The comparison of thesaurus and ontology. Case of ASIS&T web-based thesaurus and designed ontology
| Published date | 19 November 2018 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-03-2017-0060 |
| Pages | 665-684 |
| Date | 19 November 2018 |
| Author | Maryam Nowroozi,Mahdieh Mirzabeigi,Hajar Sotudeh |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,Library technology,Information behaviour & retrieval,Information user studies,Metadata,Information & knowledge management,Information & communications technology,Internet |
The comparison of thesaurus
and ontology
Case of ASIS&T web-based thesaurus and
designed ontology
Maryam Nowroozi
Department of Knowledge and Information Science, International Division,
Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
Mahdieh Mirzabeigi
Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Shiraz University,
Shiraz, Iran, and
Hajar Sotudeh
Library and Information Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to investigate indexers’evaluation on the usability of ontology vs
thesaurus in representation of concepts and semantic relations. To do so, “searching”category of ASIS&T
thesaurus was selected and ASIS&TOnto was built based on it.
Design/methodology/approach –The usability examination method is used in order to compare the two
semantic tools. Nine indexers were recruited as participants, who were proficient in English language, had
experience in using the thesaurus and all had successfully passed the course of “information representation.”
They were asked to think aloud while working with the tools and to answer a semi-structured interview.
The data gathering was continued until it reached its saturation point.
Findings –The results of this study revealed that the definitions and scope notes represented in indexing
tools such as thesauri and ontologies have an important role in improvement of indexers’understanding.
On comparing the hierarchical relations, results show that converting the structure of hierarchical
relationships of ASIS&T thesaurus can enhance the indexers understanding of them, and also enriching the
associative relations of ASIS&T thesaurus can cause indexers to have a better understanding and evaluation
of the presented concepts and relations.
Originality/value –This study shares our findings on the usability of ASIS&T thesaurus as a core set of
vocabulary for building a “searching”domain as a prototype ontology in the area of library and information
science and provides the indexers viewpoints of the two semantic tools in this area.
Keywords Usability, Ontology, Representation of concepts, Representation of relations, Semantic tools,
Thesaurus
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Ontologies are becoming of increasing importance in fields such as information retrieval.
One applicationarea which has recently seen an explosion of interestis the so-called semantic
web, where ontologies are set to play a key role in establishing a common terminology
between agents, thus ensuring that different agents have a shared understanding of terms
used in semanticmarkup (Staab and Studer, 2013).In addition, the daily growthof knowledge
has increased the need for information organization. The organization of semantic web
resources requires semantic tools such as ontologies which are more capable than other
semantic tools. However, many ontology building approaches are based on existing thesauri
as a starting point to create an ontology (Horacek et al., 2010).
Thesauri are crucial semantic tools which are used to support indexers and end users in
the process of indexing and retrieving concepts in different fields. Despite all the benefits of
thesauri, they are faced with serious problems, such as lack of conceptual abstraction,
Library Hi Tech
Vol. 36 No. 4, 2018
pp. 665-684
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0737-8831
DOI 10.1108/LHT-03-2017-0060
Received 29 November 2016
Revised 25 October 2017
Accepted 27 October 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0737-8831.htm
665
Comparison
of thesaurus
and ontology
limited semantic coverage, lack of consistency, similar semantic relationships, limited
automated processing (Soergel et al., 2006), weaknesses and ambiguities in the relationships
and their representation (Kawtrakul et al., 2005; Schmitz-Esser, 1999; Sanatjoo and
Fathian, 2011). Various researchers have tried to improve the efficiency of this semantic tool
by providing solutions for these problems. Enrichment of the concepts and disambiguation
of the relationships between them are among the solutions which improve the concepts and
the relations between them (Chun and Wenlin, 2004; Van Assem et al., 2006; Khosravi and
Vazifedoost, 2007; Na and Neoh, 2008; Golbeck et al., 2011). Other useful solutions include
transforming thesaurus into ontology through enrichment process. Ontology is a new web
semantic tool which is more efficient in the representation and retrieval of concepts in
comparison to thesauri. However, the usability of the new ontology emerged from the
enriched thesaurus is not clear for users who might be accustomed to the structure, interface
and contents of the thesaurus related to their major.
Few studies on users’perspectives concerning the enriched thesauri (constructed
ontologies based on thesauri) showed the usability of relations and extended concepts and
users’satisfaction of the conceptual content (Sanatjoo and Fathian, 2011). In between, the
indexers’views are highly important. Because not only they constantly interact with
semantic tools in a specialized way, but also their interaction with new semantic tools leads
to the creation of an index, which assists searchers in information retrieval process.
Considering the importance of indexers’views, in this study, we investigated the
usability of thesaurus vs a constructed ontology in representing concepts and relations by
eastern indexers points of views in the wide interdisciplinary field of knowledge and
information science. Up to date, no study has considered ASIS&T thesaurus in order to
build an ontology base on it; therefore, we selected the most valid thesaurus of the field,
ASIS&T[1] web-based thesaurus, which could facilitate the comprehension of concepts and
semantic relations by researchers, subject specialists and indexers. ASIS&T thesaurus is
the most valid specialized thesaurus in the field of “information science and technology”
which specially indexes Wiley digital library’s vocabularies and helps users in the
information retrieval process.
Given the fact that, until to date, no ontology has been designed based on ASIS&T
thesaurus, in this study, our main objective is to construct a prototype ontology, namely
ASIS&TOnto, based on ASIS&T thesaurus and investigate the indexers’points of viewsabout
the usability of ASIS&T vs ASIS&TOnto from the aspect of concepts and semantic relations.
In addition, this study in many ways is innovative: first, the view point of a group of
indexers from the usability of the two types of semantic tools was investigated.
Second, ASIS&T thesaurus terminology was considered as a test bed so the semantic
capability of it in the process of enriching can be measured. Third, as the area of LIS is faced
with fewer resources, authors and research groups, probably the capacity and capability of
textual resources for extracting definitions and relations in this field has not been examined
as well. Therefore, we investigated whether the textual resources in LIS have the potential to
construct ontologies by enriching its thesauri. In this regard, we tried to answer this
question that whether indexers consider the enriched concepts and relations of the newly
enriched thesaurus (prototype ontology) usable?
2. Literature review
Document organization has long been utilizing different semantic tools to access semantic
information concepts, symbols and the relations between them. Hodge (2000) and Hjørland (2007)
considered different semantic tools categories. They believe that thesaurus and ontology are the
most important semantic tools with the unique importance in representing concepts and
semantic relations for different subject areas. Because of the importance of these semantic tools,
various studies have tried to review the problems of these semantic tools with different attitudes
666
LHT
36,4
To continue reading
Request your trial