Sharing Ontologies and Rules Using Model Transformations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Web Ontology Language (OWL), Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL) and Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) are technologies being developed in parallel, but by different communities. They have common points and issues and can be brought closer together. Many authors have so far stressed this problem and have proposed several solutions. The result of these efforts is the recent OMG’s initiative for defining an ontology development platform. However, the problem of transformation between Semantic Web ontology and rule languages and MDE-based languages has been solved using rather partial and ad hoc solutions, most often by XSLT. In this paper, we relations between the Semantic Web languages and MDE-compliant languages as separate technical spaces. In order to achieve a synergy between these technical spaces, we present ontology and rule languages in terms of MDE standards, recognize relations between the OWL and SWRL langauges and MDE-based ontology languages, and propose mapping techniques. In order to illustrate the approach, we use an MDE-defined architecture that includes the ontology and rule metamodels and ontology UML Profile. We also show how MDE techniques, such as model transformations, can be used to enable sharing rules and ontologies by using REWERSE Rule Markup Language (R2ML), a proposal for a general rule language. The main benefit of this approach is that it keeps the focus on the language concepts (i.e., languages’ abstract syntax - metamodels) rather than on technical issues caused by different concrete syntax. Yet, we also provide transformations that bridge between both languages’ concrete (XML) and abstract (MOF) syntax.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".