Universidad de Salamanca
Departamento de Informática y Automática
Analítica Visual aplicada
a la
Ingeniería de Ontologías
Tesis Doctoral - RESUMEN
D. Juan Francisco García Navarro
Directores:
Dr. D. Francisco José García Peñalvo
Dr. D. Roberto Therón Sánchez
Febrero 2012
Resumen
La representación del conocimiento se ha definido como un conjunto de
reglas ontológicas provistas con la capacidad para realizar inferencias. Uno de
los esquemas de representación de conocimiento más ampliamente difundido lo
constituyen las ontologías. En términos muy generales, las ontologías son am-
pliamente utilizadas en la Ingeniería del Conocimiento, la Inteligencia Artificial
y las Ciencias de la Computación.
Una problemática en la representación del conocimiento desde un punto
de vista semántico, es la complejidad de los procesos de creación, gestión,
análisis y reusabilidad de los modelos ontológicos que representan estas estruc-
turas de conocimiento. El soporte automático o semiautomático a los procesos
relacionados con la representación de conocimiento, suele enfrentar diversos
problemas durante el proceso de modelado de datos ontológicos, que acaban
por comprometer la comprensión y el desarrollo de los modelos. Esto puede
tener como resultado, procesos de desarrollo y gestión complejos, ineficientes y,
así mismo, una escasa reutilización de los propios modelos ontológicos. Muchas
de las herramientas que soportan estos procesos, no son lo suficientemente ro-
bustas para realizar eficientemente todas las tareas involucradas en los flujos
de trabajo.
Esta tesis toma como dominio de investigación esta problemática, y plantea
como objetivo principal la definición de diversos procesos para la gestión del
ciclo de vida de las ontologías, sustentados en un enfoque de Analítica Visual,
un área de investigación basada en el uso de representaciones visuales, que se
enfoca en el uso del proceso cognitivo humano para el análisis de información.
El enfoque que sigue la Analítica Visual destaca al usuario como punto
central en el proceso de análisis, y todos los mecanismos que intervienen en
este enfoque se definen tomando en consideración, como aspectos principales,
el usuario y la interacción de este con las herramientas de cómputo. Estos
mecanismos facilitan el razonamiento analítico, al maximizar la capacidad hu-
mana para percibir, entender y razonar acerca de conjuntos de datos complejos
9
y dinámicos.
Los procesos involucrados en el ciclo de vida de las ontologías (creación,
gestión, análisis y reutilización), describen flujos de trabajo formados por di-
versas actividades. Estas actividades se han definido tomando en consideración
las principales metodologías para el desarrollo de modelos ontológicos.
Por otro lado, también es necesario que estas actividades estén soportadas
por mecanismos y herramientas que permitan su desarrollo de forma eficiente.
Estos mecanismos son principalmente, técnicas de visualización robustas y pro-
vistas de una interacción que permita al usuario a través de su capacidad, de-
sarrollar abstracción, concepción, entendimiento, representación y aprendizaje
de conocimiento.
A lo largo de esta tesis se detallan los flujos de trabajo y los mecanismos
propuestos para el desarrollo de los procesos para el modelado de datos basa-
do en ontologías. Teniendo en cuenta estos mecanismos, se ha implementado
una herramienta denominada OWL-VisMod, y se han evaluado desde dos per-
spectivas. La primera de ellas se basa en la usabilidad de las tareas definidas,
mientras que la segunda se enfoca en la funcionalidad de la herramienta y todas
las técnicas de visualización e interacción.
La evaluación de usabilidad consiste en el desarrollo del proceso de creación
de un modelo ontológico, de acuerdo a las tareas propuestas. Este desarrollo se
ha realizado por un grupo de usuarios, quienes emitieron una valoración sobre
la usabilidad de la herramienta. Por otro lado, la evaluación de funcionalidad,
se ha realizado primero, a través de un proceso de análisis sobre un modelo
ontológico existente, de acuerdo al flujo de trabajo definido para este proceso,
y segundo, a través de un proceso de creación de un nuevo modelo ontológico
de datos, para un sistema real en un dominio específico, en este caso, en el
sector del turismo.
Los resultados de las evaluaciones han indicado, por un lado, que los proce-
sos, los flujos de trabajo y las tareas definidas, son coherentes con los objetivos
definidos. Este resultado se debe en gran parte a que estas tareas se han adapta-
do a partir de metodologías previamente definidas. Por otro lado, la evaluación
de funcionalidad en el caso de estudio, ha permitido detectar algunos aspectos
mejorables, así como también ha servido para la validación general de la he-
rramienta y las diversas técnicas de visualización e interacción implementadas
en ella.
Palabras Clave
Representación del Conocimiento, Ontologías, Analítica Visual, Procesos
Abstract
Knowledge Representation has been defined as a set of ontological rules
provided with the capacity to perform inference. It basically consists of a set
of symbols that represent a specific domain, enriched with a set of functions
to perform reasoning. This reasoning aims to perform inference, most of times
based on the use of any kind of logics. Ontologies represent one of the most
widely used schema representations. They are mainly used in the Knowledge
Engineering, Artificial Intelligence and the Computer Science fields.
The main problem with the Knowledge Representation from a semantic
point of view, is the complexity of the processes of creation, management,
maintenance and reusability of the ontological models. The automatic sup-
port to the processes that manage the knowledge, usually have to face diverse
problems during the modelling process. These problems affect the comprehen-
sion and the development of these ontological models, causing complex and
unefficient processes and low levels of reusability of these ontologies.
The current tools that support these processes, have diverse problems, due
to they are not robust enough to efficiently develop all the tasks involved in
the workflows.
This thesis has taken this problematic as its starting point. It aims to
develop the processes for developing and managing the life cycle of ontologies
based on a Visual Analytics approach, where the user becomes to be the central
point in the analysis process. Furthermore, all the mechanisms involved in this
approach, have been defined taking into account, the user and his interaction
with the computers. These mechanisms, make easier the analytical reasoning,
because they maximise the human capacity to perceive and understand about
complex and dynamic data sets.
The processes involved in the ontologies’life cycle, describe the whole se-
quence of activities in the workflows, to create, manage and reuse ontologies.
These activities and workflows have been defined taking into account the main
methodologies for developing ontological models. Moreover, each of these ac-
11
tivities and workflows, is supported by Visual Analytics and interaction tech-
niques.
The user interaction represents a crucial aspect for developing ontology-
based data models. The user, supported by computer mechanisms, defines the
representation of a certain domain using an ontological model. These mecha-
nisms, are completely defined according to the human capabilities to perform
abstraction, conception, understanding, learning and knowledge representa-
tion. This user-centered approach, represents the main approach taken of the
Visual Analytics field.
Through this thesis, all the workflows for developing ontology-based data
models are completely described and detailed. Furthermore, all the mechanisms
implemented in a tool called OWL-VisMod, that support the development
of these processes are also described. These mechanisms have been evaluated
based on two approaches: the first one is the usability of the tool, and the second
one is the functionality of the tool and all the visualisation and interaction
techniques.
The usability evaluation consists of the development of the creation process
of an ontological model, according to the proposed tasks. This development has
been performed by a group of users that evaluate the usability of the tool. On
the other hand, the functionality evaluation has been performed, first, through
an analysis process of an existing ontology, and second, through the creation
of a new data ontological model, according to the workflows defined to these
processes.
This creation process has been developed over a real scenario, of a recom-
mend system for tourism activities. This evaluation has let to perform diverse
tests of the tool, about its capacity to cover all the functionality aspects needed
for a real-scenario system.
The results of these evaluations, have indicated firstly, that the processes,
workflows and the defined tasks, are coherent to the defined objectives. Sec-
ondly, the functionality evaluation in the case-study, has let to detect diverse
aspects that were improved or fixed, as well as the validation of the tool and
the diverse visualisations and interaction techniques.
Keywords
Knowledge Representation, Ontologies, Visual Analytics, Processes
Bibliografía
[1] Gediminas Adomavicius and Alexander Tuzhilin2. Toward the next gen-
eration of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and
possible extensions. Journal IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data
Engineering, 17(6):734–749, 2005.
[2] Katifori Akrivi, Torou Elena, Vassilakis Costas, Lepouras Georgios, Ha-
latsis Constantin, and Daradimos Elias. Historical archive ontologies -
requirements, modeling and visualization. IEEE, 1:1 – 11, 2002.
[3] Harith Alani. Tgviztab: An ontology visualisation extension for protégé.
Proceedings of Knowledge Capture (K-Cap’03), Workshop on Visualiza-
tion Information in Knowledge Engineering, 2003.
[4] Harith Alani and Christopher Brewster. Metrics for ranking ontologies.
4th International EON Workshop, 15th International World Wide Web
Conference, 2006.
[5] Harith Alani, Christopher Brewster, and Nigel Shadbolt. Ranking on-
tologies with aktiverank. 5th International Semantic Web Conference
(ISWC), 2006.
[6] Walter alexander Jungmeister and David Turo. Adapting treemaps to
stock portfolio visualization. Technical Report, University of Maryland,
Center for Automation Research, Computer Vision Laboratory, 1:10–16,
1992.
[7] Edward Allen and Taghi Khoshgoftaar. Measuring coupling and cohe-
sion: An information-theory approach. Proceedings of Sixth International
Software Metrics Symposium, 1:119–127, 1999.
[8] Mauricio Barcellos Almeida. A proposal to evaluate ontology content.
Applied Ontology, 4:245–265, 2009.
213
214 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[9] Keith Andrews and Helmut Heidegger. Information slices: Visualising
and exploring large hierarchies using cascading, semi-circular discs. Pro-
ceedings of IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis),
1:9–12, 1998.
[10] Gennady Andrienko, Natalia Andrienko, Piotr Jankowsk, Daniel Keim,
Menno-Jan Kraak, Alan MacEachren, and Stefan Wrobel. Geovisual an-
alytics for spatial decision support: Setting the research agenda. Inter-
national Journal of Geography Information Science, 21:839–857, January
2007.
[11] Margaret Anne-Storey, Mark Musen, John Silva, Casey Best, Neil Ernst,
Ray Fergerson, and Natasha Noy. Jambalaya: Interactive visualization
to enhance ontology authoring and knowledge acquisition in protégé.
in Protégé. Workshop on Interactive Tools for Knowledge Capture (K-
CAP), 1:1–9, 2001.
[12] Grigoris Antoniou and Frank Van Harmelen. A semantic web primer.
The MIT Press, second edition:1–227, 2008.
[13] Daniel Archambault, Tamara Munzner, and David Auber. Grouse:
Feature-based, steerable graph hierarchy exploration. Eurographics/
IEEE-VGTC Symposium on Visualization (2007), 14(4):900–913, 2007.
[14] Julio Arpírez, Oscar Corcho, Mariano Fernández-López, and Asunción
Gómez-Pérez. Webode in a nutshell. AI Magazine, 24(3):37–47, 2003.
[15] Julio C. Arpírez, Oscar Corcho, Mariano Fernández-López, and Asunción
Gómez-Pérez. Webode: a scalable workbench for ontological engineering.
Proceedings of the First International Conference on Knowledge Capture
(K-CAP), 1:6–13, 2001.
[16] John Avery and John Yearwood. Supporting evolving ontologies by cap-
turing the semantics of change. Proceedings of AusWeb, 1:1–8, 2004.
[17] Ketan Babaria. Using treemaps to visualize gene ontologies. University
of Maryland, 1:1–10, 2001.
[18] Eric Baehrecke, Niem Dang, Ketan Babaria, and Ben Shneiderman.
Visualization and analysis of microarray and gene ontology data with
treemaps. BMC Bioinformatics, 1:12–14, june 2004.
[19] Sikha Bagui and Richard Earp. Database Design Using Entity-
Relationship Diagrams. CRC Press, 2011.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 215
[20] Ian Bailey. Intelligence-Based Systems Engineering, chapter Enterprise
Ontologies: Better Models of Business, pages 327–342. Springer-Verlag,
2011.
[21] John Bateman. Upper modeling: organizing knowledge for natural lan-
guage processing. Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on
Natural Language Generation, 1:54–61, 1990.
[22] Sean Bechhofer, Ian Horrocks, Carole Goble, and Robert Stevens.
Oiled: a reason-able ontology editor for the semantic web. Joint Ger-
man/Austrian conference on Artificial Intelligence (KI 01), Lecture
Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 2174:396–408, 2001.
[23] Howard Beck and Helena Sofia Pinto. Overview of approach, method-
ologies, standards, and tools for ontologies. Technical report, University
of Florida, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, 2002.
[24] Benjamin Bederson, Ben Shneiderman, and Martin Wattenberg. Ordered
and quantum treemaps: Making effective use of 2d space to display hier-
archies. Transactions on Graphics (TOG), pages 833–854, 2002.
[25] Palash Bera. Using ontologies in the context of knowledge management
systems. PhD thesis, The University of British Columbia (Canada), 2007.
[26] Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, and Ora Lassila. The semantic web.
Scientific American, 2001.
[27] Jacques Bertin. Graphics and graphic information processing. Gruyter
Press, 1:1–273, 1977.
[28] Alberto Del Bimbo, Marco Bertini, and CarloTorniai. Multimedia on-
tologies for video digital libraries. European Digital Library, 66:37–38,
2006.
[29] Jorge Biolchini, Paula Gomes Mian, Ana Candida Cruz Natali, and Guil-
herme Horta Travassos. Systematic review in software engineering. Tech-
nical report, Systems Engineering and Computer Science Department,
COPPE / UFRJ, 2005.
[30] Renaud Blanch and Eric Lecolinet. Navigation techniques for zoomable
treemaps. Proceedings of UIST, 1:49–50, 2006.
[31] Renaud Blanch and Éric Lecolinet. Browsing zoomable treemaps:
Structure-aware multi-scale navigation techniques. IEEE Transactions
on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 13(6):1248–1253, 2007.
216 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[32] Elizabeth Sugar Boese. An Introduction to Programming with Java Ap-
plets. Jones and Bartlett, 2010.
[33] John Bondy and Siva Murty. Graph Theory with Applications. Elsevier
Science, 1976.
[34] Elena Paslaru Bontas, Malgorzata Mochol, and Robert Tolksdorf. Case
studies on ontology reuse. Proceedings of 5th International Conference
on Knowledge Management, 1:1–8, 2005.
[35] Alessio Bosca, Dario Bonino, and Paolo Pellegrino. Ontosphere: more
than a 3d ontology visualization tool. SWAP, pages 1–15, 2005.
[36] Erol Bozsak, Marcc Ehrig, Siegfried Handschuh, Siegfried H, Alexan-
der Maedche, Andreas Hotho, Er Maedche, Boris Motik, Daniel Oberle,
Christoph Schmitz, Nenad Stojanovic, Rudi, Steffen Staab, Ljiljana Sto-
janovic, and Valentin Zacharias. Kaon - towards a large scale semantic
web. Proceedings of EC-Web 2002, LNCS, 1:304–313, 2002.
[37] Janez Brank, Marko Grobelnik, and Dunja Mladenic. A survey of ontolo-
gy evaluation techniques. Proceedings of the Conference on Data Mining
and Data Warehouses, 1:166–170, 2005.
[38] Mark Bruls, Kees Huizing, and Jarke Van Wijk. Squarified treemaps,
data visualization. In Proceedings of the joint Eurographics and IEEE
TCVG Symposium on Visualization, Springer, pages 33–42, 2000.
[39] Stuart Card and Jock Mackinlay. The structure of the information vi-
sualization design space. Proceedings of Infovis, 1:92–101, 1997.
[40] Stuart Card, Jock Mackinlay, and Benn Shneiderman. Readings in Infor-
mation Visualization- Using Vision to Think. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.
[41] Núria Casellas. Ontology evaluation through usability measures. Pro-
ceedings of the Confederated International Workshops on On the Move
to Meaningful Internet Systems, 1:594–603, 2009.
[42] Vinay Chaudhri, Adam Farquhar, Richard Fikes, Peter Karp, and James
Rice. Open knowledge base connectivity 2.0.3. Technical report, Knowl-
edge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, 1998.
[43] Chaomei Chen. Visualizing the Semantic Web: Xml-Based Internet and
Information Visualization. Springer-Verlag New York, 2002.
[44] Chaomei Chen. Information Visualization: beyond the horizon. Springer-
Verlag, 2006.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 217
[45] Shyam Chidamber and Chris Kemerer. A metrics suite for object orient-
ed design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(6):476–493,
1994.
[46] Luca Chittaro. Information visualization and its application to medicine.
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 22:81–88, 2001.
[47] Clare Churcher. Beginning Database Design. Apress, 2007.
[48] Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, Angel Garcia-Crespo, Pedro Soto-Acosta,
Marcos Ruano-Mayoral, and Diego Jimenez-Lopez. A case analysis of
semantic technologies for r & d intermediation information management.
International Journal of Information Management, 30(5):465–469, 2010.
[49] Oscar Corcho, Mariano Fernández-López, and Asunción Gómez-Pérez.
Methodologies, tools and languages for building ontologies. where is their
meeting point?. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 1:41–64, 2003.
[50] Oscar Corcho, Mariano Fernández-López, Asunción Gómez-Pérez, and
Angel López-Cima. Law and the Semantic Web. Legal Ontologies,
Methodologies, Legal Information Retrieval, and Applications, chap-
ter Building legal ontologies with METHONTOLOGY and WebODE.
Springer-Verlag, 2005.
[51] Oscar Corcho and Asunción Gómez-Pérez. A roadmap to ontology
specification languages. Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on
Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management, 1:80–96, 2000.
[52] Randall Davis, Howard Shrobe, and Peter Szolovits. What is a knowledge
representation? American Association for Artificial Intelligence, 14:17–
33, 1993.
[53] Alberto del Bimbo, Marco Mugnaini, Pietro Pala, and Franco Tur-
co. Visual querying by color perceptive regions. Pattern Recognition,
31(9):1241–1253, 1998.
[54] Roberto Therón Francisco José García Peñalvo Diego Alonso
Gómez Aguilar, Miguel Ángel Conde González. Reveling the evolution of
semantic content through visual analysis. Proceedings of the 11th IEEE
International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT),
1:450–454, 2011.
[55] Dragan Djuric, Dragan Gasevic, and Vladan Devedzc. Ontology model-
ing and mda. Journal of Object Technology, 4(1):109–128, 2005.
218 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[56] Julia Dmitrieva and Fons J. Verbeek. Multi-view ontology visualization.
Proceedings 11th International Protege Conference, 1:1–4, 2009.
[57] Julia Dmitrieva and Fons J. Verbeek. Node-link and containment meth-
ods in ontology visualization. Proceedings of OWL: Experiences and Di-
rections, 1:1–8, 2009.
[58] Mike O Docherty. Object-oriented analysis and design: understanding
system development with UML 2.0. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2005.
[59] Pedro Maroun Eid. Tviz: A taxonomy visualization tool. Master’s thesis,
Concordia University, 2005.
[60] John Ellson, Emden R. Gansner, Eleftherios Koutsofios, Stephen C.
North, and Gordon Woodhull. Graphviz and dynagraph - static and
dynamic graph drawing tools. pages 127–148, 2003.
[61] Lars Engel, Michael C. Jaeger, and Gero Muhl. Search and evaluation
of ontologies for semantic web services in the internet. Proceedings of
IADIS International Conference on WWW/Internet, 1:255–260, 2005.
[62] Yuri Engelhardt. The Language of Graphics. PhD thesis, Institute for
Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, 2003.
[63] Amineh Fadhil. Ontovql: Ontology visual query language. Master’s the-
sis, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2008.
[64] Amjad Farooq, Syed Ahsan, and Abad Shah. Web-ontology design qual-
ity metrics. Journal of American Science, 6(11):52–58, 2010.
[65] Amjad Farooq, Junaid Arshad, Aslam Muhamamd, and Saba Sana. In-
consistencies in ontologies. Journal of American Science, 7(7):800–803,
2011.
[66] Adam Farquhar, Richard Fikes, and James Rice. The ontolingua server:
A tool for collaborative ontology construction. 10th Knowledge Acquisi-
tion for Knowledge-Based Systems, 1:1–19, 1996.
[67] Dieter Fensel, Jürgen Angele, Stefan Decker, Michael Erdmann,
Hans-Peter Schnurr, Steffen Staab, Rudi Studer, and Andreas Witt.
On2broker: Semantic-based access to information sources at the www.
1999.
[68] Dieter Fensel, Frank Harmelen, Y. Ding, M. Klein, and P. Mika. On-to-
knowledge: Final report. Technical report, Semantic Technology Institute
(STI), University of Innsbruck, Austria, 2007.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 219
[69] Dieter Fensel, Ian Horrocks, Frank Van Harmelen, S. Decker, M. Erd-
mann, and Mca Klein. Oil in a nutshell. Proceedings of the 12th Euro-
pean Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling, and Management,
1937:1–16, 2000.
[70] Dieter Fensel, Ian Horrocks, Frank van Harmelen, Deborah L. McGuin-
ness, and Peter Patel-Schneider. Oil: An ontology infrastructure for the
semantic web. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16 (2):38–45, 2001.
[71] Mariano Fernández, Asunción Gómez, and Natalia Juristo. Methontolo-
gy: From ontological art towards ontological engineering. Proceedings of
the Ontological Engineering AAAI-97 Spring Symposium Series, 1:33–40,
1997.
[72] Mariano Fernández-López, Asunción Gómez-Pérez, and María Rojas-
Amaya. Ontology s crossed life cycles. Proceedings of the 12th Euro-
pean Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management,
1937:65–79, 2000.
[73] Eileen Ferrance. Action research. Technical report, Northeast and Islands
Regional Educational Laboratory At Brown University, 2000.
[74] Daniel Fesenmaier, Karl Wober, and Hannes Werthner, editors. Desti-
nation Recommendation Systems. CAB International, 2006.
[75] L. Fong, S.D. Larson, and A. Gupta. An ontology-driven knowledge envi-
ronment for subcellular neuroanatomy: Owl: Experiences and directions.
CEUR Workshop Proceedings, ISSN 1613-0073, 2007.
[76] Frederico Fonseca and Max Egenhofer. Ontology-driven geographic in-
formation systems. Proceedings of 7th ACM Symposium on Advances in
Geographic Information Systems, 1:14–19, 1999.
[77] Frederico Fonseca, Max Egenhofer, Peggy Agouris, and Gilberto Camara.
Using ontologies for integrated geographic information systems. Trans-
actions in GIS, 6(3):231–257, 2002.
[78] Thomas Franke. Enhancing an online regional tourism consulting system
with extended personalized services. Information Technology & Tourism,
5:135–150, 2003.
[79] Natalya Fridman and Deborah McGuinness. Ontology development 101:
A guide to creating your first ontology. Technical report, Knowledge
Systems, AI Laboratory, Stanford University (KSL-01-05), 2001.
220 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[80] Erich Gamma, Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, and John Vlissides. De-
sign Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-
Wesley, 1995.
[81] Aldo Gangemi, Carola Catenacci, Massimiliano Ciaramita, and Jos
Lehmann. Modelling ontology evaluation and validation. The Semantic
Web Research and Applications, 3:140–154, 2006.
[82] Carlos García, José Castellanos-Garzón, and Carlos Blanco. Analyzing
gene expression data on a 3d scatter plot. Proceedings of Soft Computing
Models in Industrial and Environmental Applications, 6th International
Conference SOCO 2011, 87:349–356, 2011.
[83] Juan García, Diego Alonso Gómez Aguilar, Antonio González, Francis-
co José García-Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. A middleware framework
to create data structures for a visual analytics object oriented approach.
International Journal of Knowledge and Learning (IJKL), 6(2/3):256–
267, 2010.
[84] Juan García, Francisco García, and Roberto Therón. Defining coupling
metrics among classes in an owl ontology. In Trends in Applied Intelli-
gent Systems. 23rd International Conference on Industrial Engineering
and Other Applications of Applied Intelligent Systems, IEA/AIE 2010,
Springer, 2010.
[85] Juan García, Francisco García, and Roberto Therón. Visualising se-
mantic coupling among entities in an owl ontology. Proceedings of ON-
TOSE 2010, Ontology, Conceptualization and Epistemology for Informa-
tion Systems, Software Engineering and Service Science, Springer, 2010.
[86] Juan García, Francisco García, and Roberto Therón. Modelling relation-
ships among classes as semantic coupling in owl ontologies. Proceedings
of the 2011 International Conference on Information & Knowledge En-
gineering, IKE 2011,, 1:22–28, 2011.
[87] Juan García, Francisco García-Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. Analizan-
do el acoplamiento entre las clases de una ontología owl. Actas de las XV
Jornadas de Ingeniería del Software y Bases de Datos, 1:207–216, 2010.
[88] Juan García, Francisco García-Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. Defining
coupling metrics among classes in an owl ontology. Proceedings of the
23rd international conference on Industrial engineering and other appli-
cations of applied intelligent systems, 2:12–17, 2010.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 221
[89] Juan García, Francisco García-Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. Evaluating
the usability of owl-vismod: A modelling tool for owl ontologies. Pro-
ceedings XII Congreso Internacional de Interacción Persona-Ordenador
Interacción 2011, 1:297–300, 2011.
[90] Juan García, Francisco J. García-Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. Through
the data modelling process of turimov, an ontology-based project for
mobile intelligent systems. 10th International Conference on Practical
Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2012.
[91] Juan García, Francisco J. García-Peñalvo, Roberto Therón, and Patri-
cia Ordoñez de Pablos. Usability evaluation of a visual modelling tool
for owl ontologies. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 17( 9):1299–
1313, 2011.
[92] Juan García, Antonio González, Diego Gómez, Roberto Therón, and
Francisco García. A visual analytics tool for software project structure
and relationships among classes. Proceedings of 9th. International Sym-
posium on Smart Graphics, 1, 2009.
[93] Juan García, Francisco García Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. A survey
on ontology metrics. In Knowledge Management, Information Systems,
E-Learning, and Sustainability Research. Third World Summit on the
Knowledge Society, WSKS, 111:22–27, 2010.
[94] Juan García, Roberto Therón, and Francisco García. Visualisation of
large ontologies by using advanced techniques. Proceedings of I Workshop
Web Mining and Semantic Web, 1:1–10, 2008.
[95] Juan García, Roberto Therón, and Francisco García. Visualisation of
large software projects by using advanced techniques. Innovations and
Advances in Computer Sciences and Engineering, 1:325–330, 2008.
[96] Juan García, Roberto Therón, and Francisco García. Semantic zoom: A
details on demand visualisation technique for modelling owl ontologies.
Highlights in Practical Applications of Agents and Multiagent Systems,
AISC 89:85–92, 2011.
[97] Elena García-Barriocanal, Miguel Ángel Sicilia, and Salvador Sánchez-
Alonso. Usability evaluation of ontology editors. Knowledge Organiza-
tion, 32(1):1–9, 2005.
[98] Elena García-Barriocanal, Miguel A. Sicilia, León A. González Sotos,
and José R. Hilera González. An ontology-based approach for designing
web usability evaluation questionnaires. Proceedings of the Iinternational
Conference on Web Engineering, 1:186–189, 2003.
222 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[99] Francisco-José García-Peñalvo, Juan García, and Roberto Therón. Anal-
ysis of the owl ontologies: A survey. Scientific Research and Essays,
6(20):4318–4329, 2011.
[100] Juan Garcia, Diego A. Gomez, Antonio Gonzalez, Francisco J. Garcia,
and Roberto Theron. A middleware framework to create and manage
data structures for visual analytics. Proceedings of Second World Summit
on the Knowledge Society (WSKS), 49(3):466–473, 2009.
[101] Angel Garcia-Crespo, Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, Juan Miguel Gomez-
Berbis, and Belen Ruiz-Mezcua. Semo: a framework for customer social
networks analysis based on semantics. Journal of Information Technol-
ogy, 25 (2):178–188, 2010.
[102] Alexander G. Gee, Georges G. Grinstein, Yu Min, and Li Hongli. Dy-
namic and interactive dimensional anchors for spring-based visualiza-
tions. Technical report, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Dept. of
Computer Science, Lowell, 2005.
[103] John Gennari, Mark Musen, Ray Fergerson, William Grosso, Monica
Crubezy, Henrik Eriksson, Natalya Noy, and Samson Tu. The evolution
of protege: An environment for knowledge-based systems development.
Stanford Medical Informatics, 58(1):89–123, 2003.
[104] Hiranmay Ghosh, Gaurav Harit, and Subhasis Chaudhury. Using onto-
logy for building distributed digital libraries with multimedia contents.
World Digital Library, 1(2):83–100, 2008.
[105] Diego Gómez-Aguilar, Roberto Therón, and Francisco García-Peñalvo.
Semantic spiral timelines used as support for e-learning. Journal of Uni-
versal Computer Sience (j-jucs), 15(7):1526–1545, 2009.
[106] Asunción Gómez-Pérez. Evaluation of taxonomic knowledge in ontologies
and knowledge bases. Proceedings of the Banff Knowledge Acquisition for
Knowledge-Based Systems, 2:1 – 18, 1999.
[107] Asunción Gómez-Pérez. Evaluating ontologies: Cases of study. special is-
sue on verification and validation of ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems
and their Applications, 16(3):391 – 409, 2001.
[108] Asunción Gómez-Pérez. Evaluation of ontologies. International Journal
of Intelligent Systems, 16(3), 2001.
[109] Asunción Gómez-Pérez and Oscar Corcho. Ontology specification lan-
guages for the semantic web. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 17 (1):54–60,
2002.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 223
[110] Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Mariano Fernández, and Oscar Corcho. Onto-
logical Engineering. Springer-Verlag, 2003.
[111] Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Mariano Fernández-López, and Oscar Corcho.
Ontological Engineering, with examples from the areas of Knowledge
Management, e-Commerce and the Semantic Web. Springer-Verlag, 2004.
[112] Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Mari-Carmen Suárez, and Boris Villazón. Neon
methodology for building ontology networks: Ontology specification.
Technical report, NeOn Project, 2008.
[113] Antonio González-Torres, Roberto Therón, Francisco José García Peñal-
vo, Michel Wermelinger, and Yijun Yu. Maleku: An evolutionary visual
software analysis tool for providing insights into software evolution. icsm
2011:. Proceedings of IEEE 27th International Conference on Software
Maintenance ICSM, 1:594–597, 2011.
[114] Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Ian Horrocks, Yevgeny Kazakov, and Ulrike Sat-
tler. Modular reuse of ontologies: Theory and practice. Journal of Arti-
ficial Intelligence Research, 31:273–318, 2008.
[115] Thomas Gruber. Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for
knowledge sharing. Kluwer, 43:907–928, August 1993.
[116] Thomas Gruber. A translation approach to portable ontology specifica-
tions. Knowledge Acquisition, pages 199–220, 1993.
[117] Michael Gruninger. Designing and evaluating generic ontologies. Proceed-
ings of the 12th European Conference of Artificial Intelligence, 1:53–64,
1996.
[118] Nicola Guarino. Understanding, building and using ontologies. Interna-
tional Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46(2-3):293–310, 1997.
[119] Nicola Guarino and Pierdaniele Giaretta. Ontologies and knowledge
bases. Knowledge Acquisition, Volume: 1:25–32, 1995.
[120] Nicola Guarino and Chris Welty. Evaluating ontological decisions with
ontoclean. Communications of the ACM, 45(2):61–65, 2002.
[121] Nicola Guarino and Chris Welty. An overview of ontoclean. The Hand-
book on Ontologies, 1:151–159, 2004.
[122] Jorge Gutiérrez, Miguel Ruiz, Roberto Herrera, Enrique Cabello, Steve
Legrand, and Dave Elliman. Ontology languages for the semantic web:
A never completely updated review. Knowledge-Based Systems, 19:489–
497, 2006.
224 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[123] Peter Haase, Holger Lewen, Rudi Studer, and Michael Erdmann. The
neon ontology engineering toolkit. In Proceedings of the 17th Interna-
tional World Wide Web Conference, 2008.
[124] Maja Hadzic, Pornpit Wongthongtham, Tharam Dillon, and Elizabeth
Chang, editors. Ontology-Based Multi-Agent Systems, chapter Ontology
Design Approaches, pages 75–91. Springer-Verlag, 2009.
[125] Terry Halpin. Object-role modeling: an overview. Technical report, Mi-
crosoft Corporation, 2002.
[126] Terry Halpin. Object-role modeling version 2 (orm 2). Encyclopedia of
Database Systems, 1:60–69, 2009.
[127] Hans-Jorg Happel and Stefan Seedorf. Applications of ontologies in soft-
ware engineering. Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop on Seman-
tic Web Enabled Software Engineering (SWESE 2006), 1:1–14, 2006.
[128] Frank Harary, Robert Norman, and Dorwin Cartwright. Structural Mod-
els: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. John Wiley &
Sons Inc, 1965.
[129] Helwig Hauser. Generalizing focus+context visualization. Technical
report, Scientific Visualization: Extracting Information and Knowledge
from Scientific Data Sets, 2003.
[130] Jeff Heflin, James Hendler, and Sean Luke. Shoe: A blueprint for the
semantic web. Spinning the Semantic Web, 1:1–19, 2003.
[131] Pippa Hemingway and Nic Brereton. What is a systematic review? Hay-
ward Medical Communications, 2:1–8, 2009.
[132] Ivan Herman, Guy Melancon, and Scott Marshall. Graph visualization
and navigation in information visualisation: a survey. IEEE Transactions
on Visualisation and Computer Graphics, 6(1):24–43, 2000.
[133] Martin Hitz and Behzad Montazeri. Measuring coupling and cohesion
in object-oriented systems. Proceedings of International Symposium on
Applied Corporate Computing, 1:25–35, 1995.
[134] Rami Hodrob and Mustafa Jarrar. Orm to owl 2 dl mapping. Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Semantic Web -
Applications and Services, 1:131–137, 2010.
[135] Danny Holten. Hierarchical edge bundles: Visualization of adjacency
relations in hierarchical data. IEEE Transactions on visualization and
computer graphics, 12(5):741–748, 2006.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 225
[136] Tonya Hongsermeier and Vipul Kashyap. A knowledge management plat-
form for translational medicine. In AMIA 2005 Symposium Proceedings,
2005.
[137] Matthew Horridge, Simon Jupp, Georgina Moulton, Alan Rector, Robert
Stevens, and Chris Wroe. A practical guide to building owl ontologies
using protégé 4 and co-ode tools. Technical report, University of Manch-
ester, 2007.
[138] Matthew Horridge, Holger Knublauch, Alan Rector, Robert Stevens, and
Chris Wroe. A practical guide to building owl ontologies using the
protege-owl plugin and co-ode tools edition 1.0. 2004.
[139] Ian Horrocks, Ulrike Sattler, and Stephan Tobies. Practical reasoning
for expressive description logics. Proceedings of LPAR ’99 Proceedings of
the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated
Reasoning, 1:161–180, 1999.
[140] Watts S. Humphrey. Managing the software process. SEI Series in Soft-
ware Enginering, 1989.
[141] Petra Isenberg and Danyel Fisher. Collaborative brushing and linking
for co-located visual analytics of document collections. Eurographics/
IEEE-VGTC Symposium on Visualization, 28(3):1031–1038, 2009.
[142] Ivar Jacobson and Stefan Bylund. The Road to the Unified Software
Development Process. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[143] Mustafa Jarrar. Towards Methodological Principles for Ontology Engi-
neering. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2005.
[144] Mustafa Jarrar, Jan Demey, and Robert Meersman. On using conceptual
data modeling for ontology engineering. Journal on Data Semantics,
2800:185–207, 2003.
[145] Mustafa Jarrar and Andriy Lisovoy. Dogmamodeler - a tool for ontology
specification. Technical report, STARLab VUB, 2003.
[146] Mustafa Jarrar and Robert Meersman. Formal ontology engineering in
the dogma approach. Proceedings of the International Conference on
Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics, 2519:1238–1254,
2002.
[147] Mustafa Jarrar and Robert Meersman. Scalability and knowledge
reusability in ontology modeling. Proceedings of International confer-
ence on the infrastructure for e-Business, e-Education, e-Science and
e-Medicine, 1:12–20, 2002.
226 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[148] Mustafa Jarrar and Robert Meersman. Ontology engineering -the dogma
approach. Advances in Web Semantics I, 4891:7–34, 2008.
[149] Yuhui Jin, Stefan Decker, and Gio Wiederhold. Ontowebber: Model-
driven ontology-based web site management. The 1st International
Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS’01), Stanford University,
2001:1–19, 2001.
[150] Mathias John, Christian Tominski, and Heidrun Schumann. Visual and
analytical extensions for the table lens. Proceedings of Visualization and
Data Analysis (SPIE), 6809:680907–680907–12, 2008.
[151] Brian Johnson and Ben Shneiderman. Treemaps: a space filling approach
to the visualization of hierarchical information structures. Proceedings
of the 2nd. IEEE Visualization Conference, pages 284–291, 1991.
[152] Yannis Kalfoglou and Marco Schorlemmer. Ontology mapping: the state
of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 18 (1):1–31, 2003.
[153] Aditya Kalyanpur, Bijan Parsia, Evren Sirin, Bernardo Cuenca, and
James Hendler. Swoop: A web ontology editing browser. Journal of
Web Semantics (JWS), 4(2):1–20, 2005.
[154] Dimitris Kanellopoulos. An ontology-based system for intelligent match-
ing of travellersñeeds for group package tours. International Journal of
Digital Culture and Electronic Tourism, 1(1):76–99, 2008.
[155] Even-André Karlsson. Software Reuse: A holistic approach. John Wiley
& Sons Ltd., 1995.
[156] Peter Karp, Vinay Chaudhri, and Jerome Thomere. Xol: An xml-based
ontology exchange language. Technical report, Artificial Intelligence Cen-
ter SRI International, 1999.
[157] Vipul Kashyap, Cartic Ramakrishnan, and Thomas C Rindflesch. To-
wards (semi-)automatic generation of bio-medical ontologies. In AMIA
2003 Symposium Proceedings, page 886, 2003.
[158] Vipul Kashyapa, Alfredo Morales, and Tonya Hongsermeiera. On im-
plementing clinical decision support: Achieving scalability and maintain-
ability by combining business rules and ontologies. In AMIA 2006 Sym-
posium Proceedings, pages 414–419, 2006.
[159] Akrivi Katifori, Constantin Halatsis, George Leopuras, Costas Vassilakis,
and Eugenia Giannopoulou. Ontology visualization methods- a survey.
volume 39, pages 1–43. ACM Computing, 2007.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 227
[160] Akrivi Katifori, Elena Torou, Costas Vassilakis, Georgios Lepouras, and
Constantin Halatsis. A comparative study of four ontology visualiza-
tion techniques in protege: Experiment setup and preliminary results.
Information Visualization, IEEE, 1:1–7, 2006.
[161] Mikhail Kazakov and Habib Abdulrab. Dl-workbench: a metamodeling
approach to ontology manipulation. Proceedings of EON Conference,
1:10–26, 2003.
[162] Mikhail Kazakov and Habib Abdulrab. A meta-modeling approach to on-
tological engineering: Dl-workbench platform. Metainformatics, 3002:17–
33, 2004.
[163] Daniel Keim. Visual exploration of large data sets. Communications of
the ACM, 44:38–44, 2001.
[164] Daniel Keim, Gennady Andrienko, Jean-Daniel Fekete, Carsten Görg,
Jörn Kohlhammer, and Guy Melançon. Visual analytics: Definition, pro-
cess, and challenges. pages 154–175. 2008.
[165] Daniel Keim, Jörn Kohlhammer, Geoffrey Ellis, and Florian Mansmann.
Mastering the Information Age Solving Problems with Visual Analytics.
Eurographics Association, 2010.
[166] Daniel Keim, F. Mansmann, J. Schneidewind, and T. Schreck. Moni-
toring network traffic with radial traffic analyzer. IEEE Symposium on
Visual Analytics Science and Technology, pages 123–128, 2006.
[167] Daniel A. Keim, Florian Mansmann, Daniela Oelke, and Hartmut Ziegler.
Visual analytics: Combining automated discovery with interactive visu-
alizations. In DS 08: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on
Discovery Science, pages 2–14, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008. Springer-Verlag.
[168] Andreas Kerren, John Stasko, Jean-Daniel Fekete, and Chris North.
Information Visualization - Human-Centered Issues and Perspectives.
Springer-Berlag, 2008.
[169] Purvesh Khatri and Sorin Draghici. Ontological analysis of gene expres-
sion data: current tools, limitations, and open problems. Bioinformatics,
21(18):3587–3595, 2005.
[170] M. Rahamatullah Khondoker and Paul Mueller. Comparing ontology
development tools based on an online survey. Proceedings of the World
Congress on Engineering 2010, 1, 2010.
228 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[171] Barbara Kitchenham. Procedures for performing systematic reviews.
Technical report, Keele University and NICTA, 2004.
[172] Holger Knublauch, Ray Fergerson, Natalya Noy, and Mark Musen. The
protege owl plugin: An open development environment for semantic web
applications. Proceedings of The Semantic Web (ISWC), 3298:229–243,
2004.
[173] Cris Kobryn, Grady Booch, Ivar Jacobson, and Jim Rumbaugh, editors.
UML distilled: a brief guide to the standard object modeling language,
volume 3. Addison-Wesley, 2004.
[174] Haridimos Kondylakis, Giorgos Flouris, and Dimitris Plexousakis. Onto-
logy and schema evolution in data integration: Review and assessment.
In Proceedings of the Confederated International Conferences, CoopIS,
DOA, IS, and ODBASE 2009 on On the Move to Meaningful Internet
Systems: Part II, OTM 2009, pages 932–947, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009.
Springer-Verlag.
[175] Robert Kosara, Silvia Miksch, and Helwig Hauser. Focus+context taken
literally. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 22(1):22–29, 2002.
[176] Kouji Kozaki, Yoshinobu Kitamura, and Riichiro Mizoguchi. Develop-
ing ontology-based applications using hozo. Proceedings of the Fourth
IASTED International Conference on Computational Intelligence, 1:10–
16, 2005.
[177] John Lamping and Ramana Rao. The hyperbolic browser : A focus +
context technique for visualizing large hierarchies. Journal of Visual
Languages and Computing, 7:33 – 55, 1996.
[178] John Lamping, Ramana Rao, and Peter Pirolli. A focus+context tech-
nique based on hyperbolic geometry for visualizing large hierarchies. Pro-
ceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Comput-
ing Systems, 1:401–408, 1995.
[179] Jonathan Lazar, Jinjuan Feng, and Harry Hochheiser. Research Methods
in Human-Computer Interaction. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Publica-
tion, 2010.
[180] Bongshin Lee, Cynthia Sims Parr, Dana Campbell, , and Benjamin B.
Bederson. How users interact with biodiversity information using tax-
ontree. Proceedings of Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI ), 1:320–327,
2004.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 229
[181] Douglas Lenat and R Guha. Building Large Knowledge-Based Systems;
Representation and Inference in the Cyc Project. Addison-Wesley Long-
man Publishing Co, 1989.
[182] Zhanjun Li, Maria Yang, and Karthik Ramani. A methodology for en-
gineering ontology acquisition and validation. Artificial Intelligence for
Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 23:37–51, 2009.
[183] Thorsten Liebig and Olaf Noppens. Ontotrack: Fast browsing and easy
editing of large ontologies. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop
on Evaluation of Ontology-based Tools, 1:47–56, 2003.
[184] Thorsten Liebig and Olaf Noppens. Ontotrack: Combining browsing and
editing with reasoning and explaining for owl lite ontologies. Proceedings
of the 3rd International International Semantic Web Conference, 1:244–
258, 2004.
[185] Robert Lintern and Margaret-Anne Storey. Jambalaya express: ontology
visualization-on-demand. In Proceedings of the 8th International Protégé
Conference, pages 1–3, 2005.
[186] Miron Livny, Raghu Ramakrishnan, Kevin Beyer, Guangshun Chen,
Donko Donjerkovic, Shilpa Lawande, Jussi Myllymaki, and Kent Wenger.
Devise: integrated querying and visual exploration of large datasets. SIG-
MOD Rec, 26(2):301–312, 1997.
[187] Adolfo Lozano-Tello and Asunción Gómez-Pérez. Ontometric: A method
to choose the appropiate ontology. Journal of Database Management,
15(2):1–18, 2004.
[188] Sean Luke and Jeff Heflin. Shoe 1.01. proposed specification. Technical
report, SHOE Project technical report, University of Maryland, 2000.
[189] Alexander Maedche, Boris Motik, Ljiljana Stojanovic, Rudy Studer, and
Raphael Volz. Managing multiple ontologies and ontology evolution in
ontologging. Intelligent Information Processing, 1:51–63, 2002.
[190] Carlos Marcondes, Maria Mendon, Luciana Malheiros, Leonardo Costa,
and Tatiana Santos. Ontologies as the new bases of scientific knowledge.
Perspectivas em Ciencia da Information, 13:20 – 39, 12 2008.
[191] Carlos Marcondes and Marilia Rocha. Ontological and conceptual bases
for a scientific knowledge model in biomedical articles. Electronic Journal
of Communication, Information & Innovation in Health, 3:19–30, 2009.
230 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[192] Fernandez Mariano. Overview of methodologies for building ontologies.
1999.
[193] Fernandez Mariano and Asuncion Gomez. A survey on methodologies for
developing, maintaining, evaluating and reengineering ontologies. 2002.
[194] Deborah McGuinness, Richard Fikes, James Hendler, and Lynn Andrea
Stein. Daml+oil: An ontology language for the semantic web. IEEE
Intelligent Systems, 17 (5):72–80, 2002.
[195] Deborah Mcguinness, Richard Fikes, Lynn Stein, and James Hendler.
Daml-ont: An ontology language for the semantic web. In Dagstuhl Sem-
inars, pages 65–93, 2003.
[196] Alexander Mikroyannidis. Toward a social semantic web. Database Man-
agement & Information Retrieval, 40:113–115, 2007.
[197] Riichiro Mizoguchi. Tutorial on ontological engineering: Advanced course
of ontological engineering. New Generation Computing, 22(2):198–220,
2004.
[198] Gonzalo Méndez. Especificación de Requisitos según el estándar de IEEE
830. Facultad de Informática, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2008.
[199] David Modjeska. Navigation in electronic worlds: A research review.
Technical report, Computer Systems Research Group, University of
Toronto, 1997.
[200] Daniel Moody. The physics of notations: Toward a scientific basis for
constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Transactions
on Software Engineering, 35 (6), 2009.
[201] Enrico Motta. An overview of the ocml modelling language. In Pro-
ceedings KEML’98: 8th Workshop on Knowledge Engineering Methods &
Languages, pages 21–22, 1998.
[202] Jakob Nielsen. Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation.
Proceedings of the Computer-Human Interaction Conference, 1:373–380,
1992.
[203] Jakob Nielsen. Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.
[204] Jakob Nielsen. Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics.
Proceedings ACM CHI Conference, 1:152–158, 1994.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 231
[205] Héctor Oscar Nigro and Sandra Elizabeth González Císaro, editors.
Ontologies-Driven Web Mining: Concepts and Techniques. IGI Global
(formerly Idea Group Inc.), 2011.
[206] Olaf Noppens and Thorsten Liebig. Interactive visualization of large owl
instance sets. In Proc. of the Third Int. Semantic Web User Interaction
Workshop (SWUI 2006), 2006.
[207] Chris North. Multiple views and tight coupling in visualization: A lan-
guage, taxonomy, and system. In Proc. CSREA CISST 2001 Workshop
of Fundamental Issues in Visualization, pages 626–632, 2001.
[208] Chris North, Nathan Conklin, Kiran Indukuri, and Varun Saini. Vi-
sualization schemas and a web-based architecture for custom multiple-
view visualization of multiple-table databases. Information Visualizati-
on, 1(3/4):211–228, 2002.
[209] Chris North and Ben Shneiderman. Snap-together visualization: a user
interface for coordinating visualizations via relational schemata. In Pro-
ceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces, pages
128–135, 2000.
[210] Natalya F. Noy and Deborah L. McGuinness. Ontology Development 101:
A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology. Stanford Knowledge Systems
Laboratory, March 2001.
[211] Leo Obrst, Benjamin Ashpole, Werner Ceusters, Inderjeet Mani, Steve
Ray, and Barry Smith. The evaluation of ontologies: Toward improved se-
mantic interoperability. Technical report, US National Institute of Stan-
dards and Technology, 2006.
[212] Jeff Offutt, Mary Jean Harrold, and Priyadarshan Kolte. A software
metric system for module coupling. The Journal of Systems and Software,
20(3):295–308, 1993.
[213] Annika Ohgren and Kurt Sandkuhl. Towards a methodology for ontology
development in small and medium-sized enterprises. In Proceedings of
IADIS International Conference on Applied Computing, pages 369–376,
2005.
[214] Mamoru Ohta, Kouji Kozaki, and Riichiro Mizoguchi. An extension of
an environment for building/using ontologies "hozo"toward practical on-
tology engineering. Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference
if Software Engineering and Applications, 1:373–379, 2010.
232 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[215] Anthony Orme, Haining Yao, and Letha Etzkorn. Coupling metrics for
ontology-based systems. Software, IEEE, 2006.
[216] Ekaterina Ovchinnikova, Tonio Wandmacher, and Kai-Uwe Kühnberger.
Solving terminological inconsistency problems in ontology design. IBIS
- Interoperability in Business Information Systems, 1(1):1–16, 2006.
[217] Bostjan Pajntar, Marko Grobelnik, and Dunja Mladenic. Contextualized
visualization of ontologies and ontology networks. Proceedings of SIKDD,
1:1–4, 2009.
[218] Viktoria Pammer and Stefanie Lindstaedt. Ontology evaluation through
assessment of inferred statements: Study of a prototypical implementa-
tion of an ontology questionnaire for owl dl ontologies. Proceedings of
Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management (KSEM), 1:394–405,
2009.
[219] Jeff Z. Pan and Ian Horrocks. Reasoning in the shoq(dn) description
logic. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics,
1:15–25, 2002.
[220] Cynthia Sims Parr, Bongshin Lee, Dana Campbell, and Benjamin B.
Bederson. Visualizations for taxonomic and phylogenetic trees. Bioin-
formatics, 20(17):2997–3004, 2004.
[221] Bijan Parsia, Taowei Wang, and Jennifer Golbeck. Visualizing web on-
tologies with cropcircles. ISWC, pages 1 – 8, 2005.
[222] Alan Perlis. Software Reusability: Concepts and Models. ACM Press,
1989.
[223] Catherine Plaisant, Jesse Grosjean, and Benjamin Bederson. Spacetree:
Supporting exploration in large node link tree, design evolution and em-
pirical evaluation. IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, (In-
foVis), 1:57–64, 2002.
[224] Roberto Poli. Ontological methodology. International Human-Computer
Studies, 56:639–664, 2002.
[225] Rubén Prieto-Díaz and Guillermo Arango. Domain Analysis and Soft-
ware Systems Modeling. IEEE, 1991.
[226] Ramana Rao and Stuart K. Card. The table lens: Merging graphical and
symbolic representations in an interactive focus+context visualization for
tabular information. In ACM, editor, Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1994.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 233
[227] Steven Reiss. A visual query language for software visualization. Pro-
ceedings of the IEEE 2002 Symposia on Human Centric Computing Lan-
guages and Environments, 1:80–88, 2002.
[228] Walky Rivadeneira and Benjamin Bederson. A study of search result
clustering interfaces: Comparing textual and zoomable interfaces. Uni-
versity of Maryland HCIL Tech. Rep. HCIL-2003-36, 21:1–5, 2003.
[229] Dietmar Rosner and Manfred Stede. Generating multilingual documents
from a knowledge base: the techdoc project. Proceedings of the 15th
conference on Computational linguistics, 1:339–343, 1994.
[230] Winston Royce. Managing the development of large software systems.
Proceedings of IEEE WESCON, 1:1–9, 1970.
[231] Jeffrey Saffer, Vicki Burnett, Guang Chen, and Peter Van der Spek.
Visual analytics in the pharmaceutical industry. Computer Graphics and
Applications, IEEE, 24:10–15, 2004.
[232] Rodrigo Santamaría and Roberto Therón. Visualization of intersecting
groups based on hypergraphs. IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Information
and Systems, 7:1957–1964, 2010.
[233] Óscar Corcho, Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Rafael González-Cabero, and
Carmen Suárez-Figueroa. Odeval: a tool for evaluating rdf(s), daml+oil,
and owl concept taxonomies. Proceedings of IFIP Conference on Artifi-
cial Intelligence Applications and Innovations, 1:369 –382, 2004.
[234] Jean Scholtz. Usability evaluation. Technical report, National Institute
of Standards and Technology (NIST), 2004.
[235] Helen Sharp, Yvonne Rogers, and Jenny Preece. Interaction design :
beyond human-computer interaction. Wiley & Sons Ltd., second edition,
2007.
[236] Ben Shneiderman. Extreme visualization: squeezing a billion records into
a million pixels. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD international
conference on Management of data, pages 3–12, 2008.
[237] Harri Siirtola. Combining parallel coordinates with the reorderable ma-
trix. In Proceedings of the conference on Coordinated and Multiple Views
In Exploratory Visualization, 2003.
[238] Elena Simperl. Reusing ontologies on the semantic web: A feasibility
study. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 68:905–925, 2009.
234 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[239] Evren Sirin, Bijan Parsia, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Aditya Kalyanpur,
and Yarden Katz. Pellet: A practical owl-dl reasoner. Web Semantics:
Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 5(2):51 – 53, 2007.
[240] Chakkrit Snae and Michael Brueckner. Ontology-driven e-learning sys-
tem based on roles and activities for thai learning environment. Inter-
disciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3:1–17, 2007.
[241] Peter Spyns, Robert Meersman, and Mustafa Jarrar. Data modelling
versus ontology engineering. SIGMOD Rec., 31:12–17, 2002.
[242] John Stasko and Eugene Zhang. Focus+context display and navigation
techniques for enhancing radial, space-filling hierarchy visualizations. In-
fovis 2000, 1:57–70, 2000.
[243] Robert Stevens, Mikel Egana Aranguren, Katy Wolstencroft, Ulrike Sat-
tler, Nick Drummond, Matthew Horridge, and Alan Rector. Using owl to
model biological knowledge. International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies, 2007.
[244] Evelyn Stiller and Cathie LeBlanc. Project-Based Software Engineering:
An Object-Oriented Approach. Addison-Wesley, 2002.
[245] Vijayan Sugumaran and Veda Storey. Ontologies for conceptual model-
ing: their creation, use and management. Data & Knowledge Engineering,
42(3):251–271, 2002.
[246] Bongwon Suh and Benjamin Bederson. Ozone: a zoomable interface for
navigating ontology information. Proceedings of the Working Conference
on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI), 1:139 – 143, 2002.
[247] Eiichi Sunagawa, Kouji Kozaki, Yoshinobu Kitamura, and Riichiro Mi-
zoguchi. A framework for organizing role concepts in ontology devel-
opment tool: Hozo. Roles, an Interdisciplinary Perspective: Ontologies,
Programming Languages, and Multiagent Systems, 1:136–143, 2005.
[248] Kaustubh Supekar, Chintan Patel, and Yugyung Lee. Characterizing
quality of knowledge on semantic web. Proceedings of AAAI Florida AI
Research Symposium (FLAIRS), 1:20–26, 2004.
[249] York Sure, Juergen Angele, and Steffen Staab. Ontoedit: Guiding
ontology development by methodology and inferencing. In Coop-
IS/DOA/ODBASE, pages 29–31, 2002.
[250] York Sure, Steffen Staab, Rudi Studer, and Ontoprise Gmbh. On-to-
knowledge methodology (otkm). In Handbook on Ontologies, Internation-
al Handbooks on Information Systems, pages 117–132. Springer, 2003.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 235
[251] Kamidi Suresh, Sanjay Kumar Malik, Nupur Prakash, and SAM Rizvi.
Role of ontology editors : Ontology design. Proceedings of IPCV08, 2008.
[252] Mari-Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Saartje Brockmans, Aldo Gangemi,
Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Jos Lehmann, and Holger Lewen. Neon mod-
elling components. neon deliverable d5.1.1, neon project. Technical re-
port, NeOn project, 2007.
[253] Samir Tartir and Budak Arpinar. Ontology evaluation and ranking us-
ing ontoqa. Proceedings of the International Conference on Semantic
Computing, 2007.
[254] Samir Tartir, Budak Arpinar, Michael Moore, Amit Sheth, and Boan-
erges Aleman-meza. Ontoqa: Metric-based ontology quality analysis.
Scientific Literature Digital Library and Search Engine, pages 1–9, 2005.
[255] Samir Tartir, Budak Arpinar, and Amit Sheth. Ontological evaluation
and validation. Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Appli-
cations, 1:115–130, 2010.
[256] Alexandru Telea and Lucian Voinea. Case study: Visual analytics in
software product assessments. In VISSOFT’09, pages 65–72, 2009.
[257] Soon Tee Teoh and Kwan-Liu Ma. Rings : A technique for visualizing
large hierarchies. Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on
Graph Drawing, 1:268–275, 2002.
[258] Roberto Therón. Visual analytics of paleoceanographic conditions. In
Pak Chung Wong and Daniel A. Keim, editors, IEEE VAST, pages 19–
26. IEEE, 2006.
[259] James J. Thomas and Kristin A. Cook. Illuminating the Path: The Re-
search and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. National Visuali-
zation and Analytics Ctr, 2005.
[260] Christian Tominski, James Abello, Frank Van Ham, and Heidrun Schu-
mann. Fisheye tree views and lenses for graph visualization. In Pro-
ceedings of the conference on Information Visualization, pages 17–24,
Washington, DC, USA, 2006. IEEE Computer Society.
[261] Christian Tominski, P. Schulze-Wollgast, and Heidrun Schumann. Visual
methods for analyzing human health data. Encyclopedia of Healthcare
Information Systems, 1:1357–1364, 2008.
[262] Mike Uschold. Building ontologies towards a unified methodology. Pro-
ceedings of Expert Systems, 1:1–20, 1996.
236 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
[263] Mike Uschold and Michael Gruninger. Ontologies: Principles, methods
and applications. Knowledge Engineering Review, 11(2):93–136, 1996.
[264] Mike Uschold and Martin King. Towards a methodology for building on-
tologies. Proceedings of Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowl-
edge Sharing, 1:1–15, 1995.
[265] Mike Uschold, Martin King, Stuart Moralee, and Yannis Zorgios. The
enterprise ontology. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 13:31–89, 1995.
[266] David Vallet, Miriam Fernández, and Pablo Castells. An ontology-based
information retrieval model. Proceedings of Extended Semantic Web Con-
ference ( ESWC 2005), 1:455–470, 2005.
[267] Michel Vanden-Bossche, Peter Ross, Ian Maclarty, Bert Van Nuffelen,
and Nikolay Pelov. Ontology driven software engineering for real life
applications. Proceedings of 3rd International Workshop on Semantic
Web Enabled Software Engineering (SWESE 2007), 1:61–66, 2007.
[268] Pepijn Visser and Trevor Bench-Capon. On the reusability of ontologies
in knowledge-system design. Proceedings of the Seventh Int. Workshop
on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 1:256 – 261, 1996.
[269] Raphael Volz, Daniel Oberle, Steffen Staab, and Rudi Studer. Ontobro-
ker and ontoedit adaptation. Technical report, Institute AIFB, Univer-
sity of Karlsruhe, 2003.
[270] Denny Vrandecic. Ontology Evaluation. PhD thesis, Karlsruher Institute
of Technology, 2010.
[271] Denny Vrandecic and York Sure. How to design better ontology metrics.
The Semantic Web: Research and Applications, Springer-Berlag, pages
311–325, 2007.
[272] Yair Wand, Veda Storey, and Ron Weber. An ontological analysis of the
relationship construct in conceptual modeling. ACM Transactions on
Database Systems, 24(4):494–528, 2000.
[273] David Wang and Bijan Parsia. Cropcircles: Topology sensitive visuali-
zation of owl class hierarchies. In International Semantic Web Confer-
ence, volume 4273 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 695–708.
Springer, 2006.
[274] Colin Ware. Information Visualization: perception for design. Elsevier,
second edition, 2004.
BIBLIOGRAFÍA 237
[275] Ron Weber. Conceptual modelling and ontology: Possibilities and pit-
falls. Journal of Database Management, 14 (3):1–20, 2003.
[276] Moritz Weiten. Ontostudio 3: Professional tool for knowledge arquitects.
Technical report, Enterprise GmbH, 2009.
[277] Moritz Weiten. Semantic Knowledge Management, chapter OntoSTU-
DIO: as a Ontology Engineering Environment, pages 51–61. Springer-
Verlag, 2009.
[278] Douglas West. Introduction to Graph Theory. Prentice Hall, 2001.
[279] Jarke Van Wijk and Huub Van de Wetering. Cushion treemaps: Vi-
sualization of hierarchical information. Proceedings of the IEEE Sympo-
sium on Information Visualization (InfoVis 99). IEEE Computer Soci-
ety, pages 73–78, 1999.
[280] Hong Yul Yang, Ewan Tempero, and Rebecca Berrigan. Detecting indi-
rect coupling. Proceedings of the 2005 Australian conference on Software
Engineering, 1:212–221, 2005.
[281] Haining Yao, Anthony Mark Orme, and Letha Etzkorn. Cohesion metrics
for ontology design and application. Journal of Computer Science, vol.
1:107–113, 2005.
[282] Ma Yinglong, Jin Beihong, and Yulin Feng. Semantic oriented ontology
cohesion metrics for ontology-based systems. The Journal of Systems
and Software, Elsevier, 83(1):143–152, 2009.
[283] Anna Zhdanova and Uwe Keller. Choosing an ontology language. World
Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 4:47–50, 2005.
[284] Dalu Zhang Zhe YANG and Chuan YE. Evaluation metrics for ontology
complexity and evolution analysis. IEEE International Conference on
e-Business Engineering (ICEBE’06), 1:162–170, 2006.