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 P08: Missing annotations. 65 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.w3.org/2006/time-entry#CalendarClockDescription
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#Instant
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#ProperIntervalThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#DurationDescription
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#InstantThingPair
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#TemporalUnit
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#Event
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#IntervalThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#IntervalEvent
http://www.w3.org/2006/timezone#TimeZone
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#TemporalEntity
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#InstantEvent
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#InstantThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#Interval
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#CalendarClockInterval
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#TemporalThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#ProperInterval
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intOverlaps
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intFinishes
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#startsOrDuring
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intContains
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#inCalendarClock
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#instantPairDurationDescriptionOf
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intDuring
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#after
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#unitType
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intFinishedBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#begins
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#before
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intStarts
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#firstInstantThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intOverlappedBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intMeets
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#inside
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#durationDescriptionOf
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intAfter
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#calendarClockDescriptionOf
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#secondInstantThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intMetBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#nonoverlap
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intEquals
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intStartedBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#ends
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intBefore
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#timeZone
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#dayOfYearField
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#weeks
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#week
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#hour
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#minute
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#hours
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#months
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#durationDescriptionDataType
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#instantPairDurationDescriptionDataType
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#day
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#minutes
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#dayOfWeekField
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#calendarClockDescriptionDataType
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#seconds
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#month
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#inCalendarClockDataType
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#year
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#days
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#second
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#years

Results for P11: Missing domain or range in properties. 7 cases | Important Important

Object and/or datatype properties without domain or range (or none of them) are included in the ontology.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intStartedBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intMetBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intAfter
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intOverlappedBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intFinishedBy
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#after
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intContains

Tip: Solving this pitfall may lead to new results for other pitfalls and suggestions. We encourage you to solve all cases when needed and see what else you can get from OOPS!

Results for P13: Inverse relationships not explicitly declared. 15 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.w3.org/2006/time-entry#startsOrDuring could be inverse of http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#nonoverlap
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#nonoverlap could be inverse of http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intEquals

• Sorry, OOPS! has no suggestions for the following relationships without inverse:
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#inCalendarClock
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#instantPairDurationDescriptionOf
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#unitType
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#begins
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#firstInstantThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#inside
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#durationDescriptionOf
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#calendarClockDescriptionOf
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#secondInstantThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#ends
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#timeZone

Results for P24: Using recursive definitions. 6 cases | Important Important

An ontology element (a class, an object property or a datatype property) is used in its own definition. Some examples of this would be: (a) the definition of a class as the enumeration of several classes including itself; (b) the appearance of a class within its owl:equivalentClass or rdfs:subClassOf axioms; (c) the appearance of an object property in its rdfs:domain or range rdfs:range definitions; or (d) the appearance of a datatype property in its rdfs:domain definition.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#Interval
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#InstantThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#InstantEvent
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#IntervalEvent
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#IntervalThing
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#Instant

Results for P39: Ambiguous namespace. ontology* | Critical Critical

This pitfall consists in declaring neither the ontology URI nor the xml:base namespace. If this is the case, the ontology namespace is matched to the file location. This situation is not desirable, as the location of a file might change while the ontology should remain stable, as proposed in [12].

*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. 9 cases

The domain and range axioms are equal for each of the following object properties. Could they be symmetric or transitive?
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intOverlaps
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intFinishes
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#startsOrDuring
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intDuring
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intStarts
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intMeets
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#nonoverlap
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intEquals
http://www.w3.org/2006/time-entry#intBefore


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


Critical pitfalls were found
<p>
<a href="http://oops.linkeddata.es"><img
	src="http://oops.linkeddata.es/resource/image/oops_critical.png"
	alt="Critical 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