El-Diraby, T E (2013) Domain ontology for construction knowledge. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(7), pp. 768-784. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
An ontology is a claim on/for knowledge that attempts to model what is known about a domain of discourse. A domain ontology does not aim to exhaustively list all concepts in a domain, but rather to build an abstract (yet extendable) philosophical (yet practical) conceptualization of the essence of knowledge in a domain. At the core of any ontology is an ontological model - an architecture of how the world (in a domain) behaves (or becomes). The ontology categorizes construction knowledge across three main dimensions: concept, modality, and context. Concept encompasses five key terms: entity (further subdivided into generic and secondary), environmental element, abstract concept, attribute, and system (combinations of the previous four types). Modality is a means for generating a variety of types for each of the described concepts. Context allows for linking concepts in a variety of ways - creating different worlds.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | interoperability; knowledge representation; ontology; semantic web |
| Index terms: | ontology, semantic web, dimension, interoperability |
| Subjects: | education and knowledge transfer, networking, systems and processes, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here