Digital Repository

A review of data mining ontologies

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Sinha, Prashant Kumar en_US
dc.contributor.author Gajbe, Sagar Bhimrao en_US
dc.contributor.author Debnath, Sourav en_US
dc.contributor.author Sahoo, Subhranshubhusan en_US
dc.contributor.author Chakraborty, Kanu en_US
dc.contributor.author MAHATO, SHIVA SHANKAR en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2021-09-27T07:06:52Z
dc.date.available 2021-09-27T07:06:52Z
dc.date.issued 2021-09 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Data Technologies and Applications. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 2514-9288 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://dr.iiserpune.ac.in:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/6290
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1108/DTA-04-2021-0106 en_US
dc.description.abstract Purpose:This work provides a generic review of the existing data mining ontologies (DMOs) and also provides a base platform for ontology developers and researchers for gauging the ontologies for satisfactory coverage and usage.Design/methodology/approach :The study uses a systematic literature review approach to identify 35 DMOs in the domain between the years 2003 and 2021. Various parameters, like purpose, design methodology, operations used, language representation, etc. are available in the literature to review ontologies. Accompanying the existing parameters, a few parameters, like semantic reasoner used, knowledge representation formalism was added and a list of 20 parameters was prepared. It was then segregated into two groups as generic parameters and core parameters to review DMOs.Findings:It was observed that among the 35 papers under the study, 26 papers were published between the years 2006 and 2016. Larisa Soldatova, Saso Dzeroski and Pance Panov were the most productive authors of these DMO-related publications. The ontological review indicated that most of the DMOs were domain and task ontologies. Majority of ontologies were formal, modular and represented using web ontology language (OWL). The data revealed that Ontology development 101, METHONTOLOGY was the preferred design methodology, and application-based approaches were preferred for evaluation. It was also observed that around eight ontologies were accessible, and among them, three were available in ontology libraries as well. The most reused ontologies were OntoDM, BFO, OBO-RO, OBI, IAO, OntoDT, SWO and DMOP. The most preferred ontology editor was Protégé, whereas the most used semantic reasoner was Pellet. Even ontology metrics for 16 DMOs were also available.Originality/value:This paper carries out a basic level review of DMOs employing a parametric approach, which makes this study the first of a kind for the review of DMOs. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Emerald Publishing Limited en_US
dc.subject Library and Information Science en_US
dc.subject 2021
dc.title A review of data mining ontologies en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.identifier.sourcetitle Data Technologies and Applications en_US
dc.publication.originofpublisher Foreign en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Repository


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account