Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models

By Giancarlo Guizzardi. 2005

1,309 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/834dbec0940e50953f9d66b0f3fafa526a7224df

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. J. Recker
2. Jérôme Euzenat
3. Pavel Shvaiko
4. Michael Rosemann
5. Marta Indulska
6. Peter F. Green
7. Giancarlo Guizzardi
8. Lorena Otero-Cerdeira

Citations in the corpus

• On Ontology, ontologies, Conceptualizations, Modeling Languages, and (Meta)Models (2007, methodology): “Some of these constraints are motivated by semantic cons iderations (laws of the domain being modeled as we shall see) while others are motivated by pragmatic issues [10].”
• Business Process Modeling- A Comparative Analysis (2009, methodology): “While a number of existing ontological models of representation (e.g., Cocchiarella, 1995; Chisholm, 1996; Guizzardi, 2005) can be used as part of representational analysis, the deployment of the BWW representation model in our study can be justified on at least three premises.”
• Ontology Matching (2007, methodology): “Examples are the upper Cyc ontology (Lenat and Guha 1990), the Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) (Niles and Pease 2001), the Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO) (Guizzardi 2005), and Descriptive Ontology for Linguistic and Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE) (Gangemi et al.”