pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 68 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public • Technically, the approach was adequate to allow a possible integration with other products (Web services, import/export tools). However, introducing ontologies is not by itself the solution nor is “magic”. • Therefore, Ontologging must be considered as a platform, a set of tools that should aim to integrate with – and not replace – existing applications. 5.6 Final words The ontology engineers from Indra and Meta4 have been questioned related to the advantage and limitations of the use of ontologies, and it appears useful to report this more high level perspective. What are the difficulties and what are the advantages of using ontologies? The key advantage is in the power of the relationships, which enables users to navigate from one concept (and its instances) to another (and its instances) very easily. The main difficulty is that the users are not used to work with this kind of map or representation. Some of the Indra knowledge workers faced problems “understanding what an ontology really is.” People are used with taxonomies, trees for structuring knowledge and they faced problems to think in terms of concepts, relationships, etc. However, a taxonomic view, a well-known interface similar to folders in Windows explorer made easier understanding the structure beneath the application to the end-users. From the Meta4 perspective, the advantage is the flexibility: it is very easy to change the model maintaining consistency. No major difficulties were found, if performed as an individual process. Collaborative modelling should be given more support. Is an ontology based management information meta -model useful for better structuring the domain model? Why? Yes, because it enables users to see all the domain elements and its relationships, providing easy navigation. There is no sim ilar system with the same power and possibilities.
6 Discussion and Conclusions Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 69 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public Concluding the work and outcome of the Ontologging project, which the evaluation has helped to determine, appears to be difficult: On one hand, the technical objectives of this project have been fulfilled: a whole set of tools relying on ontology based technologies that provide support to many of the very important dimensions of the knowledge processes have been elaborated. These tools provides the means to define “knowledge schema” that will be used to structure the organization of the knowledge in a KM system, to populate this system with content, to retrieve this knowledge, and finally to evaluate this knowledge as well as the different knowledge processes being conducted in the system. Even if some room for improvement still remains, the design of ontology-based knowledge management systems does not appear an unachievable overtaking. From this perspective, moving to a productisation phase would not to raise any major difficulties, given in particular the fact that most of the technological building blocks for designing these systems are now available. On the other hand, this project has “kind of ” revealed a real “Pandora box”: Ontology oriented knowledge management systems are radically different systems than the traditional document centric knowledge management system of today, and raises many more nontechnical issues that are not particular trivial to solve. For instance the design of the structure (ontology building) is difficult, and require time. In the case of the Ontologging project, it took several months and a major redesign to obtain a correct domain Ontology. (Missikoff, Navigli and Velardi, 2002) indicates that it took one year for the project Harmonize project to release their first domain Ontology (in the domain of tourisms) that comprises about 300 concepts. Even if we can obviously imagine that in the later case the participants were not dedicating all their time on this design (they also mentioned some techniques that have helped to reduced considerably this time), ontology design is a complex operation that requires time and expertise. In a similar way, the ontology content population requires also an important amount of effort and rigor, and cannot be improvised. Hence, in the Ontologging project, the first (unsupervised) population resulted in a result that was barely usable. Indeed, Ontology systems appear also to be less tolerant to low quality and noise than more traditional information-centred systems. The solution that was finally adopted to have the content population be accomplished by a reduced and specialised team, was working all right, but seems to go against the general idea that all the employees should participate to the knowledge capitalisation process and contribute to enrich the repository of knowledge of the company. Even if this solution is only temporary, some investigation needs to be accomplished to make possible the collaborative capitalization process. Finally, the retrieval of this knowledge is also more complex (but also richer) and prone to dispersion, since it goes much beyond the use of search mechanisms but also include the navigation in a maze of node of information elements connected to one another, and the more
Page 1 and 2:
The ONTO-LOGGING Consortium consist
Page 3 and 4:
Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 5 and 6:
Executive Summary Evaluation report
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 53 and 54: • List of connected users to the
Page 67: 5.5.1 Description of the evaluation
Page 75 and 76: 8 Annex Evaluation report of the us
Page 93 and 94: esolver consultas. C42 Existen axio
Page 103 and 104: 1 The functionalities provided by D
show all

pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?