Journal of Automated Reasoning
Journal of Management Information Systems
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Laconic and Precise Justifications in OWL
ISWC '08 Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on The Semantic Web
A catalogue of OWL ontology antipatterns
Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Knowledge capture
IJCAI'81 Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Structuring computer generated proofs
IJCAI'89 Proceedings of the 11th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Explaining subsumption in description logics
IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Non-standard reasoning services for the debugging of description logic terminologies
IJCAI'03 Proceedings of the 18th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence
Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies
Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web
Swoop: A Web Ontology Editing Browser
Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web
Justification oriented proofs in OWL
ISWC'10 Proceedings of the 9th international semantic web conference on The semantic web - Volume Part I
Visualizing Semantic Web proofs of defeasible logic in the DR-DEVICE system
Knowledge-Based Systems
The cognitive complexity of OWL justifications
ISWC'11 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on The semantic web - Volume Part I
Repairing unsatisfiable concepts in OWL ontologies
ESWC'06 Proceedings of the 3rd European conference on The Semantic Web: research and applications
Extracting justifications from bioportal ontologies
ISWC'12 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on The Semantic Web - Volume Part II
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Justifications are the dominant form of explanation for entailments of OWL ontologies, with popular OWL ontology editors, such as Protege 4, providing justification-based explanation facilities. A justification is a minimal subset of an ontology which is sufficient for an entailment to hold; they correspond to the premises of a proof. Unlike proofs, however, justifications do not articulate how their axioms support the entailment. We frequently observe that ontology developers find certain justifications difficult to work with; and while in some cases the sources of difficulty are obvious (such as a large number of axioms), we do not have a good general understanding of what makes justifications easy or difficult for ontology users. In this paper, we present an approach to determining the cognitive complexity of justifications for entailments of OWL ontologies. We describe an exploratory study which forms the basis for a cognitive complexity model that predicts the complexity of OWL justifications, and present the results of validating that model via experiments involving OWL users. This is concluded by an investigation into strategies OWL users apply to support them in understanding justifications. Our contributions include an evaluation of the cognitive complexity model, new insights into the complexity of justifications for entailments of OWL ontologies, a significant corpus with novel analyses of justifications suitable for experimentation, and an experimental protocol suitable for model validation and refinement.