Abstract
When ontologies reach a certain size and complexity, faults such as inconsistencies, unsatisfiable classes or wrong entailments are hardly avoidable. Locating the incorrect axioms that cause these faults is a hard and time-consuming task. Addressing this issue, several techniques for semi-automatic fault localization in ontologies have been proposed. Often, these approaches involve a human expert who provides answers to system-generated questions about the intended (correct) ontology in order to reduce the possible fault locations. To suggest as informative questions as possible, existing methods draw on various algorithmic optimizations as well as heuristics. However, these computations are often based on certain assumptions about the interacting user. In this work, we characterize and discuss different user types and show that existing approaches do not achieve optimal efficiency for all of them. As a remedy, we suggest a new type of expert question which aims at fitting the answering behavior of all analyzed experts. Moreover, we present an algorithm to optimize this new query type which is fully compatible with the (tried and tested) heuristics used in the field. Experiments on faulty real-world ontologies show the potential of the new querying method for minimizing the expert consultation time, independent of the expert type. Besides, the gained insights can inform the design of interactive debugging tools towards better meeting their users’ needs.
Abstract (translated by Google)
URL
http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.00317