WiseOWL: A Methodology for Evaluating Ontological Descriptiveness and Semantic Correctness for Ontology Reuse and Ontology Recommendations
arXiv AIArchived Apr 15, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2604.12025v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The Semantic Web standardizes concept meaning for humans and machines, enabling machine-operable content and consistent interpretation that improves advanced analytics. Reusing ontologies speeds development and enforces consistency, yet selecting the optimal choice is challenging because authors lack systematic selection criteria and often rely on intuition that is difficult to justify, limiting reuse. To solve this, WiseOWL is proposed, a methodol
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 13 Apr 2026]
WiseOWL: A Methodology for Evaluating Ontological Descriptiveness and Semantic Correctness for Ontology Reuse and Ontology Recommendations
Aryan Singh Dalal, Maria Baloch, Asiyah Yu Lin, Anna Maria Masci, Kathleen M. Jagodnik, Hande Kucuk McGinty
The Semantic Web standardizes concept meaning for humans and machines, enabling machine-operable content and consistent interpretation that improves advanced analytics. Reusing ontologies speeds development and enforces consistency, yet selecting the optimal choice is challenging because authors lack systematic selection criteria and often rely on intuition that is difficult to justify, limiting reuse. To solve this, WiseOWL is proposed, a methodology with scoring and guidance to select ontologies for reuse. It scores four metrics: (i) Well-Described, measuring documentation coverage; (ii) Well-Defined, using state-of-the-art embeddings to assess label-definition alignment; (iii) Connection, capturing structural interconnectedness; and (iv) Hierarchical Breadth, reflecting hierarchical balance. WiseOWL outputs normalized 0-10 scores with actionable feedback. Implemented as a Streamlit app, it ingests OWL format, converts to RDF Turtle, and provides interactive visualizations. Evaluation across six ontologies, including the Plant Ontology (PO), Gene Ontology (GO), Semanticscience Integrated Ontology (SIO), Food Ontology (FoodON), Dublin Core (DC), and GoodRelations, demonstrates promising effectiveness.
Comments: 7 pages, 2 figures. Submitted to a conference
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
ACM classes: I.2.4
Cite as: arXiv:2604.12025 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2604.12025v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.12025
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Maria Baloch [view email]
[v1] Mon, 13 Apr 2026 20:09:16 UTC (318 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-04
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)