Heavy-weight ontology engineering in AIED saw limited adoption despite a complete proof-of-concept¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Despite demonstrations and documentation, research on heavy-weight ontology building in AIED has not met the authors' expectations; vocabulary-oriented ontologies and Semantic Web metadata became popular instead. → Mizoguchi 2015

Evidence¶

Mizoguchi 2015¶

Mizoguchi, R., & Bourdeau, J. (2015). Using Ontological Engineering to Overcome AI-ED Problems: Contribution, Impact and Perspectives. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0077-5

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

The authors' own interpretive assessment (type e) in the section on limitations and recent trends. They attribute low adoption to OMNIBUS-SMARTIES complexity and to the Hozo editor while Protégé became the standard, and count 394 Google Scholar citations of the original paper as of August 25, 2015.

"In spite of the authors' efforts in demonstrating how to proceed in the suggested directions for the use of ontology engineering in AIED, research on ontology building has not reached our expectation."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Educational ontologies are rarely used in practical e-learning platforms, mainly due to cost, complexity, integration, performance, and scalability problems, which ontology reuse can partially overcome — related