, based on a combination of DOLCE and SUMO, is geared toward semantic integration in the mobile computing domain. an ontology over the Smart Web domain.
is based on a merge of DOLCE and SUMO with modifications not depicted here.
is TLO over the Smart Web domain. It is rooted in the alignment and merging of a descriptive foundational ontology with high ontological commitments (DOLCE) and an upper-level ontology with lower commitments (SUMO). It is difficult to tease out the exact commitments of yet it does inherit some of the high commitments of DOLCE.
Abstract of Oberle et al:
To integrate the various domain-specific ontologies, we have developed a foundational ontology, the ontology, the DOLCE and SUMO ontologies. This allows us to combine all the developed ontologies into a single Integrated Ontology () having a common basis with conceptual clarity and the provision of ontology design patterns for consistency.
Ontological and High: (Section 3)
In the previous section, we discussed the need for a foundational ontology and identified the integration of DOLCE and SUMO as the best available choice.
Both ontologies had to be adapted and extended arrive at the integrated ontology, called .
The DOLCE and SUMO parts of are mostly directed at the referent side of the well-known ‘meaning triangle’ [OR23], but much less at the symbol side.
[p5] A descriptive ontology aims at describing the ontological assumptions behind language and cognition by taking the surface structure of natural language and common sense
[p6] The system is targeted at the end-user and will thus model artifacts of human common sense. Therefore, the foundational ontology should be descriptive.
Vertical and Universal aspects:
[…] is a consequence because it is usually nearer at human common sense than reductionist .
[…] Regarding the choice between possibilism and actualism we claim that the latter
will be more practicable for the ontology engineers of the project because
modalities would raise the complexity of .
[…] the of 4D entities is required, e.g., for navigational concepts, such as Translocation, whose temporal parts would be .
[…] The primary difficulty in using DOLCE proved to be the concepts
beneath , i.e., Stative and Event. It was too difficult for ontology
engineers to understand the intended meaning of these terms and to classify
their own underneath them. Hence, we only kept the concept
and made SUMO’s Processes direct .
[…] Among the extensions to DOLCE, the of time is particularly
worth mentioning. DOLCE is quite unspecific with respect to a concrete
of time-points in terms of hours, minutes, and seconds. There are
only the basic patterns between , , and
(these are the axioms called and ). Therefore, we refined
the patterns and introduced concrete with all the necessary
attributes: , , and .
Non categorical: (pages 2-3)
realize this demonstrator, depends on several substantial domain ontologies for knowledge representation and reasoning. The main topics to be covered by these ontologies are the following:
Each of the domain ontologies just described may be used in several parts of the demonstrator system. They need to be interoperable and therefore need to be integrated into a single concise knowledge base.
Oberle et al., DOLCE ergo SUMO: On foundational and domain models in the Integrated Ontology (), Journal of Web Semantics, 5(3), 156-174, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2007.06.002