scanning


OOPS! is scanning...

OOPS! (OntOlogy Pitfall Scanner!) helps you to detect some of the most common pitfalls appearing when developing ontologies.

To try it, enter a URI or paste an OWL document into the text field above. A list of pitfalls and the elements of your ontology where they appear will be displayed.

Scanner by URI:

Example: http://oops.linkeddata.es/example/swc_2009-05-09.rdf


Scanner by direct input:

Uncheck this checkbox if you don't want us to keep a copy of your ontology.

Evaluation results

It is obvious that not all the pitfalls are equally important; their impact in the ontology will depend on multiple factors. For this reason, each pitfall has an importance level attached indicating how important it is. We have identified three levels:

  • Critical Critical : It is crucial to correct the pitfall. Otherwise, it could affect the ontology consistency, reasoning, applicability, etc.
  • Important Important : Though not critical for ontology function, it is important to correct this type of pitfall.
  • Minor Minor : It is not really a problem, but by correcting it we will make the ontology nicer.

Results for P04: Creating unconnected ontology elements. 6 cases | Minor Minor

Ontology elements (classes, object properties and datatype properties) are created isolated, with no relation to the rest of the ontology.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://erlangen-crm.org/current/E18_Physical_Thing
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#Person
http://www.opengis.net/ont/sf#Geometry
http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#Geometry
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Zoology
http://erlangen-crm.org/current/E24_Physical_Man-Made_Thing

Results for P08: Missing annotations. 18 cases | Minor Minor

This pitfall consists in creating an ontology element and failing to provide human readable annotations attached to it. Consequently, ontology elements lack annotation properties that label them (e.g. rdfs:label, lemon:LexicalEntry, skos:prefLabel or skos:altLabel) or that define them (e.g. rdfs:comment or dc:description). This pitfall is related to the guidelines provided in [5].

• The following elements have no rdfs:label defined:
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Tile
http://erlangen-crm.org/current/E24_Physical_Man-Made_Thing
http://erlangen-crm.org/current/E18_Physical_Thing
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#PavingCube
http://www.opengis.net/ont/geosparql#Geometry
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#Person
http://www.opengis.net/ont/sf#Point
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Zoology
http://www.opengis.net/ont/sf#Geometry
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTile
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTarget
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasLogicalCameraObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSourceObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTargetObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSource
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasPavingCube
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasOrientaionObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasOZRotation

Results for P13: Inverse relationships not explicitly declared. 78 cases | Minor Minor

This pitfall appears when any relationship (except for those that are defined as symmetric properties using owl:SymmetricProperty) does not have an inverse relationship (owl:inverseOf) defined within the ontology.

• OOPS! has the following suggestions for the relationships without inverse:
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationRiempie could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTaglia
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTaglia could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTagliatoDa
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTagliatoDa could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationLegatoA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationLegatoA could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCollegatoA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCollegatoA could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationContemporaneita
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#haveASetOfPhotograph could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isPhotographOf
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationContemporaneita could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCopre
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSourceObservation could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTargetObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCopre could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCopertoDa
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCopertoDa could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationGliSiAppoggia
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isTooFarFrom could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isDirectNeighborOf
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationGliSiAppoggia could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationUgualeA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationUgualeA could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationAnteriorita
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfCF could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasCA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationAnteriorita could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationAppoggiatoA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationAppoggiatoA could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationPosteriorita
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationPosteriorita could be inverse of http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationRiempitoDa

• Sorry, OOPS! has no suggestions for the following relationships without inverse:
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSito
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasCenter
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTile
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasCamera
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasPhotograph
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTarget
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasMeasuredPointManager
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfUS
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTranslation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTransformation3D
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasLogicalCameraObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTargetIntersection
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasIntervalStartPoint
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOf3DPointWithObs
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isObservationOf
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#has2DTransformation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasUnitaStratigrafica
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasInterval
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOf3DPoint
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfPP
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasCameraManager
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasMeasuredSource
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasPhotoManager
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasIntervalEndPoint
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasCF
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isElementOf
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasRotationMatrix2D
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasPrimitiveGeometry
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfSito
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfCamera
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasPointManager
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSourceIntersection
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfCA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTranslation2D
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasImagePointManager
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSource
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasPavingCube
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasBoundingBox
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfUT
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasRotationMatrix
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalEquals
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasDistortion
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasASetOfSiti

Results for P20: Misusing ontology annotations. 1 case | Minor Minor

The contents of some annotation properties are swapped or misused. This pitfall might affect annotation properties related to natural language information (for example, annotations for naming such as rdfs:label or for providing descriptions such as rdfs:comment). Other types of annotation could also be affected as temporal, versioning information, among others.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasCoef_K4

Results for P22: Using different naming conventions in the ontology. ontology* | Minor Minor

The ontology elements are not named following the same convention (for example CamelCase or use of delimiters as "-" or "_") . Some notions about naming conventions are provided in [2].

*This pitfall applies to the ontology in general instead of specific elements.

Results for P32: Several classes with the same label. 3 cases | Minor Minor

Two or more classes have the same content for natural language annotations for naming, for example the rdfs:label annotation. This pitfall might involve lack of accuracy when defining terms.

• The following classes contains the same label, maybe they should be replaced by one class with several labels or might be equivalent classes:
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Point2DManager, http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Point3DManager
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Transformation2D, http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Transformation3D
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#IPoint2D, http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#IPoint3D

Results for P36: URI contains file extension. ontology* | Minor Minor

This pitfall occurs if file extensions such as ".owl", ".rdf", ".ttl", ".n3" and ".rdfxml" are included in an ontology URI. This pitfall is related with the recommendations provided in [9].

*This pitfall applies to the ontology in general instead of specific elements.

Results for P41: No license declared. ontology* | Important Important

The ontology metadata omits information about the license that applies to the ontology.

*This pitfall applies to the ontology in general instead of specific elements.

SUGGESTION: symmetric or transitive object properties. 60 cases

The domain and range axioms are equal for each of the following object properties. Could they be symmetric or transitive?
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpSWof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpEof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnNof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalFinishedBy
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationRiempie
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTaglia
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalMetBy
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#ZenithOf
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Wof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#NWof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnNEof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnSWof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalMeets
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalStartedBy
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTagliatoDa
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationTagliatoDa
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalDuring
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Eof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationLegatoA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCollegatoA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpWof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalStarts
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationContemporaneita
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSourceObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasSourceObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpNWof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalBefore
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCopre
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#SEof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationCopertoDa
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnSof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnEof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isTooFarFrom
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Sof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#NEof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalContains
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpSEof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalFinishes
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#SWof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationGliSiAppoggia
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnNWof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationUgualeA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnSEof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalOverlaps
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationAnteriorita
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTargetObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasTargetObservation
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationAppoggiatoA
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpNEof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpSof
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalOverlappedBy
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzDnWof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#Nof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#HzUpNof
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#isDirectNeighborOf
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationPosteriorita
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#hasStratigraphicRelationRiempitoDa
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalEquals
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalAfter
http://www.arpenteur.org/ontology/Arpenteur.owl#NadirOf


According to the highest importance level of pitfall found in your ontology the conformace bagde suggested is "Important pitfalls" (see below). You can use the following HTML code to insert the badge within your ontology documentation:


Important pitfalls were found
<p>
<a href="http://oops.linkeddata.es"><img
	src="http://oops.linkeddata.es/resource/image/oops_important.png"
	alt="Important pitfalls were found" height="69.6" width="100" /></a>
</p>


References:

  • [1] Aguado-De Cea, G., Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Poveda-Villalón, M., and Giraldo-Pasmin, O.X. (2015). Lexicalizing Ontologies: The issues behind the labels. In Multimodal communication in the 21st century: Professional and academic challenges. 33rd Conference of the Spanish Association of Applied Linguistics (AESLA), XXXIII AESLA.
  • [2] Noy, N. F., McGuinness, D. L., et al. (2001). Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology.
  • [3] Gómez-Pérez, A. (1999). Evaluation of Taxonomic Knowledge in Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. Proceedings of the Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop. Alberta, Canada.
  • [4] Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Vila Suero, D., Villazón-Terrazas, B., Dunsire, G., Escolano Rodríguez, E., Gómez-Pérez, A. (2011). Style guidelines for naming and labeling ontologies in the multilingual web.
  • [5] Vrandecic, D. (2010). Ontology Evaluation. PhD thesis.
  • [6] Gómez-Pérez, A. (2004). Ontology evaluation. In Handbook on ontologies, pages 251-273. Springer.
  • [7] Rector, A., Drummond, N., Horridge, M., Rogers, J., Knublauch, H., Stevens, R., Wang, H., and Wroe, C. (2004). Owl pizzas: Practical experience of teaching owl-dl: Common errors & common patterns. In Engineering Knowledge in the Age of the Semantic Web, pages 63-81. Springer.
  • [8] Hogan, A., Harth, A., Passant, A., Decker, S., and Polleres, A. (2010). Weaving the pedantic web. In Proceedings of the WWW2010 Workshop on Linked Data on the Web, LDOW 2010, Raleigh, USA, April 27, 2010.
  • [9] Archer, P., Goedertier, S., and Loutas, N. (2012). D7. 1.3-study on persistent URIs, with identification of best practices and recommendations on the topic for the Mss and the EC. PwC EU Services.
  • [10] Bernes-Lee Tim. (2006). “Linked Data - Design issues”. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
  • [11] Heath, T. and Bizer, C. (2011). Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space. Morgan & Claypool, 1st edition.
  • [12] Vatant, B. (2012). Is your linked data vocabulary 5-star?. http://bvatant.blogspot.fr/2012/02/is-your-linked-data-vocabulary-5-star_9588.html

How to cite OOPS!

Poveda-Villalón, María, Asunción Gómez-Pérez, and Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa. "OOPS!(Ontology Pitfall Scanner!): An on-line tool for ontology evaluation." International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS) 10.2 (2014): 7-34.


BibTex:


@article{poveda2014oops,
 title={{OOPS! (OntOlogy Pitfall Scanner!): An On-line Tool for Ontology Evaluation}},
 author={Poveda-Villal{\'o}n, Mar{\'i}a and G{\'o}mez-P{\'e}rez, Asunci{\'o}n and Su{\'a}rez-Figueroa, Mari Carmen},
 journal={International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS)},
 volume={10},
 number={2},
 pages={7--34},
 year={2014},
 publisher={IGI Global}
}

Please, help us making OOPS! better. Feedback is more than welcome!
In addition, you can also suggest new pitfalls so that they can be detected in future evaluations.

Want to help?

Documentation:

Related papers:

Web services:

Developed by:

OEG logo