|
Dear Jelena,
the topics encoded this way should be recogized and
annotated in documents without problems. Looking forward for
feedback
Chears,
Naso
---------------------------------------------------------- Atanas
Kiryakov Head of Ontotext Lab, http://www.ontotext.comSirma Group Corp,
http://www.sirma.bgPhone: (+359 2) 9768
303; Fax: 9768 311 ----------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 10:20
PM
Subject: Re: [KIM-discussion] How to use
PROTON's Topic class and its subclassesin KIM
Hi Naso,
many thanks for your response!
Still, I have
to ask one more thing:-). Will I be able to use KIM's Java API to
annotate my documents with concepts of the domain ontology built in the way
you suggested? To be more precise, when I call KIM's method to do annotation
of a document:
...
KIMService serviceKim = GetService.from( RMI_HOST,
RMI_PORT );
apiCorpora = serviceKim.getCorporaAPI();
NercAPI apiNerc =
serviceKim.getNercAPI();
String url = "";
KIMDocument kdoc =
apiCorpora.createDocument(url,
"UTF-8");
apiNerc.execute(kdoc);
...
will it be able to annotate document content with concepts such as
"eCommerce" and "b2bActivities"? Or it would just recognize them of being type
protont:Topic?
I thought that I need to attach one or more aliases to each
domain topic to enable KIM recognize it in the text and annotate the text with
the respective concept.
I would try this out myself and not bother you
with these questions, but my computer is currently too weak to execute KIM and
Tomacat in parallel (I have 512MB of RAM and it doesn't seam to be enough) and
I'm waiting for additional 512MB to be delivered in a couple of days. But, I'm
very curious about this issue, so I decided on asking about it:-)
Cheers,
Jelena
On 8/6/06, Atanas
Kiryakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Dear
Jelena,
thanks for your interest! Actually it is more simple than it
looks like: you
shall define your topics as instances of protont:Topic
and put them in a
hierarchy via protont:subTopicOf,
i.e.
<protont:Topic
rdf:ID="eCommerce">
</protont:Topic>
<protont:Topic
rdf:ID="b2bActivities">
<protont:subTopicOf
rdf:resource="#eCommerce"/>
</protont:Topic>
the
rationale behind this solution is to keep the ontology and the KB in
the
OWL DL. As long as OWLIM (the semantic repository used in KIM)
is
rule-based, we do not really need this, we prefered this modelling
approach
because it also avoids overloading of the subClassOf
relationship (IS-A
overloadingis probably the most typical ontology
design problem). You can
read more on this subject in section 6.3.4
(pp.49-51) of PROTON's
documentation: http://proton.semanticweb.org/D1_8_1.pdf.
Regards,
Naso
----------------------------------------------------------
Atanas
Kiryakov
Head of Ontotext Lab, http://www.ontotext.com
Sirma Group
Corp, http://www.sirma.bg
Phone: (+359
2) 9768 303; Fax: 9768
311
----------------------------------------------------------
-----
Original Message -----
From: Jelena Jovanovic
To: KIM Mailing
list
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 10:09 PM
Subject: [KIM-discussion]
How to use PROTON's Topic class and its
subclassesin KIM
Hello
everyone,
I would like to use KIM to semantically annotate content of
a course with
the topics of the domain ontology for that course (as you
might have
guessed, I'm doing my research in the learning domain). I read
the
instructions for extending the KIM platform and it seams clear to me
what is
to be done:-), however I am not sure how to extend the PROTON
ontology.
I thought of defining classes of my domain ontology as
subclasses of the
protont:Topic class. However, I have doubts here.
Should I model all my
classes as direct subclasses of the Topic class and
relate them in a
hierarchy using protont:subTopicOf property, or should I
model them in the
hierarchy in the typical manner it is done in
ontologies ( i.e. using
rdfs:subClassOf). According to the PROTON
documentation the first option
seams to be preferable, but I'm concerned
that this design decision might
not be in accordance with KIM extraction
modules, and that I might later
have problems when using KIM IE
functionality to extract entities from text.
In order to clarify my
question i will give you an example for the above
mentioned
options:
1) Defining domain classes as direct subclasses of the Topic
class and
relating them in a hierarchy using protont:subTopicOf
property
<owl:Class
rdf:ID="eCommerce">
<rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource="
http://proton.semanticweb.org/2005/04/protont#Topic"/>
</owl:Class>
<owl:Class
rdf:ID="b2bActivities">
<rdfs:subClassOf>
<owl:Restriction>
<owl:onProperty
rdf:resource="http://proton.semanticweb.org/2005/04/protont#subTopicOf
"/>
<owl:allValuesFrom
rdf:resource="#eCommerce"/>
</owl:Restriction>
</rdfs:subClassOf>
<rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource="
http://proton.semanticweb.org/2005/04/protont#Topic"/>
</owl:Class>
2)
Using rdfs:subClassOf property to create hierarchy of domain classes
and
just make a reference to protont:Topic via the top level domain class
<owl:Class
rdf:ID="eCommerce">
<rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource="http://proton.semanticweb.org/2005/04/protont#Topic
"/>
</owl:Class>
<owl:Class
rdf:ID="b2bActivities">
<rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource="#eCommerce"/>
</owl:Class>
Initially
my idea was to represent domain concepts as instances of the
protont:Topic class. However, I realized that in that case KIM would not
be
able to recognize those concepts in the content of the course - KIM
would
recognize each of them as Topic not as something more specific. I'm
I right,
or I misinterpreted that part of KIM
documentation?
Thanks in advance! And sorry for the confusion with my
previous
email:-)
Cheers,
Jelena
_______________________________________________
NOTE: Please REPLY TO ALL to ensure that your reply reaches all members
of
this mailing list.
KIM-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/kim-discussion_ontotext.com
__________
NOD32 1.1691 (20060803) Information __________
This message was
checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
|
