Browse > Article

Analysis and comparison of ontology development methodologies: based on CMM-I version 1.1 Maturity Level 2 and 3  

Choi, Seung-Yong (관동대학교 전자계산공학과)
Kim, Jeong-Ah (관동대학교 컴퓨터교육과)
Jung, Ran (강원대학교 컴퓨터공학과)
Bae, Je-Min (관동대학교 컴퓨터교육과)
Hong, Chan-Ki (관동대학교 컴퓨터공학과)
Choi, Sung-Woon (명지대학교 컴퓨터공학과)
Abstract
As the requirement of Semantic Web and knowledge management has been rising, ontology developments have been carried out actively. Ontology is now at the point that systematic developing standardization should be made up like the developing a large scale software. Yet, It has not been made to optimize and standardize ontology development methodologies. In this study, to compare ontology development methodologies, METHONTOLOGY, CommonKADS, OTK in foreign countries and EOE in Korea are selected. The evaluating method is to introduce CMM-I version 1.1 framework. Ontology development methodologies have been evaluated in process areas that introduce for CMM-I maturity level 2 and 3. The purpose of this study is to find matured process and weak process in ontology development methodology on the view of process maturity, and suggests the areas to be Improved in it. The result of this study can be applied as basic data to establish and improve ontology development methodology.
Keywords
CMMI; methodology; ontology; process;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Alec Dorling, 'SPICE: software process improvement and capability dEtermination,' Information and Software Technology. Vol.35, No.6-7, pp. 404-408. 1993   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Mariano Fernandez-Lopez, 'Overview Of Methodologies For Building Ontologies,' Proceedings of the IJCAI-99 Workshop on Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods(KRR5), August 1999
3 김은경, '시맨틱웹을 위한 온톨로지 구축방법에 관한 비교연구', 중앙대학교 석사학위 논문, 2004
4 Mike Uschold, and Michael Grüninger, 'ONTOLOGIES: Principles, Methods and Applications,' Knowledge Engineering review 11(2), pp. 93-155, 1996   DOI
5 한국전산원, '웹 온톨로지 개발지침 연구', NCA IV-RER-04059, 2004. 12
6 Musen, 'Dimensions of knowledge sharing and reuse,' Computers and Biomedical Research, Vol. 25, Issue 5, pp. 435-467, 1992   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Steffen Staab, Rudi Studer, Hans Peter Schnurr, and York Sure, 'Knowledge Processes and Ontologies,' IEEE Intelligent Systems, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp. 26-34, 2001
8 Bill Swartout, Ramesh Patil, Kevin Knight, and Tom Russ, 'Toward Distributed Use of Large-Scale Ontologies,' Symposium on Ontological Engineering of AAAI., pp. 138-148, 1997
9 Mariano Fernandez-Lopez, Asuncion Gomez-Perez, and Natalia Juristo, 'METHONTOLOGY: From Ontological Art Towards Ontological Engineering,' Spring Symposium on Ontological Engineering of AAAI, Stanford University, California, pp. 25-34, 1997
10 Khaled El Emam, Jean-Normand Drouin, and Walcelio Melo, SPICE - The Theory and Practice of Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination, IEEE Computer Society, 1998
11 Mark S. Fox, 'The TOVE Project: A Commonsense Model of the Enterprise,' Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Industrial and engineering applications of artificial intelligence and expert systems, Springer-Verlag, London, pp. 25-34, 1992
12 Thomas R. Gruber, 'A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications,' Knowledge Acquisition Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 199-220, 1993   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Geri Steve, Aldo Gangemi, and Domenico M. Pisanelli, 'Integrating Medical Terminologies with ONIONS Methodology,' Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases VIII, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 1997
14 Guus Schreiber, Bob Wielinga, Robert de Hoog, Hans Akkermans, and Walter Van de velde, 'CommonKADS: a comprehensive methodology for KBS development,' IEEE Expert, Volume 9, Issue 6, pp. 28-37, 1994
15 Margaret K. Kulpa, and Kent A. Johnson, 'Interpreting the CMMI: A Process Improvement Approach,' Auerbach, 2003
16 Douglas B. Lenat, and R. V. Guha, building Large Knowledge-based Systems: Representation and Inference in the Cyc Project, 1st Ed., Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1989