Descriptions of Part-of Relationships for Ontology Building and Its Deployment – A Representation Model for Part Structures based-on Role Theory

Abstract

Ontological considerations about part-of relations have been extensively investigated because they are basic and important relationships for ontology building. Although there are various discussions on kinds of part-of and their ontological characteristics, there remains some room for discussing a couple of fundamental issues such as "What is a part?" and "When is a part-of relation composed?" This paper discusses ontology patterns of descriptions of part-of relationships on the basis of ontological theories in order to provide practitioners with useful guidelines for descriptions of part-of structurers. This paper focuses on ontology patterns which capture commonality and special characteristics of parts so that complicated structures of physical objects are described appropriately. We discuss four problems related to descriptions of parts. 1) interdependence between the whole and its parts, 2) kinds of parts such as components, portions and materials, 3) multiple inheritance according to substance and properties of parts, 4) the commonality and specificity of parts. To cope with these problems, this paper introduces a part representation model based on ontological theory of roles. The main idea of the part representation model is to distinguish between a part dependent on its whole and the context-independent properties of the part. The former is defined as the role-holder which plays roles and the latter is defined as the player of the role. The role defines properties of the part which is dependent on its whole. These three kinds of definitions enable to describe differences of various properties of parts according to their context dependence. We show how this model is used to describe various parts through practical examples of the anatomical structure of human body developed in the medical ontology project in Japan.

Intelligent personalised exercise recommendation: A weighted knowledge graph‐based approach

“…Knowledge graphs are usually constructed on the basis of the entities and the relationships between entities, which are extracted from external knowledge bases such as Wikipedia, YAGO and DBpedia. However, most of the knowledge graph construction techniques only focus on the extraction of general entity relationships, such as 'is‐a' [11,24] and 'part‐of' relationships [18,30], or the extraction of domain‐oriented entity relations, such as the 'eaten‐by' or 'preys‐on' relation in a biological domain [31], and the 'treatment' relation in a clinical domain [4]. In recent years, the prerequisite relationships between concepts have garnered significant attention from researchers in the field of education [3,5,35,36], as such relations reflect natural dependencies among concepts in cognitive processes when we learn, organise, apply and generate knowledge [4].…”

“…Knowledge graph, utilised by Google, is a mainstream approach for building the knowledge structure, and it has become increasingly popular in academia and various industries owing to its wide application in recommendation [13] and information retrieval [35]. However, most of the knowledge graph construction techniques only focus on the extraction of general entity relationships, such as ‘is‐a’ relationships and ‘part‐of’ relationships [11,18,24,30]. In recent years, the prerequisite relationships between concepts have attracted significant attention from researchers, because they reflect a reasonable learning sequence during a study procedure [8,35,36].…”