Dependencies between modularity metrics towards improved modules

9Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Recent years have seen many advances in ontology modularisation. This has made it difficult to determine whether a module is actually a good module; it is unclear which metrics should be considered. The few existing works on evaluation metrics focus on only some metrics that suit the modularisation technique, and there is not always a quantitative approach to calculate them. Overall, the metrics are not comprehensive enough to apply to a variety of modules and it is unclear which metrics fare well with particular types of ontology modules. To address this, we create a comprehensive list of module evaluation metrics with quantitative measures. These measures were implemented in the new Tool for Ontology Module Metrics (TOMM) which was then used in a testbed to test these metrics with existing modules. The results obtained, in turn, uncovered which metrics fare well with which module types, i.e., which metrics need to be measured to determine whether a module of some type is a ‘good’ module.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Khan, Z. C., & Keet, C. M. (2016). Dependencies between modularity metrics towards improved modules. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 10024 LNAI, pp. 400–415). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49004-5_26

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free