Ontological Analysis of the Wikipedia Category System

Alexander Kirillovich

and Olga Nevzorova

1,2

Kazan Federal University, Kazan, Russia

Research Institute of Applied Semiotics of the Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, Kazan, Russia

Keywords: Wikipedia, Categorization, Ontology Validation, OntoClean, Ontological Dependence.

Abstract: We analyse violations of the transitivity principle of the Wikipedia category system, i.e. the situations where

articles from a subcategory doesn’t logically belong to its parent category. The causes of the violation have

been analysed on the base of ontological modelling methodologies such as OntoClean. We propose a new

approach to automatically eliminating the violations. This approach is based on analysis of the relation of

ontological dependence between categories. As a theoretical foundation of such analysis we propose a new

deflationistic interpretation of the essential account of ontological dependence. The proof of concept has been

evaluated on the category C:Mathematics. We are going to apply the proposed approach to derive a new large-

scale domains hierarchy from the Wikipedia category system, and use it to provide BabelNet and DBpedia

with fine-grained domain annotations.

1 INTRODUCTION

Wikipedia is one of the largest knowledge bases on

the Web. Wikipedia data are used in such tasks as

word sense disambiguation, text categorization,

calculation of semantic similarity, and machine

translation. To automatically process information

from Wikipedia, means of data structuring are

needed.

The category system is the main meen for

structuring information in Wikipedia. The categories

specify the thematic classification of articles.

There are two types of categories:

 Set categories, for example

C:Cities category

that contains articles about various cities (New

York, Moscow, Kazan, Seville, etc).

 Topic categories, for example

C:City category

that contains articles on city-related topics (Urban

planning, Urbanization, History of cities, Urban

culture, etc).

Each category can include subcategories and can be

included in a parent category. Thus the category

system is organized as an directed acyclic graph.

Categories can be grouped using meta-categories,

for example

C:Writers →

C:Writers_by_nationality →

C:Russian_writers.

Thus it is important that the category system

demonstrate transitivity and nested subcategories be

relevant to the parent category. However, building a

chain of nested categories does not always satisfy this

requirement. This fact causes problems while

searching for articles. Therefore it is necessary to

analyze the causes of violations of transitivity which

leads to a discrepancy between the category and the

article that is located in one of the nested

subcategories.

We understand relevance as rating a category-

subcategory pair in terms of preserving the volume of

common and distinctive features. We assume that for

relevant categories, the volume of common attributes

exceeds the volume of differences, and in this sense

one can speak of the transitivity property of

categories.

However, the requirement of transitivity is often

violated. For example, the category

C:Arithmetic

contains irrelevant subcategories such as

C:Colombian_people_executed_by_firing_squa

(see example 1).

Example 1: C

:Arithmetic → C:Ratios →

C:Rates → C:Temporal_rates →

C:Acceleration → C:Force →

C:Motion_(physics) → C:Flight →

C:Ballistics → ... → C:Projectile_weapons →

C:Firearms →

C:People_associated_with_firearms →

C:Shooting_victims → ... →

C:Colombian_people_executed_by_firing_squa

358

Kirillovich, A. and Nevzorova, O.

Ontological Analysis of the Wikipedia Category System.

DOI: 10.5220/0006961803580366

In Proceedings of the 10th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2018) - Volume 2: KEOD, pages 358-366

ISBN: 978-989-758-330-8

The objective of this paper is to analyze the

problem of transitivity violations in the Wikipedia

category system and to propose an approach to

solving it.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2,

we briefly enumerate other projects of structuring

Wikipedia data and note its limitations. In Section 3,

we analyze Wikipedia category system on base of

ontological modeling methodologies and reveal

causes of transitivity violations. In Section 4, we

propose an approach that corrects the category system

by removing intransitive chains. Section 5 describes

the direction of future work.

2 RELATED WORKS

There are many projects for extracting structured data

from Wikipedia (Medelyan et al., 2009; Hovy et al.,

2013), such as DBpedia (Auer et al., 2007; Bizer et

al., 2009; Lehmann et al., 2015), YAGO (Suchanek

et al., 2007; Hoffart et al., 2013; Mahdisoltani et al.,

2015), WikiTaxonomy (Ponzetto and Strube, 2007;

Ponzetto and Strube, 2011; Zirn et al., 2008),

WikiNet (Nastase and Strube, 2008; Nastase et al.,

2010; Nastase and Strube, 2013), ORA (Gangemi et

al., 2012; Nuzzolese et al., 2013), WiBi (Flati et al.,

2014; Flati et al., 2016), MENTA (de Melo and

Weikum, 2010), BabelNet (Navigli and Ponzetto,

2010; Navigli and Ponzetto, 2012), WiSiNet (Moro

and Navigli, 2012), KOG (Wu and Weld, 2008), as

well as projects for alignment of Wikipedia and

WordNet (Ruiz-Casado et al., 2005; Toral et al.,

2008; Niemann and Gurevych, 2011; Ponzetto and

Navigli, 2009; Gella et al., 2014; Titze et al., 2014).

However, these projects cannot completely

substitute the Wikipedia category system in the case

of subject retrieval, i.e. retrieval of articles on the

particular subject (for example, all the articles related

to Ancient Greece).

3 ANALYSIS OF TRANSITIVITY

VIOLATIONS

We have analyzed the category system using the

methodology of ontological modeling and have

identified the causes of transitivity violations.

The category system can be considered as a

thesaurus (ANSI, 2005; ISO 2011; Loukachevitch,

2011). In this case the categories will correspond to

thesaurus concepts, and the relationships between the

category and its subcategory will be viewed as

standard ontological relationships.

Here are examples of such relations:

 Generic relation:

C:Cities_in_Europe →

C:Capitals_in_Europe;

C:Software → ... → C:Operating_systems;

C:Mathematical_axioms →

C:Axioms_of_set_theory;

C:Machines → C:Engines;

C:Wars → ... →

C:Wars_involving_the_Soviet_Union;

C:Fiction_books → ... →

C:Dystopian_novels.

 Instance relation:

C:Capitals_in_Europe → C:Moscow;

C:Intergovernmental_organizations →

C:United_Nations;

C:Universities_and_colleges_in_Connec

ticut

→ C:Yale_University;

C:Operating_systems → C:Unix;

C:Fields_of_mathematics → C:Algebra;

C:Axioms_of_set_theory →

C:Axiom_of_choice;

C:Abstract_strategy_games → C:Chess;

C:Engines →

C:Internal_combustion_engine;

C:Wars_involving_the_Soviet_Union →

C:World_War_II;

C:Dystopian_novels →

C:Nineteen_Eighty‐Four;

C:Organs → C:Brain;

C:Space_stations →

C:International_Space_Station.

 Part-whole relation:

C:Moscow →

C:Cities_and_towns_under_jurisdiction

_of_Moscow

→ C:Zelenograd;

C:Yale_University →

C:Yale_University_Library;

C:United_Nations →

C:International_Atomic_Energy_Agency;

C:World_War_II → … →

C:Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor;

C:Central_nervous_system → C:Brain;

C:Unix → C:Network_socket;

Ontological Analysis of the Wikipedia Category System

359

C:Internal_combustion_engine →

C:Pistons.

 Associative relation:

 Science → object of study:

o C:Botany→C:Plants.

 Agent → counteragent:

o C:Plants→C:Herbicides;

o C:Violence→C:Nonviolence;

o C:Communism→C:Anti‐communism.

 Value → measure instrument:

C:Temperature → C:Thermometers.

 Activity → agent of activity:

o C:Hunting→C:Hunting_dogs;

o C:Military

→

C:Military_personnel.

 Raw material → product:

o C:Grape→C:Raisins;

o C:Petroleum→

C:Petroleum_products

→Gasoline;

o C:Textiles

→C:Textile_arts→

C:Weaving

.

 Other associative relations:

o C:Death→C:Death_customs→

C:Funerals;

o C:Automobiles→C:Auto_racing;

o C:Books→C:Book_arts→

C:Bookbinding.

The meta-categories correspond to the Node

labels.

The problem of ascribing relevant subcategories

to a given category corresponds to the standard query

expansion task.

Representing the category system in the form of a

thesaurus allowed us to apply the methodologies for

constructing information retrieval thesauri as well as

the methodologies for verifying the ontology

correctness, such as OntoClean (Guarino and Welty,

2009; Guarino and Welty, 2000; Guizzardi, 2005;

Gangemi, A. et al., 2001; Gangemi, A. et al., 2002).

As a result, we determined that many cases of

transitivity violations are caused by violations of rules

for constructing a hierarchy of ontology concepts.

The main reasons are:

 Incomplete inclusion of one category in another

category:

o Analog film stock is included in the Digital

technology category:

C:Digital_technology→ C:Digital_med

→ C:Video →

C:Film_and_video_technology →

C:Film_stock. The reason is that the Video

category is not fully included in the Digital

media category, because there is also the

analog video.

o The English-language novel Lolita is

included in the Russian novels category:

C:Russian_novels → …→

C:Novels_by_Vladimir_Nabokov →

C:Lolita. The same way, the Novels by

Vladimir Nabokov category is not fully

included in the Russian novels category.

o Japanese language is included in Korea

languages:

C:Korea_languages →

C:Buyeo_languages →

C:Japonic_languages →

C:Japanese_language.

 Errors in the application of fuzzy concepts:

o Electric chairs are included in the Consumer

goods category:

C:Consumer_goods →

C:Furniture → C:Chairs →

C:Electric_chairs.

 Errors due to the application of ambiguous

categories:

o Record charts is included in the Diagrams

category:

C:Diagrams → C:Charts →

C:Record_charts. In one case Charts is

interpreted as diagrams and in other as music

charts.

o Ship construction is included in the Real

estate category:

C:Real_estate →

C:Construction → C:Ship_construction.

 Using a concept in different senses:

o Digital library Lib.ru is included in the

Buildings:

C:Buildings_and_structures →

C:Buildings_and_structures_by_type →

C:Libraries → C:Digital_libraries →

Lib.ru. In one case Libraries is interpreted

as buildings type, and in another as the social

institute.

o Nihilism is included in the Biology:

C:Biology → C:Life →

C:Philosophy_of_life → C:Nihilism. In

one case Life is interpreted as a biological

process, and in another as a social process.

o Snow category is included in the Liquids:

C:Liquids → C:Water →

C:Forms_of_water → C:Snow. In one case

Water is interpreted as a chemical substance

KEOD 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development

360

as such, and in another as a chemical

substance in liquid state.

 Incompatible identity criteria:

o The Kaaba (a Muslim sacred building) is

included in the Mathematical objects:

C:Mathematical_objects →

C:Geometric_shapes →

C:Elementary_shapes → C:Cubes →

C:Cubic_buildings → C:Kaaba. The error

is located in the chain:

C:Cubes →

C:Cubic_buildings. Cubic buildings,

strictly speaking, are not cubes, since cubes

and cubic buildings have different criteria for

identity. A cube is an abstract, timeless and

unchanging object. If the size of a cube

changes, then it will be another cube. A cubic

building is a concrete object that exists in

time and space and retains identity under

small modifications.

o Bermuda Triangle is included in the

Geometric shapes:

C:Mathematical_objects →

C:Geometric_shapes →

C:Elementary_shapes → C:Triangles →

Bermuda_Triangle.

 Confusion between concepts and signs:

o House of Habsburg is included in Words and

phrases category:

C:Words_and_phrases → ... →

C:Surnames_of_Swiss_origin →

C:Swiss_families →

C:Swiss_noble_families →

C:House_of_Habsburg.

o Toxin is included in the Language category:

C:Language → C:Terminology →

C:Biology_terminology → Toxin. The

reason for the error is that the toxin is not a

term. It is a word ‘toxin’ that is a term.

 OntoClean constraints vionations:

o Analgesic is included in the Illegal drugs

category:

C:Illegal_drugs →

C:Morphine→ C:Analgesic. The reason

for the error is that the Illegal drugs is not a

type. It is a role, and it should not contain

type categories.

o Optical bombsights category is included in

the Office equipment category:

C:Office_equipment→

C:Computers→ … →

C:Analog_computers→ …→

C:Optical_bombsights.

o Poison berry Sambucus is included in the

Foods category:

C:Foods → C:Fruit→

C:Berries→ C:Sambucus.

In the following cases, transitivity is violated not

because of an error, but because of the very principle

of organization of the Wikipedia categories system:

 Nontransitivity of the class-instance relation:

o The Santa María ship is included in the Ship

types category:

C:Ship_types → ... →

C:Exploration_ships →

Santa_María_(ship).

o The ‘Ode’ poem is included in the Literary

genres category:

C:Literary_genres →

C:Poetry → ... → Ode_(poem). This case is

complicated by the real lexical homonymy

(the ode as a literary genre).

 Nontransitivity of associative relation:

o Zelenograd, a city under Moscow jurisdiction

is included in the Capitals in Europe

category:

C:Capitals_in_Europe→

C:Moscow→ … → C:Zelenograd.

o Blondi the dog is included in the Nazi leaders

category:

C:Nazi_leaders →

C:Adolf_Hitler → Blondi.

o Fictional Galactic Empire is included in the

Northern American countries category:

C:Northern_American_countries →

C:United_States →

C:American_people → … →

C:George_Lucas →

C:Star_Wars → … →

Galactic_Empire_(Star_Wars).

o Languages of Djibouti is included in the

Statistics category:

C:Statistics →

C:Statistical_data_sets →

C:Demographics_by_country →

C:Demographics_of_Djibouti →

C:Languages_of_Djibouti.

o Biological weapons is included in the Labour

law category:

C:Labour_law →

C:Labour_relations →

C:Occupational_safety_and_health →

C:Toxicology → C:Biological_weapons.

o Colombian people executed by firing squad is

included in the Arithmetic category:

C:Arithmetic → C:Ratios → C:Rates →

C:Temporal_rates → C:Acceleration →

C:Force → C:Motion_(physics) →

C:Flight →

C:Ballistics → … → C:Projectile_weap

ons

→ C:Firearms →

C:People_associated_with_firearms →

C:Shooting_victims → ... →

Ontological Analysis of the Wikipedia Category System

361

C:Colombian_people_executed_by_firing

_squad

Thus, the transitivity violation in the Wikipedia

category system is caused by two groups of reasons.

The first group includes the reasons related to the

violation of rules for constructing a hierarchy of

concepts in an ontology. These violations can be

eliminated by the authors of Wikipedia. The second

group includes the reasons related to the very

principle of organizing the system of Wikipedia

categories, the main one of which is the

nontransitivity of the associative relationship.

4 APPROACH TO ELIMINATION

OF TRANSITIVITY

VIOLATIONS

In this section, we propose a method for elimination

of intransitive category-subcategory chains.

4.1 The Basic Idea

As we have demonstrated, one of the main causes of

transitivity violations is the associative relation,

which is not transitive.

Up-to-date methods of extracting transitive

hierarchical structure from the category system (such

as YAGO and WikiTaxonomy) detect associative

relationships between categories and eliminate them

all. A disadvantage of these methods is elimination of

potentially relevant relationships, that don’t violate

transitivity. As a result, there is a need for a method,

that eliminates associative relationships violating

transitivity (e.g. Statistics → Demography), but keeps

relationships not violating transitivity (e.g. Education

→ Teacher).

A proposed method is based on approach to

establishing associative relationships in RuThes

thesaurus (Loukachevitch, 2011; Loukachevitch and

Dobrov, 2014; Loukachevitch et al., 2014;

Loukachevitch and Dobrov, 2004a; Loukachevitch

and Dobrov, 2004b). According to this approach

associative relationship between two concepts

doesn’t violate transitivity if ontological dependence

relation holds between these concepts.

In RuThes the notion of ontological dependence

(Tahko and Lowe, 2016; Correia, 2008; Koslicki,

2012, Koslicki, 2013) is formalized according to

modal-existential account: an object A is

ontologically depends on an object B iff necessary if

A exists then B exists (Simons, 1987, chap. 8, pp.

290–323; Thomasson, 1999, chap. 2, pp. 24–34).

The modal-existential account has several

advantages, including simplicity and mathematical

rigorous. A disadvantage is that its application

requires a human participation. In this regard, it is not

appropriate for the given problem.

Additionally, modal-existential account has been

criticized on pure ontological grounds. Kit Fine has

demonstrated, that this account is very rough

approximation to the notion of ontological

dependence and has counterexamples. As an

alternative, Fine proposed an essential account.

According to this account, A depends on B iff B is a

constituent of the essence of A. Essence of object is

defined as a collection of propositions that are true in

virtue of the identity of this object. These

propositions, in turn, constitute real definition of the

object (Fine, 1994; Fine, 1995).

The notion to be true in virtue of the identity of

calls for clarification. According to Fine’s own

interpretation, based on meta-ontological realism,

this notion designates unanalyzed relation between an

object and a proposition. We propose another

interpretation, based on deflationist approach of Amie

L. Thomasson. According to Thomasson, existence

and identity criteria for an object A are application/co-

application conditions for the term “A” (Thomasson,

2008; Thomasson, 2009). According to our

interpretation, a proposition is true in virtue of

identity of the object A if it is a part of application/co-

application conditions for the term “A”. And,

accordingly, an object A is ontologically depended on

an object B iff application/co-application conditions

for the term “A” contain application/co-application

conditions for term “B”. Our interpretation

demonstrates that the essential account is independent

from meta-ontological assumptions.

So, employing the essential account we obtain the

following criteria of ontological dependence: A

ontologically depends on B iff B is ineliminably

involved in the definition of

A. This criterion suits

better for automatic application.

As an approximation of a definition of an object,

represented by any given Wikipedia category, we

take the lead section of the main article of this

category as well as of other language versions of this

article. Involvement of an object in the definition of

another object is roughly approximated by existence

of a hyperlink between the two definitions.

4.2 Proof of the Concept

The proof of concept of the proposed method has

been realized as follows:

 Check whether the relationship between the cate-

KEOD 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development

362

gory and its subcategory is associative. Assume

that the relationship is associative if one of its

participants is a topic category. The type of the

category is detected by the method from

WikiTaxonomy project.

 If the relationship is associative, then check

whether the ontological dependence relation

exists between the corresponding concepts on the

base of the criterion described above. If the

ontological dependence holds, then keep the

relationship between the categories, and eliminate

it otherwise.

 If the relationship is not associative, but

taxonomic, then refer to YAGO that contains

refined taxonomic relationships. If the

corresponding relationship is contained in

YAGO, then keep it, and eliminate it otherwise.

4.3 Evaluation

The proof of concept has been evaluated with

category

C:Mathematics. The choice of this category

was motivated by the practical task of interlinking

OntoMath

Pro

ontology (Nevzorova et al., 2014;

Elizarov et al., 2014; Elizarov et al., 2016; Elizarov et

al., 2017) with DBpedia.

For the task of evaluation we recursively formed

a list of subcategories of

C:Mathematics category.

Then we applied our method to eliminate supposedly

irrelevant subcategories. The lists of the eliminated

and the kept categories were analyzed manually. The

assessor’s task was to check whether the kept

categories were relevant, and the eliminated

categories were irrelevant. The assessment result is

represented in Table 1.

Table 1: The result of the preliminary assessment of the

proposed method with C:Mathematics.

Total 4281

True positives 2136

True negatives 650

False positives 1010

False negatives 485

Recall 0,814956

Precision 0,678957

F1 score 0,740766

5 CONCLUSION

We analyzed the causes for transitivity violations in

the Wikipedia category system and proposed an

approach to their elimination.

The main contributions of this paper are:

(1) an ontological analysis of the Wikipedia category

system;

(2) a new approach to eliminating the violations of

transitivity in this category system, based on

analysis of the relation of ontological dependence

between categories; and

(3) a new deflationistic interpretation of the essential

account of ontological dependence, obtained by

application of the meta-ontological framework of

Amie Thomasson to the ontological dependence

account of Kit Fine.

However, our work is on early stage and will be

continued in the following directions:

1. Ontological Analysys of the Wikipedia

Category System. We are going to conduct an

ontological analysis in a more systematic way. In

particular, it is supposed to find a numerical

distribution of the category-subcategory relationships

as well as of the causes for transitivity violations.

2. Aboutness Analysis of the Wikipedia Category

System. We are going to complement our ontological

analysis of the Wikipedia category system with an

analysis based on the notion of aboutness. Aboutness

is the relation between a meaningful item (such as a

document or a proposition) and its subject matter.

Subject matter is a central concept in Library and

information science (Hjørland, 2016; Hjørland, 1992)

and has been formalized in formal semantics and

mathematical logic (Hawke, 2017). In our analysis,

we would rely on the formalization of Yablo (2014),

according to which subject matter is conceived as a

partition of logical space and the part-whole relation

between two subjects is defined as refinement relation

between two partitions. With this formalisation in

hands, we consider a category-subcategory chain as

transitivity-preserving if subject matter, associated

with the subcategory is a part of the subject matter,

associated with the category.

Additionally, we are going to investigate

correspondence between the notions of aboutness and

ontological dependence. Our working hypothesis to

be proved or disproved is that A is ontologically

depended on B iff the subject matter associated with

A is a part of the subject matter associated with B.

3. Formalization of the Deflationistic

Interpretation of the Essential Account of

Ontological Dependence. In this paper we proposeed

a new deflationistic interpretation of the essential

account of ontological dependence, where this

Ontological Analysis of the Wikipedia Category System

363

relation has been explained in terms of

application/co-application conditions. However, the

notion of application/co-application conditions itself

requires clarification and formalization. We a going

to formalize this notion on base of the situation

semantics for relevant logic (Mares, 2004).

4. Refining of the proposed Approach. In

particular, it is supposed to analyze other articles in

the target category, as well as to use the context of the

link within the definition.

5. Fine-grained Domain Annotation of DBpedia

and BabelNet. We are going to apply the developed

approach to derive a new large-scale domains

hierarchy from the Wikipedia category system. In

contrast to relatively small domains hierarchies of

WordNet, BabelNet and DBpedia, the extracted

hierarchy will contain a large number of fine-grained

domains, such as Ancient Greece, Moscow, Modal

logic, Object-oriented programming or Star Wars.

This hierarchy will be integrated into RuThes

Cloud, a multilevel multilingual resource of the

Linguistic Linked Open Data (Kirillovich et al., 2017;

Galieva et al., 2017), and can be naturally applied to

carry out fine-grained domain annotation of the

resources, automatically extracted from Wikipedia,

first of all, DBpedia and BabelNet.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was funded by the subsidy allocated to

Kazan Federal University for the state assignment in

the sphere of scientific activities, grant agreement no.

1.2368.2017, and by the subsidy of the Russian

Government to support the Program of Competitive

Growth of Kazan Federal University.

REFERENCES

ANSI/NISO Z39.19-2005 (R2010). Guidelines for the

Construction, Format, and Management of

Monolingual Controlled Vocabularies.

Auer, S. et al. (2007). DBpedia: A Nucleus for a Web of

Open Data. In Aberer K. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of

the 6th International Semantic Web Conference and the

2nd Asian Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2007 +

ASWC 2007). The Semantic Web. Lecture Notes in

Computer Science, vol. 4825, pp. 722–735. Berlin,

Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-76298-

0_52.

Bizer, C. et al. (2009). DBpedia: A Crystallization Point for

the Web of Data. Journal of Web Semantics, 7 (3), 154–

165. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.websem.2009.07.002.

Correia, F. (2008). Ontological Dependence. Philosophy

Compass, 3 (5), 1013–1032. Blackwell.

doi:10.1111/j.1747-9991.2008.00170.x.

de Melo, G., Weikum, G. (2010). MENTA: Inducing

Multilingual Taxonomies from Wikipedia. In

Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference

on Information and knowledge management (CIKM

'10), pp. 1099–1108. New York: ACM.

doi:10.1145/1871437.1871577.

Elizarov, A.M. et al. (2014). Mathematical Knowledge

Representation: Semantic Models and Formalisms.

Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics, 35(4), 348–354.

Pleiades Publishing. doi:10.1134/S1995080214040143

Elizarov, A. et al. (2016). Mathematical Knowledge

Management: Ontological Models and Digital

Technology. In Kalinichenko L. et al. (Eds.), Selected

Papers of the XVIII International Conference on Data

Analytics and Management in Data Intensive Domains

(DAMDID/RCDL 2016). CEUR Workshop

Proceedings, vol. 1752, pp. 44–50.

Elizarov, A. et al. (2017). Digital Ecosystem OntoMath:

Mathematical Knowledge Analytics and Management.

In Kalinichenko L. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th

International Conference on Data Analytics and

Management in Data Intensive Domains

(DAMDID/RCDL 2016). Communications in

Computer and Information Science, vol. 706, pp. 33–

46. Springer, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57135-

5_3.

Fine, K. (1994). Essence and Modality. Philosophical

Perspectives, 8, 1–16. Ridgeview Publishing Company.

doi:10.2307/2214160.

Fine, K. (1995). Ontological Dependence. Proceedings of

the Aristotelian Society, 95, 269-290. Wiley.

Flati, T. et al. (2014). Two Is Bigger (and Better) Than One:

the Wikipedia Bitaxonomy Project. In Toutanova K.,

Wu H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting

of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL

2014), vol. 1, pp. 945–955. ACL. doi:10.3115/v1/P14-

1089.

Flati, T. et al. (2016). MultiWiBi: The multilingual

Wikipedia bitaxonomy project. Artificial Intelligence,

241, 66–102. doi:10.1016/j.artint.2016.08.004.

Galieva, A. et al. (2017). Toward Domain-Specific

Russian-Tatar Thesaurus Construction. Proceedings of

the International Conference IMS-2017, pp. 120–124.

New York: ACM. doi:10.1145/3143699.3143716.

Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A. (2001).

Conceptual Analysis of Lexical Taxonomies: The Case

of WordNet Top-Level. In Welty C., Smith B. (Eds.),

Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on

Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS 2001),

pp. 285–296. New York: ACM.

doi:10.1145/505168.505195.

Gangemi, A. et al. (2002). Sweetening Ontologies with

DOLCE. In Gómez-Pérez A., Benjamins V.R. (Eds.),

Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on

Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management

(EKAW 2002). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.

2473, pp. 166–181. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Doi:

KEOD 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development

364

10.1007/3-540-45810-7_18.

Gangemi, A. et al. (2012). Automatic Typing of DBpedia

Entities. In Cudré-Mauroux P. et al. (Eds.),

Proceedings of the 11th International Semantic Web

Conference (ISWC 2012). Lecture Notes in Computer

Science, vol. 7649, pp. 65–81. Springer, Berlin,

Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35176-1_5.

Gella, S., Strapparava, C., Nastase, V. (2014). Mapping

WordNet Domains, WordNet Topics and Wikipedia

Categories to Generate Multilingual Domain Specific

Resources. In Calzolari N. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of

the 9th International Conference on Language

Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2014), pp. 1117–

1121. ELRA.

Guarino, N., Welty, C. (2000). A Formal Ontology of

Properties. In Dieng R., Corby O. (Eds.), Proceedings

of the 12th International Conference on Knowledge

Engineering and Knowledge Management Methods,

Models, and Tools (EKAW 2000). Lecture Notes in

Computer Science, vol. 1937, pp. 97–112. Springer,

Berlin, Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/3-540-39967-4_8.

Guarino, N., Welty, C. (2009). An Overview of OntoClean.

In Staab S., Studer R. (Eds.), Handbook on Ontologies

(2nd ed., pp. 201–220). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_9.

Guizzardi, G. (2005). Ontological foundations for

structural conceptual models. Enschede: CTIT.

Hawke, P. (2017). Theories of Aboutness. Australasian

Journal of Philosophy. Taylor & Francis.

doi:10.1080/00048402.2017.1388826.

Hjørland, B. (2016). Subject (of documents). In Hjørland B.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization.

ISKO. Retrieved from: http://www.isko.org/

cyclo/subject.

Hjørland, B. (1992). The Concept of ‘Subject’ in

Information Science. Journal of Documentation, 48 (2),

172–200. MCB UP Ltd.

Hoffart, J. et al. (2013). YAGO2: A spatially and

temporally enhanced knowledge base from Wikipedia.

Artificial Intelligence, 194, 28–61. Elsevier.

doi:10.1016/j.artint.2012.06.001.

Hovy, E., Navigli, R., Ponzetto, S.P. (2013).

Collaboratively built semi-structured content and

Artificial Intelligence: The story so far. Artificial

Intelligence, 194, 2–27. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/

j.artint.2012.10.002.

ISO 25964-1:2011. Information and documentation —

Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies

— Part 1: Thesauri for information retrieval.

Kirillovich, A. et al. (2017). RuThes Cloud: Towards a

Multilevel Linguistic Linked Open Data Resource for

Russian. In Różewski P., Lange C. (Eds.), Proceedings

of the 8th International Conference on Knowledge

Engineering and Semantic Web (KESW 2017).

Communications in Computer and Information

Science, vol. 786, pp. 38–52. Springer, Cham.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-69548-8_4.

Koslicki, K. (2012). Varieties of Ontological Dependence.

In Correia F., Schnieder B. (Eds.),

Metaphysical

Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality (pp.

186–213). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Koslicki, K. (2013). Ontological Dependence: An

Opinionated Survey. In Hoeltje M. et al. (Eds.),

Varieties of Dependence (pp. 31–64). Munich:

Philosophia Verlag.

Lehmann, J. et al. (2015). DBpedia: A Large-scale,

Multilingual Knowledge Base Extracted from

Wikipedia. Semantic Web Journal, 6 (2), 167–195. IOS

Press. doi:10.3233/SW-140134.

Loukachevitch, N. (2011). Thesauri in Information

Retrieval Tasks. Moscow: Moscow University Press.

Loukachevitch, N., Dobrov, B. (2004a). Development of

Ontologies with Minimal Set of Conceptual Relations.

In Lino, M.T. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th

International Conference on Language Resources and

Evaluation (LREC’04), pp. 1889-1892. ELRA.

Loukachevitch, N., Dobrov, B. (2004b). Ontological Types

of Associative Relations in Information-Retrieval

Thesauri and Automatic Query Expansion. In Oltramari

A. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the LREC Workshop on

Ontologies and Lexical Resources in Distributed

Environments (Ontolex 2004), pp. 24–29.

Loukachevitch, N., Dobrov, B. (2014). RuThes Linguistic

Ontology vs. Russian Wordnets. In Orav H., Fellbaum

C., Vossen P. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Conference

on Global WordNet (GWC 2014), pp. 154–162.

University of Tartu Press.

Loukachevitch, N., Dobrov, B., Chetviorkin, I. (2014).

RuThes-Lite, a Publicly Available Version of Thesauru

of Russian Language RuThes. In Computational

Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies: Papers from

the Annual International Conference “Dialogue”, pp.

340–349. Moscow: RGGU.

Mahdisoltani, F., Biega, J., Suchanek, F.M. (2015).

YAGO3: A Knowledge Base from Multilingual

Wikipedias. In Proceedings of the 7th Biennial

Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research

(CIDR 2015).

Mares, E.D. (2004). Relevant Logic: A Philosophical

Interpretation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Medelyan, O. et al. (2009). Mining meaning from

Wikipedia. International Journal of Human-Computer

Studies, 67 (9), 716–754. Academic Press.

doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.05.004.

Moro, A., Navigli, R. (2012). WiSeNet: Building a

Wikipedia-based Semantic Network with Ontologized

Relations. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM

international conference on Information and

knowledge management (CIKM 2012), pp. 1672–1676.

New York: ACM. doi:10.1145/2396761.2398495.

Nastase, V. et al. (2010). WikiNet: A Very Large Scale

Multi-Lingual Concept Network. In Calzolari N. et al.

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference

on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2010),

pp. 1015–1022.

Nastase, V., Strube, M. (2008). Decoding Wikipedia

Categories for Knowledge Acquisition. In Cohn A.

(Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference on

Ontological Analysis of the Wikipedia Category System

365

Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2008), vol. 2, pp. 1219–

1224. AAAI Press

Nastase, V., Strube, M. (2013). Transforming Wikipedia

into a large scale multilingual concept network.

Artificial Intelligence, 194, 62–85. Elsevier.

doi:10.1016/j.artint.2012.06.008.

Navigli, R., Ponzetto, S.P. (2010). BabelNet: Building a

Very Large Multilingual Semantic Network. In

Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the

Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2010),

pp. 216–225. ACL.

Navigli, R., Ponzetto, S.P. (2012). BabelNet: The automatic

construction, evaluation and application of a wide-

coverage multilingual semantic network. Artificial

Intelligence, 193, 217–250. Elsevier.

doi:10.1016/j.artint.2012.07.001.

Nevzorova, O. et al. (2014). OntoMath

PRO

Ontology: a

Linked Data Hub for Mathematics. In Klinov P.,

Mouromstev D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th

International Conference on Knowledge Engineering

and Semantic Web (KESW 2014). Communications in

Computer and Information Science, vol. 468, pp. 105–

119. Springer, Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-

11716-4_9.

Niemann, E., Gurevych, I. (2011). The people’s web meets

linguistic knowledge: automatic sense alignment of

Wikipedia and WordNet. In Proceedings of the 9th

International Conference on Computational Semantics

(IWCS 2011), pp. 205–214. Stroudsburg: ACL.

Nuzzolese, A.G. et al. (2013). Towards the Natural

Ontology of Wikipedia. In Blomqvist E., Groza T.

(Eds.), Proceedings of the ISWC 2013 Posters &

Demonstrations Track. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,

vol. 1035, pp. 273–276.

Ponzetto, S.P., Navigli, R. (2009). Large-Scale Taxonomy

Mapping for Restructuring and Integrating Wikipedia.

In Proceedings of the 21st International Joint

Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2009), pp.

2083–2088. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann

Publishers.

Ponzetto, S.P., Strube, M. (2007). Deriving a Large Scale

Taxonomy from Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 22nd

National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI

2007), pp. 1440–1445. AAAI Press.

Ponzetto, S.P., Strube, M. (2011). Taxonomy induction

based on a collaboratively built knowledge repository.

Artificial Intelligence, 175 (9–10), 1737–1756.

Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.artint.2011.01.003.

Ruiz-Casado, M., Alfonseca, E., Castells, P. (2005).

Automatic Assignment of Wikipedia Encyclopedic

Entries to WordNet Synsets. In Szczepaniak P.S. et al.

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International

Conference on Advances in Web Intelligence (AWIC

2005). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3528,

pp. 380–386. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

doi:10.1007/11495772_59.

Simons, P. (1987). Parts: A Study in Ontology. Oxford:

Clarendon Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/

9780199241460.001.0001

Suchanek, F. M., Kasneci, G., Weikum, G. (2007). Yago: a

Core of Semantic Knowledge. In Proceedings of the

16th international conference on World Wide Web

(WWW 2007), pp. 697–706. New York, ACM.

doi:10.1145/1242572.1242667.

Tahko, T.E., Lowe, E.J. (2016). Ontological Dependence.

In Zalta E.N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy. Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/

entries/dependence-ontological/.

Thomasson, A.L. (1999). Fiction and Metaphysics.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thomasson, A.L. (2008). Existence Questions.

Philosophical Studies, 141(1), 63–78. Springer

Netherlands. doi:10.1007/s11098-008-9263-8.

Thomasson, A.L. (2009). Answerable and Unanswerable

Questions. In Chalmers D.J. et al. (Eds.),

Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of

Ontology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Titze, G. et al. (2014). DBpedia Domains: augmenting

DBpedia with domain information. In Calzolari N. et al.

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference

on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2014),

pp. 1438–1442. ELRA.

Toral, A., Muñoz, R., Monachini, M. (2008). Named Entity

WordNet. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on

Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008), pp.

741–747.

Wu, F., Weld, D.S. (2008). Automatically Refining the

Wikipedia Infobox Ontology. In Proceedings of the

17th international conference on World Wide Web

(WWW 2008), pp. 635–644. New York: ACM.

doi:10.1145/1367497.1367583.

Yablo, S. (2014). Aboutness. Princeton: Princeton

University Press.

Zirn, C., Nastase, V., Strube, M. (2008). Distinguishing

between Instances and Classes in the Wikipedia

Taxonomy. In Zirn C. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the

5th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2008).

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5021, pp.

376–387. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-68234-9_29.

KEOD 2018 - 10th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development

366