Ontologies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Unconventional Conflict

Part of the book series: Understanding Complex Systems ((UCS))

  • 541 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, we are not discussing ontologies in metaphysics (ontology: a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations of being), rather we are interested in computer science ontologies. According to Wikipedia the definition of this is almost equally baffling: “an ontology is a formal naming and definition of the types, properties, and interrelationships of entities that really or fundamentally exist for a particular domain of discourse” (Ontology (information science) n.d.). In this chapter, we provide a more extensive and concrete definition of ontologies that should make the meaning clear. We then proceed to describe an ontology for unconventional conflict.

A branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations of being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Davis, I. (2010). RELATIONSHIP: A vocabulary for describing relationships between people. Retrieved May 21, 2016, from vocab.org—A URI space for vocabularies: http://vocab.org/relationship/

  • Department of State. (2005). Post-conflict reconstruction. Retrieved May 4, 2016, from peacebuildingcentre.com: http://peacebuildingcentre.com/pbc_documents/US_State_Department_Post_Conflict_Essential_Tasks_2005.pdf

  • Department of State. (2016, April 19). Updated foreign assistance standardized program structure and definitions. Retrieved May 5, 2016, from Department of State: http://www.state.gov/f/releases/other/255986.htm

  • Dziedzic, M., Sotirin, B., & Agoglia, J. (2008). Measuring progress in conflict environments (MPICE)—A metrics framework for assessing conflict transformation and stabilization. DTIC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, D. S. (2006a). Interim semi-static stability model. Retrieved May 4, 2016, from Hartley Consulting: http://drdeanhartley.com/HartleyConsulting/TOOLBOX/issm.htm

  • Hartley, D. S. (2008). DIME/PMESII VV&A tool. Retrieved May 4, 2016, from Hartley Consulting: http://drdeanhartley.com/HartleyConsulting/VVATool/VVA.htm

  • Hartley, D. S. (2010b). Corruption in Afghanistan: Conceptual model. In NDU Corruption Workshop. Washington, DC: National Defense University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, D. S. (2016b). Ontologies. Retrieved May 19, 2016, from Hartley Consulting: http://drdeanhartley.com/HartleyConsulting/Ontologies.htm

  • Hartley, D. S., & Lacy, L. W. (2011). Irregular Warfare (IW) metrics ontology final report, TRAC-H-TR-13-020. Ft Leavenworth, KS: US Army TRAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, D. S., & Lacy, L. W. (2013a). Creating the foundations for modeling irregular warfare. In D. M. Nicholson & D. D. Schmorrow (Eds.), Advances in design for cross-cultural activities, Part II (pp. 13–23). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, D. S., & Lacy, L. W. (2013b). IW ontology final report. Ft Leavenworth, KS: US Army TRAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haskins, C. (2010, September–October). A practical approach to cultural insight. Military Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. C., & Sands, J. I. (1997). Doing windows: Non-traditional military responses to complex emergencies. Washington, DC: CCRP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillson, R., et al. (2009). Requirements for a Government owned DIME/PMESII model suite. Washington, DC: Office of the Secretary of Defense Modeling & Simulation Steering Committee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, G. (2011). A taxonomy for HSCB research and operations. HSCB Focus 2011 Conference, February 8–10, 2011. Chantilly, BA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, L. W. (2005). OWL: Representing information using the web ontology language. Victoria, BC: Trafford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowrance, J. D., & Murdock, J. L. (2009). Political, Military, Ecomomic, Social, Infrastructure, Information (PMESII) effects forecasting for Course of Action (COA) evaluation. Rome, NY: Air Force Research Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ontology (information science). (n.d.). Retrieved July 6, 2016, from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(information_science)

  • Protégé. (n.d.). Retrieved July 16, 2016, from http://protege.stanford.edu/

  • Sun-Tzu. (1963). The art of war. (S. B. Griffith, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • TRAC. (2009, January). IW decomposition analytic strategy: Overview briefing for IW WG. Ft Leavenworth, KS: TRAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • TRAC. (2010). Metrics v3.xls. Ft Leavenworth, KS: TRAC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hartley, D.S. (2017). Ontologies. In: Unconventional Conflict. Understanding Complex Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51935-7_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation