JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617

HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 61

Analyze Semantic of Object-Oriented Model Using

RiTa.WordNet
Noraida Haji Ali, Noor Syakirah Ibrahim, Nor Fazlida Mohd Sani and Noor Maizura Mohamad Noor

Abstract— The importance of modeling is obvious with its use to predict cost and time requirement especially in completing a system. However, there is
no equivalent standard for evaluating the quality of conceptual models. Thomasson has also shown the difficulties in designing the appropriate UML class
diagram such as naming the notation element. The UML class diagram designed by students always neglects the quality in modeling such as consistency
and accuracy. This study proposes the use of WordNet in order to achieve the quality in modeling. RiTa.WordNet will be used as a tool to extract synsets
from WordNet. The use of RiTa.WordNet shows that synonyms extracted can be used to match the UML class name designed by students. This application
will be used to increase the accuracy of object-oriented model.

Index Terms—Framework, Object-Oriented Model, RiTa.WordNet, WordNet

——————————  ——————————

1 INTRODUCTION

F RAMEWORK is a basic conceptual structure that used to

solve or address complex issues, usually a set of tools,
materials or components. It is also a reusable and half-
complete application which used for producing other
application [1], [2]. In a software context, the framework is
used as a name for a different kind of tool sets. Currently,
frameworks are most commonly represented through design
diagrams written in standard object-oriented analysis and
design languages. Frameworks used to model a specific
domain or an important aspect of that domain [3]. They
represent the domain as an abstract design, consisting of
abstract classes (or interfaces). The abstract design is more than
a set of classes, because it defines how instances of the classes
are allowed to collaborate with each other at runtime.
Effectively, it acts as a skeleton, or material that determines
how framework objects relate to each other.
Towards the system completion, modeling is essential to
predict cost and time requirement. However, there is no
equivalent standard for evaluating the quality of conceptual
models. The traditional focus of software quality shows that
only final product has been evaluating. The main task in object-
oriented is concentrated on the construction of a model of a
problem domain, rather than software implementation.
Improving the quality of conceptual models is as important as
to improve the quality of delivered system [4]. Traditionally,
system modeling can be represented by text or graphically.
Nevertheless, statement through this approach can solve some
problems related to understanding the system requirements.
This scenario will emerge the misunderstanding between user
and system engineer. This will also make a system inconsistent
[5].
Because of its significant popularity and is the de facto for
modeling software architecture and design, Unified Modeling
Language (UML) was adopted as a standard by the Object
Management Group (OMG) in November 1997 and now serves
as the standard language of blueprints for software [6]. In
modeling, designing the UML class diagram is an important
phase. Nevertheless, the formal semantics in UML is still
lacking, i.e. the meaning of the elements of a UML model is not
formally defined and may depend on the interpretation of
individuals who are using the UML [7]. Evaluating some
problems in modeling, research from Thomasson shows the
difficulties in designing the appropriate UML class diagram
[8]. They are
1. The variation of the design form.
2. Naming the notation element.
3. Free in designing.
4. Difficult to state the class or object.
5. Difficult to elaborate the requirement.
The UML class diagrams designed by students always
neglect the quality in modeling such as consistency and
accuracy. This should be overcome to make sure that there is
no duplicate in class naming and the inheritance relationship is
valid. For this purpose, a framework will be developed to
overcome the inconsistency problem in UML class diagram [9].
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section
2 discusses about the background of this research. The next
section describes the method that is used in this study. Section
4 discusses the framework and presents result testing in
Section 5. In section 6, we give the results of our study and the
discussion in section 7. Section 8 summarizes the study and
points out some future research issues.

————————————————
2 BACKGROUND
 Noraida Haji Ali. Computer Science Department, Universiti Malaysia Many ways have been done to produce a good system or
Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia. model. One of that is by using tools such as CONCEIVER++,
 Noor Syakirah Ibrahim. Computer Science Department, Universiti an understanding-based program debugger for object-oriented
Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia.
 Nor Fazlida Mohd Sani. Computer Science Department, Universiti Putra programming language [10]. However, analysis is also an
Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. important stage because the conceptual model can be shown to
 Noor Maizura Mohamad Noor. Computer Science Department, Universiti fulfill the requirements and becomes the skeleton to build a
Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia.
© 2011 Journal of Computing Press, NY, USA, ISSN 2151-9617
http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/
JOURNAAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME
V 3, ISSUE 5, MAY
M 2011, ISSN 2151-9617
HTTPS:///SITES.GOOGLE.COM
M/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JO OURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 62

compplete system. Without

W thorouugh analysis, it is impossiblle to TABLE 2
have a good deesign or corrrect implemeentation [11]. In AMOUNT OFF WORDS AND SYNSETS IN WORDNET
modeeling, analysiss of the semanntic quality cann help studentts in (ENHANCED
E ROM TABLE 1)
FR
desig
gning the UML L class diagram m. By doing semantic
s analyysis,
we deelve even deep per to check whether
w they fo
orm a sensiblee set WorrdNet Noun
#N erb
#Ve #Noun #Verb
b
of in
nstruction in the
t programmming languagee. This will help h verrsion Syn
nsets Synsets
studeents to overco ome the variation of nam ming the notation 2.1
2 81,,426 13,6
650 117,0
097 11,488
8
elemeent because it is semanticallly valid. 3
3.0 82,115 13,7
767 117,7
798 11,529
9
languaage of Word dNet such aas Chinese W WordNet, Th hai
2.1 R
RiTa.WordNet Background WordN Net, EuroWo ordNet and many moree. To improve
RiTa covers a rang ge of computa ational tasks related
r to literrary WordN Net and its wiidespread app plications, therre is still a lot of
practtice, including text analy ysis, generatio on, display and works to do. Each v versions of W WordNet noted the increased
animmation, text-to--speech, text-m mining, and access
a to external numbeer of NounSy ynsets, VerbSy ynset, Noun and Verb. Th his
resouurces (e.g., Wo ordNet) [12]. RiTa.WordNeet (RiWordNet) is provess that WordNeet continues to o grow which is an advantage
one oof the core ob bjects in RiTa toolkit that su upport structu ures of an o
online databasse. In Fig. 1, th
he escalation oof the number of
for a specific task. Briefly, RiWo ordNet is an intuitive
i interface
to thee WordNet on ntology provid ding definition
ns, glosses, annd a
rangee of -onym ms (hyperny yms, hypony yms, synony yms,
antonnyms, merony yms, etc.). It can be transp parently bund dled
into a web-based,, browser-exeecutable prog gram. RiWord dNet
also uused for accesssing WordNeet via the RiTa aServer. For most
m
casess, it is simpler just
j to use thee RiWordNet.

2.2 W
WordNet Conccept
Word dNet is a largee lexical datab
base of (any) language.
l Nouuns,
verbss, adjectives an
nd adverbs aree grouped into o sets of cogniitive
synon nyms (synsetss), each expresssing a distinctt concept. Synnsets
are in nterlinked byy means of co onceptual-sem mantic and lex xical
relatiions. The Wo ordNet is a syystem to integrate lexical and
semaantic relations between the words. It org ganizes the lex xical
inform mation in term
ms of word meeanings and can be termed as a synsetss and words ccan be seen cllearly from W
WordNet versio
on
lexicoon based on pssycholinguistiic principles. 1.6 to v
version 3.0.
Inh herent to the technology immprovement and a realization
n of
the im
mportance of semantic, WorrdNet has beeen developed as a
greatt tool which giives a great im
mpact to the educational
e woorld Fig. 1. Esscalation of WordN
Net synsets and words
especcially in the semantic fiield [13]. Few studies were w
publiished on using WordNeet for education [14] orr in
specialized domaiins [15]. Theey are a lott of studies for 2.3 WordNet Seearch Results
produ ucing varietyy languages of WordNet such as Ma alay The ressults of a searrch of the WorrdNet databasse are displayed
Word dNet [16], Th hai WordNet [17], EuroW WordNet [18] and in the R Results Wind ow. Horizontal and verticaal scroll bars are
a
many y more. This shows that WordNet
W has been
b acceptedd all presentt for scrollingg through thee search resullts. All search
hes
over the world. WordNet
W has been
b released ini some versio ons. other tthan overview w list all senses matching th
he search results
Every y new version shows the increasing nu umber of wo ords. in the ffollowing geneeral format.
Tablee 1 and Table 2 show the sttatistical overv view of Word dNet 1. Items enclossed in italicizeed square brackets ([…]) may
from version 1.6 to o 3.0. not be preseent
2. If a search cannot be peerformed on some senses of
TABLLE 1 he search resu
searchstr, th ults are headed by a string of
the form: X of Y senses off searchstr.
AMOUNT OF WORDS
W YNSETS IN W ORD
AND SY O NET [19] 3. One line lissting the num mber of sensees matching the
Wo
ordNet #N
Noun #Ve
erb #Nou
un #Verb
b search selected
ve
ersion Synsets Synssets
1.6 66
6,025 12,1
127 94,47
74 10,319
9 WordNet search
Fig. 2 sshows clearly the basic synttax appear in W
1.7 75
5,084 13,2
214 109,195 11,088
8
results .
2.0 79
9,689 13,5
508 114,64
48 11,306
6 Seense n
[sy
ynset_offset}]
[<
<lex_filename> >] word1[#sen
nse_number][,, word2….]
Fig. 2. Baasic syntax in WorrdNet search resullts
Staatistical overv
view of WorrdNet version ns are important
especcially for those who are intterested in deeveloping another
JOURNAAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME
V 3, ISSUE 5, MAY
M 2011, ISSN 2151-9617
HTTPS:///SITES.GOOGLE.COM
M/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JO OURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 63
TABLE 3.
Baased on Fig. 2,
2 WordNet lexicographer files will app pear W ORDNET
E APPLICATIONS
S IN DIFFERENT DOMAIN
when n some optio ons are selectted for extend ded view. Th hese
lexicoographer files will be proceessed by grind d which then will Domain Wo
ordNet Applications
produ uces a databasse suitable forr use with the WordNet librrary, In
nformation 1.. Describe a method
m for the acquisition of th he
re
etrieval and hyponymy lexxical relation from m unrestricted te ext
interfface code, andd other appliccations [20]. The
T format of the e
extraction [23].
lexicoographer files is described in i wninput [221]. A file nummber 2.. As semantic lexicon in a module m for full te
ext
correesponds to ea ach lexicographer file. File F numbers are message retrrieval in a commu unication aid [24].
encod ded in severall parts of the WordNet
W systeem as an efficcient 3.. As a linguisticc knowledge tool [25].
4.. As a tool for f the automatic construction of
way to indicate a lexicographeer file name. By B using the file thesauri [26], [27].
lexnaames, it can bee used by prog grams or end users to correelate 5.. Pearce, D. describes
d the usee of WordNet in a
file n
names and num mbers [20]. new techniqu ue for collocatioon extraction [28 8].
Ass a case study y of this reseearch, the rev view of Word dNet They are:
6.. Choueka [29 9]: N-grams from m 2 to 6 words in
itself is very imporrtant. In this research, Word dNet will be used
u length.
to exxtract its synssets for objectt-oriented mo odel. WordNeet is 7.. Church and Hanks [30]: desscribes techniques
well-known softw ware used for many researches. The that used mutual
m informationn to measure th he
comb bination of theesaurus and dictionary
d mak kes it very usseful strength of asssociation betwee en words.
8.. Smadja [31]: infer syntax by b measuring th he
especcially in the semantic domain. One of o the promin nent spread of the e distribution of counts
c between th he
exammples of the usse of WordNeet is to determ mine the simila arity two collocatess.
betweeen words. Various
V algoritthms have beeen proposed, and 9.. Lin [32]: ba ases his extraction method on o
dependency triples obtained d from a shallow w-
thesee include considering the diistance betweeen the concep ptual parsed text co orpus.
categgories of word ds, as well as a considering g the hierarch hical 100. Katz [33]: usse patterns of parts-of-speech to
structture of the WordNet on ntology. A number
n of thhese extract technical terms (closely related to
Word dNet-based word
w similarityy algorithms are implemen nted collocations).
in a Perl package called Word dNet::Similarity and in Phy yton Disa
ambiguation 1.. Pedersen, T.. et al. Comparre 3 unsupervise ed
learning tha at distinguish th he sense of an a
packaage called NLT TK [22]. ambiguous wordw in untagged text
t [34].
 McQuittyy’s similarity analysis [35].
2.4 W
WordNet Appliccations  Ward’s minimum-varianc
m e method [36].
Theree are variou us application ns of WordN Net especiallyy in  EM algo orithm [37].
2.. The use off WordNet for improving search
comp puting domain n. Search hass been run in n a database that engines base ed on MORE techniques develope ed
accesss from Perpu ustakaan Nurr Zahirah, Un niversiti Malayysia by RBSE pro oject for more efficient
e retrieval of
Terenngganu databa ase, ScienceDiirect since 200 07-2011 as sho
own Internet resou urces [38].
in Fig
g. 2. The keywword used in th his search is “w
wordnet” andd the 3.. As a method dological elemen nt to disambigua ate
the meaning of words in info ormation extractio on
date aaccess to this database
d is on
n 16th March 2011.
2 systems [39].
Semantic
S 1.. Resnik [40] computes class similarity, definin ng
distance class to be the nouns of a synsets plus th he
nouns in all subordinate synse ets.
2.. FEDDICT, a prototype onlline dictionary to
develop on IR R technique base ed on measureme ent
of the concep ptual distance bettween words [41].
3.. McTavish [42 2] used WordNet semantic domains
to establish categories that could be used to
analyze concceptual semantic distances in term ms
of social envvironment to bettter organize term ms
for retrieval.
4.. A. Budanitskky [43] classify that t computation nal
linguistics is the area thatt has placed th he
greatest emp phasis on relatio ons and semantic
distances bettween lexemes.
Object-oriented 1.. REBUILDER system is a first step to th he
model development of a commercia al CASE tool th hat
addresses th he support of so oftware design an nd
Fig. 3.. Number of docu
uments published about WordNet in
n ScienceDirect (2
2007- design knowle edge manageme ent [44].
2011)

3 FRAMEWOORK TO ANAL
LYZE SEMANT
TIC OF
Baased on Figure 3, WordN Net has been used widely y in
OBJEC
CT-ORIENTED
D MODEL (FA
ASOOM)
Semaantic Web topiic in 2007-2011 1. This is beca
ause the naturre of
Word dNet consistss of several semantic reelations such h as This frramework con nsists of five phases. The d
details of eve
ery
synon nym, antonym m, hyponym an nd many moree. phase aare discussed as follow.
Taable 3 discussees several reseearches that have
h been donne in
varioous domains. Some popular domains are information Phase 1
retrieeval and extracction, disambiiguation and semantic
s distance. This phhase require iinput as stud dents’ answerss which used to
We also show resea arch related to
o object-oriented model. match with answers scheme prepaared by lecturrer. The answe ers
here m
means UML cllass name. If the class nam me answered by
studennts match th he answers scheme, thee answers are a
consideered to be truee. If not, it will continue to tthe 2nd phase..
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG 64

provide support for automated software testing [49], [50], [51].

Phase 2 The Testing framework is responsible for [52]:
Phase 2 is synsets extraction process in which synsets will be 1. Defining the format in which to express expectations
extracted from WordNet to match both answers. In this phase, 2. Creating a mechanism to hook into or drive the
we used RiTa.WordNet to get all the synsets for object-oriented application under test
model. After the extracting process, then the stemming process 3. Executing the tests
begins before produces the last synsets in the root form. The 4. Reporting results
synsets extracted from this process will then be used in the
next phase for the matching process. In this research, a tool is needed to prove the FASOOM
framework. RiTa.WordNet as one of the core objects in RiTa
Phase 3 tools has been chosen for this purpose.
Phase 3 is the matching process. This process match the synsets
extracted from the previous phase with the answers scheme
5 RESULTS
used in the first phase.
In this research, synonyms are important to make sure that
Phase 4 answers given by students are true. For the early stage, we
If one of the synsets extracted match the answers scheme, design a simple program to extract synonym sets (synsets)
synsets then be stored as match word (class name) and using Rita.WordNet. Several words that usually used as class
updated in the knowledge-based. name to UML have been tested and the outputs are shown in
Table 4.
Phase 5 TABLE 4
Finally, the output generated by the matching process. Phase
by phase of the framework can be seen clearly in Fig. 4. SYNSETS OUTPUT FROM RITA.W ORDNET
Search words Synsets
Phase 1: Input
account Synsets 0: history
Students’ Answers Synsets 1: chronicle
answers scheme Synsets 2: story
Synsets 3: report
Synsets 4: explanation
Y Match? N Synsets 5: score
Synsets 6: accounting
Phase 2: Synsets Synsets 7: bill
Extraction Process Synsets 8: invoice
customer Synsets 0: client
Phase 5:
WordNet client Synsets 0: customer
Output
Synsets 1: node
Synsets 2: guest
transaction Synsets 0: dealing
Phase 4: Extraction Synsets 1: dealings
Storing the using
matched money No Synsets!
Rita.WordNet
synsets
Initially, we test only five words that are commonly used for
KB Stemming UML class name. They are account, customer, client,
process transaction and money. Customer and client are two words
those synonyms to each other. We test these two words to see
Phase 3: Matching Process that if they can give the same output.

Answers Matching Synsets

scheme method
Fig. 4. FASOOM Framework
4 IMPLEMENTATION
A lot of research has been done on object-oriented programs
testing. However, few of them address the problems related
with integration testing [45], [46], [47]. In other research, tool
has been developed for testing object-oriented programs at the
integration level, accomplishing the automation of both test
case generation and test execution [48]. A test automation
framework is a set of assumptions, concepts or tools that
extracted 6 DISCUSSION
As shown in Table 4, a search word gives several synsets or no
synsets at all. This provides several choices for students in
naming the UML class diagram correctly even though they are
not provided in answers scheme. RiTa.WordNet has been used
to extract synsets from WordNet. Other extractor tools such as
TextCatch [53], TextToOnto [54] and Email Extractor [55] have
been reviewed and obviously RiTa.WordNet is the best choice.
The used of RiWordNet are because of its significant in this
research. We can conclude that RiWordNet are
1. Easy to use and understand
2. Access directly to WordNet database through
RiTaServer.
3. Give the simple output as requested
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG
4. Easy to customize with own need (use
programming)
Even though RiTa.WordNet gives a lot of benefits compared
to other tools, some problems appear when we search words in
the same synsets. As an example in Table 4, when we search
for the word “customer”, only client has appeared to be the
synsets for customer. Otherwise, when the search for the word
“client” is made, there are two other synsets found such as
“guest” and “node”. If client is a synonym for customer and
guest is a synonym for the client, we can say that the word
guest is also synonym to customer. However, the results that
we have gained show that RiTa.WordNet cannot give the
overall synsets for the search words. Therefore, some
modification should be made to retrieve all the synsets of the
search word.
7 CONCLUSION
The outcome from this study is a new framework introduced
to semantically analyze the object-oriented model. To carry
out this framework, a tool called RiTa.WordNet is adapted to
get synsets from WordNet and the synsets then matched
with the input given by the user. The extract and match step
are tremendously pertinent to analyze the semantic in the
proposed framework.
By this development, users do not need to search their
synonym information directly from WordNet. This
framework development helps students especially in their
searching of related meaning, in the specific domain
(especially in the modeling domain). In addition, students
will save time on completing their tasks with accurate
outcome. We believe that this study will give a significant
impact in adaptation of WordNet in the other way.
Future work will focus on gaining more synsets that
commonly used for UML class name using Rita.WordNet.
For this stage, we will find the solution to get more synsets
for the search words.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by a grant Tabung Bantuan
Pendidikan Khas (TBPK), Universiti Malaysia Terengganu
(Vot: 53057) and National Science Fellowship (NSF) under
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI)
Malaysia. We would like to express our thanks to all people
which helped in completing this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] Johnson, R.E. and B. Foote, "Designing reusable classes," J. Object-
Oriented Programming 1, 5, vol. no. pp. 22-35, 1988
[2] Fayad, M.E., D.C. Schmidt, and R.E. Johnson, "Object-Oriented
Application Frameworks: Problems and Perspectives," vol. no. pp.
1997
[3] Riehle, D., Framework Design: A Role Modeling Approach. 2000:
ETH Zürich.
[4] Teeuw, W.B. and H.v.d. Berg, On the Quality of Conceptual Models.
1997.
[5] Ali, N.H., Z. Shukur, and S. Idris, "Pendekatan Formalisasi Model
Berorientasi Objek dengan Model Formal: Satu Tinjauan," Jurnal
65
Java Teknologi, vol. 49, no. D, pp. 1–12, 2008
[6] Booch, G., "UML in action," Commun. ACM, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 26-28,
1999
[7] Christian, F.J.L., Improving the quality of UML models in practice, in
Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Software
engineering. 2006, ACM: Shanghai, China.
[8] Thomasson, B., M. Ratcliffe, and L. Thomas, Identifying novice
difficulties in object oriented design, in Proceedings of the 11th annual
SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer
science education. 2006, ACM: Bologna, Italy.
[9] Noor Maizura Mohamad Noor, Noraida Haji Ali, and Noor Syakirah
Ibrahim, "A New Framework to Extract WordNet Lexicographer Files
for Semi-Formal Notation: A Preliminary Study," Proc. 4th
Internationatiol Symposium on Information Technology 2010
(ITSim'10), pp. 1027-1031, 2010.
[10] Nor Fazlida Mohd, S., Z. Abdullah Mohd, I. Sufian, and S. Zarina,
Designing an understanding and debugging tool (UDT) for object-
oriented programming language, in Proceedings of the 4th WSEAS
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge
Engineering Data Bases. 2005, World Scientific and Engineering
Academy and Society (WSEAS): Salzburg, Austria.
[11] Eduardo, F. and Y. Xiaohong, Semantic Analysis Patterns, in
Conceptual Modeling — ER 2000. 2000. pp. 918-924.
[12] Howe, D.C., RiTa: Creativity Support for Computational Literature, in
SIGCHI 2008. 2008, ACM: Florence, Italy. pp. 4.
[13] Miller, G.A., "WordNet: A Lexical Database for English,"
Communication of the ACM, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 39-41, 1995
[14] Kegl, J., Machine-readable dictionaries and education, in automating
the lexicon: research and practice in a multilingual environment, D.
Walker, et al., Editors. 1995, Oxford University Press: Oxford, New
York. pp. 249–284.
[15] Strzalkowski, T. and R. Brandow, "Spotting technical concepts in
natural language text," Proc. Proceedings of the 9th Florida Artificial
Intelligence Research Symposium, pp. 66-70, 1996.
[16] Tze, L.L. and N. Hussein, Fast Prototyping of a Malay WordNet
System, in Proceedings of the Language, Artificial Intelligence and
Computer Science for Natural Language Processing Applications
(LAICS-NLP) Summer School Workshop. 2006: Bangkok, Thailand.
pp. 13–16.
[17] Sareewan, T., R. Kergrit, M. Chumpol, S. Tan, C. Thatsanee, S. Virach,
and I. Hitoshi, Thai WordNet construction, in Proceedings of the 7th
Workshop on Asian Language Resources. 2009, Association for
Computational Linguistics: Suntec, Singapore.
[18] Piek, V., "Introduction to EuroWordNet," Computers and the
Humanities, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 73-89, 1998
[19] Yu, J., Z. Wen, Y. Liu, and Z. Jin, "Statistical Overview of WordNet
from 1.6 to 2.0," Proc. Global WordNet Conference, pp. 352-357, 2004.
[20] Princeton, "lexnames (5WN) manual page," vol. no. pp. 1-3, 2005
[21] Princeton, "wninput (5WN) manual page,"
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/man/wninput.5WN.html. 2005
[22] Ted, P., P. Siddharth, and M. Jason, WordNet::Similarity: measuring
the relatedness of concepts, in Demonstration Papers at HLT-NAACL
2004 on XX. 2004, Association for Computational Linguistics: Boston,
Massachusetts.
[23] Hearst, M.A., Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text
corpora, in Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational
linguistics - Volume 2. 1992, Association for Computational
Linguistics: Nantes, France.
[24] Van de Riet, R., H. Burg, and F. Dehne, "Lingusitic instruments in
information system design. FOIS," Proc. Proceedings of 1st
International Conference, 1998.
[25] Jeong-Oog, L. and B. Doo-Kwon, Semantic Integration of Databases
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617
HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/
WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG
Using Linguistic Knowledge, in Proceedings of the 12th Australian
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Advanced Topics in
Artificial Intelligence. 1999, Springer-Verlag.
[26] Dongqiang, Y. and M.P. David, Automatic thesaurus construction, in
Proceedings of the thirty-first Australasian conference on Computer
science - Volume 74. 2008, Australian Computer Society, Inc.:
Wollongong, Australia.
[27] Mandala, R., T. Tokunaga, H. Tanaka, A. Okumura, and K. Satoh, Ad
Hoc Retrieval Experiments Using WordNet and Automatically
Constructed Thesauri., in TREC-7. 1998. pp. 414–419.
[28] Pearce, D., "Synonymy in collocation extraction," Proceedings of the
NAACL 2001 Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Resources:
Applications, Extensions and Customizations, vol. no. pp. 41-46, 2001
[29] Choueka, Y., "Looking for needles in a haystack or locating interesting
collocational expressions in large textual databases.," Proc.
Proceedings of the RIAO '88 Conference on User-Oriented Content-
Based Text and Image Handling, pp. 1-15, 1988.
[30] Church, K.W. and P. Hanks, "Word association norms, mutual
information and lexicography," Computational Linguistics, vol. 16,
no. 1, pp. 22-29, 1990
[31] Smadja, F., "Retrieving collocations from text: Xtract," Computational
Linguistics, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 143-177, 1993
[32] Lin, D., "Extracting collocations from text corpora," Proc. First
Workshop on Computational Terminology, pp. 1998.
[33] Justeson, J.S. and S.M. Katz, "Technical terminology: some linguistic
properties and an algorithm for identification in text," Natural
Language Engineering, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 9-27, 1995
[34] Pedersen, T. and R. Bruce, "Distinguishing Word Senses in Untagged
Text," Proc. Second Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural
Language Processing, 1997.
[35] McQuitty, L., "Similarity analysis by reciprocal pairs for discrete and
continuous data," Educational and Psychological Measurement,, vol.
26, no. pp. 825-831, 1966
[36] Ward, J., "Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function,"
Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 58, no. pp. 236–
244, 1963
[37] Dempster, A.P., N.M. Laird, and D.B. Rubin., "Maximum likelihood
from incomplete data via the EM algorithm," Journal of the Royal
Statistical Society B, vol. 39, no. pp. 1–38, 1977
[38] Eichmann, D., Balancing the Need for Knowledge and Nimbleness in
Transportable Agents. Position paper for the Dartmouth Workshop
on Transportable Agents, 1996.
[39] Chai, J.Y. and A.W. Biermann, A WordNet Based Rule Generalization
Engine for Meaning Extraction System, in Proceedings of the 10th
International Symposium on Foundations of Intelligent Systems. 1997,
Springer-Verlag.
[40] Resnik, P.S., Selection and information: a class-based approach to
lexical relationships. 1993, University of Pennsylvania.
[41] Richardson, R., A.F. Smeaton, and J. Murphy, Using WordNet for
conceptual distance measurement., in Proceedings of the 16th
Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information
Retrieval Specialist Group. 1996, Taylor Graham: London. pp. 100-
123.
[42] McTavish, D.G., K.C. Litkowski, and S. Schrader, "A computer
content analysis approach to measuring social distance in residential
organizations for older people," Social Science Computer Review, vol.
15, no. 2, pp. 170-180, 1997
[43] Budanitsky, A. and G. Hirst, "Semantic distance in WordNet; An
experimental, application-oriented evaluation of five measures," vol.
no. pp. 2001
[44] Gomes, P.J.d.S., A Case-Based Approach to Software Design, in
Departamento de Engenharia Inform´atica. 2003, Universidade de
66
Coimbra: Coimbra. pp. 284.
[45] Chen, H.Y., "An approach for object-oriented cluster-level tests based
on UML," Proc. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
Systems, Man and Cybernetics, pp. 1064-1068, 2003.
[46] Basanieri, F. and A. Bertolino, "A Practical Approach to UML-based
Derivation of Integration Tests," Proc. 4th International Software
Quality Week Europe, pp. 2000.
[47] Hartmann, J., C. Imoberdorf, and M. Meisinger, "UML-based
integration testing," Proc. Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 2000
International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 60-
70, 2000.
[48] Tom, M. and L. Zhe, A test framework for integration testing of
object-oriented programs, in Proceedings of the 2007 conference of the
center for advanced studies on Collaborative research. 2007, ACM:
Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada.
[49] Eun Ha, K., N. Jong Chae, and R. Seok Moon, Test Automation
Framework for Implementing Continuous Integration, in Proceedings
of the 2009 Sixth International Conference on Information
Technology: New Generations. 2009, IEEE Computer Society.
[50] Rankin, C., "The software testing automation framework," IBM Syst.
J., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 126-139, 2002
[51] "Test Automation Framework,"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_automation_framework.
[52] "Automation Framework," http://code.google.com/p/vauto/.
[53] Skesoft, "Text Catch 2.7.12," http://www.skesoft.com/textcatch.htm.
2008
[54] Geeknet, "TextToOnto," http://sourceforge.net/projects/texttoonto.
[55] WebPro, "Email Extractor 1.4," http://zmachines.net/. 2009
Noraida Haji Ali received her Bachelor and Master degree in Computer Science
from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia in 1995 and 1999 respectively. She is
currently a lecturer in Universiti Malaysia Terengganu and is doing her PhD study
at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Her research interests include Obejct-Oriented
Modeling and Formal Method.
Noor Syakirah Ibrahim obtained her Bachelor degree in Information Science
from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia in 2009. She is currently doing a Master
study in Universiti Malaysia Terengganu.
Nor Fazlida Mohd Sani is a senior lecturer in the Department of Computer
Science, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology,
Universiti Putra Malaysia. She obtained her Ph.D. focus on Program Analysis and
Program Understanding System from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia in 2007.
Her research interests include reverse engineering, software maintenance, program
debugging, software security and database.
Noor Maizura Mohamad Noor received her Diploma and Bachelor Degree in
Computer Science Universiti Pertanian Malaysia in 1990 and 1994 respectively. In
1997, she obtained Master Degree in Computer Science from Universiti Putra
Malaysia. She also received her phD Degree from The Manchester University in
2005. She is currently a senior lecturer at Universiti Malaysia Terengganu and
interest in research including Information Systems, Decision Support System and
Clinical Decision Support System.