Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2007

OntoGame on SushiKnights.org (Spanish only)

OntoGame: El Juego Semántico ::

Con la intención de mostrar cómo entender una ontología, un grupo de la Universidad de Innsbruck desarrolló el (primero de muchos) OntoGame: Este consiste en ser capaz de descifrar a qué categoría pertenece el tema central de un artículo extraído de Wikipedia. Esta es una buena forma de como aprender ir entendiendo lo que son las ontologías. Pero vamos por partes...

La verdad es que el juego es super sencillo: El sistema elige una entrada de wikipedia (AFAIK está sólo disponible en inglés) y en base a ella, el primer paso es decidir si corresponde a una instancia (es decir, un objeto particular) o una clase (un concepto general). Para entender la diferencia, la entrada "Automovil" se consideraría una clase (la clase automovil) mientras que "mi automovil" es una instancia de ella.

En la medida que vayamos acertando debemos ser cada vez más específicos: por ejemplo, si la entrada se refiera a una instancia, que es, un objeto, un evento? Si es un objeto, es un agente, una organización?

La idea además es ser rápido, ya que se juega contra el tiempo, tratando de clasificar la mayor cantidad de entradas posibles. En general, el el juego es super explicativo y si no entiendes un concepto siempre hay ayudas explicando a que se refiere cada categoría.

El juego está disponible aquí. El único pero es que es necesario registrarse, lo cual siempre es molesto, pero creo que vale la pena aunque sea para probarlo un par de veces.


from: http://sushiknights.org/2007/12/ontogame_el_juego_sem_ntico.html

Freitag, 21. Dezember 2007

OntoGame on Missing Data


From http://missingdata.wordpress.com/2007/12/17/ontology-game-humans-matching-concepts/

Ontology Game: Humans Matching Concepts

December 17, 2007 · No Comments

A new “ontology game” has recently been announced, as a “game with a purpose” to help get humans to categorize objects properly according to a formal ontology.

How it Works

The game operates in a way that’s similar to Google’s image tagging application; pairs of users who do not know one another are presented with the abstract from a Wikipedia page, and they have to choose categories in an upper ontology that accurately describe the article. (E.g. does it correspond to an abstract concept? An agent? A happening?) Users get points when both users choose the same answer to categorize an article. As the game goes on, the categorization gets more and more specific until it “bottoms out” in the upper ontology. At that point, you jump to a new article and start the process over again.

Gameplay

In terms of gameplay, it feels a little bit rough in part because the game doesn’t choose the articles very intelligently. (In one case, I got the same article twice in a row) Also, after you tag 5-6 different articles, the player has a good working knowledge of the taxonomy of the upper ontology, and it becomes less fun as the game devolves into categorization along lines you’ve seen many times before. The key difference here from Google’s image tagging game is that in Google’s game, people enter free-form words, so your input is almost limitless. Oh, and one other thing - in order to categorize properly, you have to read the 2-3 sentence descriptions of what the categories mean, which can take some time the first time around when you have 6-7 categories to choose from.

These don’t appear to me though to be fatal problems for the game, just teething problems. It could be fun if the data set was widened substantially, and the category choice perhaps narrowed a bit. And of course in the background, they’re building an interesting data set mapping Wikipedia articles to high-level concepts of what they represent.

Addictive

"2007-12-18T22:38:37Z mburtis Martha @patrickgmj I think I could get addicted to ontogame very quickly. . . "

from

https://twitter.com/mburtis/statuses/512051762

Forget "Onto" ...

"Forget 'onto' and the semantic web related tags. This is a nifty game for critical thinking and classification. (It's just a bonus that it'll make the semantic web better! ;) )"

patrickgmj