Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 61 references

CHAD-KG: A Knowledge Graph for Representing Cultural Heritage Objects and Digitisation Paradata

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that object metadata and digitisation paradata can be combined in one standards-based knowledge graph, and demonstrates it with CHAD-KG, a 52,080-triple graph now serving as the single metadata source for the Aldrovandi…

desk verdict A genuinely open cultural heritage KG with a solid pipeline, but the missing source data and lack of validation mean the reproducibility and impact claims run ahead of the evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13276 v1 pith:EZOIYJAN submitted 2025-05-19 cs.DL

Sebastian Barzaghi , Arianna Moretti , Ivan Heibi , Silvio Peroni This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.DL
keywords RDFKnowledgeGraphCulturalHeritageLinkedOpenDataDigitisationModellingMaterialisationParadata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is trying to establish that cultural heritage object metadata and digitisation paradata—the record of how a digital surrogate was acquired and processed—can be published together as a single interoperable knowledge graph using existing semantic-web standards. It presents CHAD-KG, a graph of 52,080 RDF triples and 14,506 entities describing the objects of a temporary exhibition on Ulisse Aldrovandi and the people, activities, tools, and time-spans behind their digitisation. The graph is generated by a reproducible pipeline from two tabular spreadsheets, is released openly, and now functions as the main metadata source for the exhibition's Digital Twin. The value of the claim, if true, is that museums can capture not just what an object is but how its digital replica came to be, in a machine-readable form that other institutions can reuse.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is CHAD-AP, an OWL application profile built on CIDOC-CRM and its extensions. It has two modules: the Object Module, using CIDOC-CRM and LRMoo, models a cultural heritage object through a Work-Expression-Manifestation-Item layering, with titles, creation activities, subjects, type, license, and curation; the Process Module, using CRMdig, models digitisation as a sequence of activities—an acquisition step and later software-execution steps—each with input/output data objects, actors, tools, techniques, and time-spans. The materialisation pipeline turns two spreadsheet templates into RDF according to this profile through reusable mapping rules and custom functions that normalise identifiers, split multi-valued fields, convert dates, and map techniques to Getty AAT codes.

What would settle it

Run the public SPARQL endpoint against the recorded digitisation process of a specific exhibited object—say, tracing its acquisition step, software activities, actors, tools, and dates—and compare the returned triples with the digitisation team's own project records and with the original spreadsheet rows; any missing, altered, or misdated step would show that the graph does not faithfully preserve the intended metadata and paradata.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is the working integration of three things: an OWL application profile (CHAD-AP) that reuses CIDOC-CRM, LRMoo, CRMdig, and Getty AAT to describe both objects and digitisation processes; a materialisation pipeline that converts two collaboratively edited spreadsheets into RDF through declarative mapping rules plus custom functions; and the resulting graph CHAD-KG, which is published under CC0 and queried as the source of truth for the Aldrovandi Digital Twin. The paper argues that this combination makes digitisation paradata first-class data rather than informal notes.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the two source spreadsheets are complete and accurately reflect what the digitisation team did, and that the mapping rules preserve that meaning; no completeness, accuracy, or semantic validation of the source data is reported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, the same CHAD-AP profile and mapping templates can be applied to new collections without rewriting the pipeline.
  • The graph gives the Digital Twin a single, queryable source of truth, so any correction to object or process data propagates to all views of the twin.
  • The SPARQL endpoint and CC0 dump make the exhibition's metadata and digitisation history openly reusable by other projects.
  • Other digitisation case studies in the same programme can integrate their data into the same graph, enabling cross-collection comparison of digitisation workflows.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The authors state the graph is the main metadata source; a corollary they do not spell out is that the graph inherits every error in the source spreadsheets, so a validation step becomes critical as the graph grows.
  • Because the templates are in Italian and the workflow weaves human expert entry with automated mapping, a natural next test is to map the same templates for a different exhibition or institution to see where the fixed mapping rules break.
  • The missing aspects the authors list—human-readable labels, physical dimensions, materials—suggest that CHAD-AP will need to grow before it can cover museum records beyond this exhibition.
  • One can imagine extending the Process Module to record conservation actions and loans alongside digitisation, turning the graph into a full life-cycle record of each object.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents CHAD-KG, a knowledge graph that represents bibliographic metadata and digitisation paradata for cultural heritage objects exhibited in the temporary Aldrovandi exhibition. The graph was generated from two Google Sheets tabular datasets (BM and PD) via a reproducible pipeline based on a Morph-KGC extension, and structured according to CHAD-AP, an OWL application profile reusing CIDOC-CRM, LRMoo, CRMdig, and Getty AAT. The authors report 52,080 triples and 14,506 entities, describe the data model, the materialisation pipeline, and the publishing infrastructure (Zenodo dump, SPARQL endpoint, SPUK static site), and claim that the graph now serves as the main metadata source and single source of truth for the Aldrovandi Digital Twin. The paper's central contribution is a standards-based, openly documented pipeline for publishing heritage object metadata and digitisation paradata as linked data.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a useful and timely contribution to semantic interoperability in cultural heritage. The paper demonstrates how existing standards (CIDOC-CRM, LRMoo, CRMdig, AAT) can be combined in an application profile and materialised with a declarative mapping tool, and it makes the artefacts available: the ontology, mapping files, code, templates, RDF dump, and SPARQL endpoint are all referenced with DOIs or URLs. There are no equations fitted to the target claim, and the design reuse of CHAD-AP is an acknowledged dependency rather than circularity. The main weaknesses are that the exact input spreadsheets are not released, so the source-to-graph transformation cannot be independently audited, and the paper contains no data-quality validation—only descriptive counts. These issues directly affect the reproducibility and trustworthiness claims that are central to the paper.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2 and Resource availability statement; references [37], [38]] The exact BM and PD spreadsheets used to generate CHAD-KG are not released: reference [37] provides only empty templates with a minimal sample, and reference [38] is the final RDF dump. Consequently, a third party cannot rerun the pipeline to regenerate the stated 52,080 triples and 14,506 entities, nor can they audit whether the CHAD-AP mapping preserved the intended meaning of each source field. This is load-bearing for the paper's reproducibility claim. Please deposit the actual exported CSV files used as input (or explicitly state why they cannot be released), and if they are already included in the Zenodo deposit, point the reader to the exact files and paths.
  2. [Section 4 (Discussion) and Section 3.2] The paper reports no completeness check, accuracy audit, or semantic validation of the graph against the source spreadsheets or against expert knowledge. Section 4 evaluates the graph only through descriptive statistics—total triples, entity counts, and model-reuse frequencies—which are consistent with the pipeline but do not establish that CHAD-KG is a faithful representation of the metadata and paradata, despite the 'single source of truth' claim made in Sections 3 and 5. Please add a validation step, for example a sampled comparison of entities and properties in the RDF back to the original spreadsheets, a check of mapping edge cases, and a report of discrepancies found and resolved.
  3. [Section 3.2 (User-defined functions and launch script)] The cleaning, normalisation, and reshaping performed by the launch script and the user-defined functions are described only at a high level (e.g., 'normalize_and_convert_to_iri', 'split_year_range_to_dates', 'convert_to_aat'). These steps can materially alter the semantic content of the source data—particularly the AAT term mappings and the extraction of identifiers from free-text strings—but the paper does not document the underlying assumptions or transformation rules. Please specify the rules, either in the paper or in a companion documentation file, so that a reviewer or adopter can judge whether the conversions are semantically faithful.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1 and Section 5] The text contains the grammatical error 'a OWL application profile' and later 'a OWL-encoded application profile'; both should be 'an OWL'.
  2. [Reference list] Reference [36] contains rendering artifacts ('Mero&#241, o Pe&#241, Uela'); the bibliographic encoding should be repaired so the author name appears correctly.
  3. [Section 3.3 and Section 4] The paper should state the exact version and date of the Zenodo dump used for the reported statistics, since the live SPARQL endpoint may evolve; currently the reader cannot tell whether '52,080 triples' refers to the deposited dump, the live endpoint, or both.
  4. [Section 3.2 and Figure 5] It would be helpful to clarify whether the controlled vocabularies in the Google Sheets templates were already aligned with AAT during data collection, or whether the AAT mapping is performed only during materialisation by the custom functions; this affects how the AAT reuse counts in Figure 5 should be interpreted.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: CHAD-KG is a materialised RDF graph built from external tabular inputs via an explicit mapping pipeline, with no fitted parameter, prediction, or self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The paper contains no derived equations, no fitted parameters, and no quantity predicted from data that was used to define it. CHAD-KG is produced by converting two tabular datasets (BM and PD) into RDF using CHAD-AP, an OWL application profile, via an extension of Morph-KGC with declarative YARRRML mapping files. The central claims are descriptive: the graph has 52,080 triples and 14,506 entities, it reuses CIDOC-CRM, LRMoo, CRMdig and AAT, and it serves as the metadata source for a Digital Twin. None of these claims is obtained by assuming the conclusion; the triple count and entity count are outputs of the materialisation process, not inputs. The paper does cite the authors' own CHAD-AP [8] and SPUK [6], but these are openly published artefacts with documented development processes, and they are not invoked as an unverified external authority to force a conclusion. The absence of the exact filled source spreadsheets in the deposit is a legitimate reproducibility and auditability limitation, but it is not circularity: it does not make the reported graph equivalent to an input by construction. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz smuggled in by citation, or renaming of a known result as a new derivation occurs. The derivation chain is a standard, transparent data materialisation workflow, and the claims stand or fall on the quality and completeness of the source data and mappings, not on circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims are construction claims, not derivations, so there are no fitted numbers. The main unproved inputs are the reliability of the source spreadsheets and the adequacy of CHAD-AP as a semantic model; both are inherited from the project workflow rather than independently justified in this paper. The output graph itself is the delivered artifact, not an invented entity requiring separate empirical evidence.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The source spreadsheets BM and PD are complete and accurate enough to serve as authoritative metadata and paradata.
    Section 3.2 says the datasets were 'collected with the help of the experts involved in the digitisation workflow'. The paper offers no completeness or accuracy checks, so this is a load-bearing assumption for the graph serving as a source of truth.
  • domain assumption CHAD-AP, including its reuse of CIDOC-CRM, LRMoo, CRMdig, and AAT, semantically captures the intended meaning of the source fields.
    The graph's validity depends on the mapping choices in CHAD-AP, developed in prior work [8] and extended here. No validation against alternative models or expert review of individual mappings is reported.
  • domain assumption The custom Morph-KGC extension and the RML/YARRRML mapping files transform the CSV data without unintended loss or duplication.
    Section 3.2 lists user-defined functions and pre/post-processing steps, but no test suite, round-trip checks, or comparison against the source tables is described.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CHAD-KG: A Knowledge Graph for Representing Cultural Heritage Objects and Digitisation Paradata." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EZOIYJAN

@misc{pith2026250513276,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CHAD-KG: A Knowledge Graph for Representing Cultural Heritage Objects and Digitisation Paradata},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EZOIYJAN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13276}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents CHAD-KG, a knowledge graph designed to describe bibliographic metadata and digitisation paradata of cultural heritage objects in exhibitions, museums, and collections. It also documents the related data model and materialisation engine. Originally based on two tabular datasets, the data was converted into RDF according to CHAD-AP, an OWL application profile built on standards like CIDOC-CRM, LRMoo, CRMdig, and Getty AAT. A reproducible pipeline, developed with a Morph-KGC extension, was used to generate the graph. CHAD-KG now serves as the main metadata source for the Digital Twin of the temporary exhibition titled \emph{The Other Renaissance - Ulisse Aldrovandi and The Wonders Of The World}, and other collections related to the digitisation work under development in a nationwide funded project, i.e. Project CHANGES (https://fondazionechanges.org). To ensure accessibility and reuse, it offers a SPARQL endpoint, a user interface, open documentation, and is published on Zenodo under a CC0 license. The project improves the semantic interoperability of cultural heritage data, with future work aiming to extend the data model and materialisation pipeline to better capture the complexities of acquisition and digitisation, further enrich the dataset and broaden its relevance to similar initiatives.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.13276 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A diagram of the CHAD-AP Object Module (OM) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A diagram of the CHAD-AP Process Module (PM). and crmdig:D14_Software) involved; and the activities’ temporal information (crm:E52_Time-Span) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The 3D digitisation process, an inherently multidisciplinary procedure, involv￾ing multiple actors with distinct roles and expertise (3D digitisation, technical, and domain). At each stage, one or several actors (grey boxes) are involved in the pro￾duction of new data, making coordinated collaboration essential for effective metadata management. The process of semantic materialisation is based on both BM and PD, ex￾… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The main components and additional customisations that are part of the Morph-KGC extension used to construct CHAD-KG. file to use. The configuration file allows for managing multiple conversions; in this case, for each of the datasets, a separate section should be decl…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The number of times each model is reused within CHAD-KG [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The number of entities per class in CHAD-KG. In order to reach these results, the development of CHAD-KG has followed an iterative process, shaped by successive refinements of the underlying data model, the materialisation engine, and the KG itself. A key design goal o…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The total count of properties occurrences in CHAD-KG. allowed for the acquisition and digitisation of those objects. Currently, it contains a rich set of RDF triples, produced via an extension of the Morph-KGC software and structured according to semantic patterns made…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [37]

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14277220, https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.14277220

    Moretti, A., Barzaghi, S.: Modelli spreadsheet changes - acquisizione e oggetti (Dec 2024). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14277220, https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.14277220

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14277220 2024

  2. [38]

    15102846, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15102846

    Moretti, A., Barzaghi, S.: CHAD-KG: TTL Serialised RDF Dataset of Exhibited objects and digitisation process (Mar 2025).https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo. 15102846, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15102846

    doi:10.5281/zenodo 2025

  3. [1]

    Knowledge and Information Systems 66(8), 4899–4925 (Aug 2024)

    Angelis, S., Moraitou, E., Caridakis, G., Kotis, K.: CHEKG: a collabora- tive and hybrid methodology for engineering modular and fair domain-specific knowledge graphs. Knowledge and Information Systems 66(8), 4899–4925 (Aug 2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-024-02110-w, https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10115-024-02110-w

    work page doi:10.1007/s10115-024-02110-w 2024

  4. [2]

    SoftwareX26, 101709 (2024) 16 S

    Arenas-Guerrero, J., Espinoza-Arias, P., Bernabé-Diaz, J.A., Deshmukh, P., Sánchez-Fernández, J.L., Corcho, O.: An RML-FNML module for Python user- defined functions in Morph-KGC. SoftwareX26, 101709 (2024) 16 S. Barzaghi et al

    work page 2024

  5. [3]

    Seman- tic Web 15(1), 1–20 (Jan 2024)

    Arenas-Guerrero, J., Chaves-Fraga, D., Toledo, J., Pérez, M.S., Corcho, O.: Morph- KGC: Scalable knowledge graph materialization with mapping partitions. Seman- tic Web 15(1), 1–20 (Jan 2024). https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-223135, https: //journals.sagepub.com/action/showAbstract, publisher: SAGE Publications

    doi:10.3233/sw-223135 2024

  6. [4]

    Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Her- itage 32, e00309 (Mar 2024)

    Balzani, R., Barzaghi, S., Bitelli, G., Bonifazi, F., Bordignon, A., Cipriani, L., Colitti, S., Collina, F., Daquino, M., Fabbri, F., Fanini, B., Fantini, F., Ferdani, D., Fiorini, G., Formia, E., Forte, A., Giacomini, F., Girelli, V.A., Gualandi, B., Heibi, I., Iannucci, A., Manganelli Del Fà, R., Massari, A., Moretti, A., Per- oni, S., Pescarin, S., Ren...

    2024

  7. [5]

    In: Ceci, M., Ferilli, S., Poggi, A

    Barbuti, N.: Creating Digital Cultural Heritage with Open Data: From FAIR to FAIR5 Principles. In: Ceci, M., Ferilli, S., Poggi, A. (eds.) Digital Libraries: The Era of Big Data and Data Science. pp. 173–181. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39905-4_17

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39905-4_17 2020

  8. [6]

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo

    Barzaghi, S.: SPUK: v0.1.0 (May 2025). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo. 15389756, https://zenodo.org/records/15389756

    arXiv 2025

Show all 61 references
  1. [7]

    Data Intelligence6(4), 1190–1221 (Dec 2024)

    Barzaghi, S., Bordignon, A., Gualandi, B., Heibi, I., Massari, A., Moretti, A., Peroni, S., Renda, G.: A Proposal for a FAIR Management of 3D Data in Cultural Heritage: The Aldrovandi Digital Twin Case. Data Intelligence6(4), 1190–1221 (Dec 2024). https://doi.org/10.3724/2096-...

    2024

  2. [8]

    In: Demartini, G., Hose, K., Acosta, M., Palmonari, M., Cheng, G., Skaf-Molli, H., Ferranti, N., Hernández, D., Hogan, A

    Barzaghi, S., Heibi, I., Moretti, A., Peroni, S.: Developing Application Profiles for Enhancing Data and Workflows in Cultural Heritage Digitisation Processes. In: Demartini, G., Hose, K., Acosta, M., Palmonari, M., Cheng, G., Skaf-Molli, H., Ferranti, N., Hernández, D., Hogan...

    2025

  3. [9]

    org/10.5281/zenodo.15391304, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15391304

    Barzaghi, S., Moretti, A., Peroni, S.: CHAD-AP: v2.0.1 (May 2025).https://doi. org/10.5281/zenodo.15391304, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15391304

    2025 doi

  4. [10]

    Semantic Web3(4), 355–370 (Nov 2012)

    Battle, R., Kolas, D.: Enabling the geospatial Semantic Web with Parliament and GeoSPARQL. Semantic Web3(4), 355–370 (Nov 2012). https://doi.org/ 10.3233/SW-2012-0065, https://journals.sagepub.com/action/showAbstract, publisher: SAGE Publications

    2012 doi

  5. [11]

    In: Ghidini, C., Hartig, O., Maleshkova, M., Svátek, V., Cruz, I., Hogan, A., Song, J., Lefrançois, M., Gandon, F

    Carriero, V.A., Gangemi, A., Mancinelli, M.L., Marinucci, L., Nuzzolese, A.G., Presutti, V., Veninata, C.: ArCo: The Italian Cultural Heritage Knowledge Graph. In: Ghidini, C., Hartig, O., Maleshkova, M., Svátek, V., Cruz, I., Hogan, A., Song, J., Lefrançois, M., Gandon, F. (e...

    2019

  6. [12]

    Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print) (Aug 2023)

    Desul, S., Mahapatra, R.K., Patra, R.K., Sethy, M., Pandey, N.: Seman- tic technology for cultural heritage: a bibliometric-based review. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print) (Aug 2023). https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-04-2023-0125, https://ww...

    2023 doi

  7. [13]

    Ldow 1184 (2014)

    Dimou, A., Vander Sande, M., Colpaert, P., Verborgh, R., Mannens, E., Van de Walle, R.: RML: A generic language for integrated RDF mappings of heterogeneous data. Ldow 1184 (2014)

    2014

  8. [14]

    AI Magazine 24(3), 75 (Sep 2003)

    Doerr, M.: The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Module: An Ontological Ap- proach to Semantic Interoperability of Metadata. AI Magazine 24(3), 75 (Sep 2003). https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v24i3.1720, https://ojs.aaai. org/aimagazine/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/1720, section: Articles

    2003 doi

  9. [15]

    In: Staab, S., Studer, R

    Doerr, M.: Ontologies for Cultural Heritage. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 463–486. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_21 , https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-540-92673-3_21

    2009 doi

  10. [16]

    Doerr, M., Kritsotaki, A., Rousakis, Y., Hiebel, G., Theodoridou, M.: CRMsci: The scientific observation model. Tech. rep., FORTH, Tech. Rep., 2014.[Online]. Available: https://projects.ics.forth.gr/isl/CRMext/CRMsci/docs/CRMsci1.1.pdf (2014), https://projects.ics.forth.gr/isl...

    2014

  11. [17]

    In: 3rd USENIX Workshop on the Theory and Practice of Provenance(TaPP11)(2011), https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/tapp11/ tech/final_files/Doerr.pdf

    Doerr, M., Theodoridou, M.: CRMdig: A generic digital provenance model for scientific observation. In: 3rd USENIX Workshop on the Theory and Practice of Provenance(TaPP11)(2011), https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/tapp11/ tech/final_files/Doerr.pdf

    2011

  12. [18]

    In: Staab, S., Studer, R

    Gangemi, A., Presutti, V.: Ontology Design Patterns. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 221–243. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_10 , https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-540-92673-3_10

    2009 doi

  13. [19]

    International Journal of Digital Curation 17(1), 15–15 (2023)

    Grant, R.: Reusable, FAIR Humanities Data: Creating Practical Guidance for Authors at Routledge Open Research. International Journal of Digital Curation 17(1), 15–15 (2023). https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v17i1.820, https://www. ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/820, number: 1

    2023 doi

  14. [20]

    Jour- nal of Documentation 79(7), 51–71 (Dec 2022)

    Gualandi, B., Pareschi, L., Peroni, S.: What do we mean by “data”? A proposed classification of data types in the arts and humanities. Jour- nal of Documentation 79(7), 51–71 (Dec 2022). https://doi.org/10.1108/ JD-07-2022-0146, https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1...

    2022

  15. [21]

    Data Intelligence2(1- 2), 181–191 (Jan 2020).https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00040, https://doi

    Guizzardi, G.: Ontology, Ontologies and the “I” of FAIR. Data Intelligence2(1- 2), 181–191 (Jan 2020).https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00040, https://doi. org/10.1162/dint_a_00040

    2020 doi

  16. [22]

    48550/arXiv.1909.13078, http://arxiv.org/abs/1909.13078, arXiv:1909.13078 [cs]

    Han, X., Gao, T., Yao, Y., Ye, D., Liu, Z., Sun, M.: OpenNRE: An Open and Ex- tensible Toolkit for Neural Relation Extraction (Sep 2019).https://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.1909.13078, http://arxiv.org/abs/1909.13078, arXiv:1909.13078 [cs]

    2019 doi arXiv

  17. [23]

    Remote Sensing13(13), 2511 (Jan 2021)

    Hao, X., Ji, Z., Li, X., Yin, L., Liu, L., Sun, M., Liu, Q., Yang, R.: Construction and Application of a Knowledge Graph. Remote Sensing13(13), 2511 (Jan 2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13132511, https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/13/ 13/2511, number: 13 Publisher: Multidisciplin...

    2021 doi

  18. [24]

    Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North Amer- ica 29(1), 67–72 (Apr 2010)

    Harpring, P.: Development of the Getty Vocabularies: AAT, TGN, ULAN, and CONA. Art Documentation: Journal of the Art Libraries Society of North Amer- ica 29(1), 67–72 (Apr 2010). https://doi.org/10.1086/adx.29.1.27949541, https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/adx.2...

    2010 doi

  19. [25]

    https://doi.org/10.7486/DRI.tq582c863, https://orbi.uliege

    Harrower, N., Immenhauser, B., Lauer, G., Maryl, M., Orlandi, T., Rentier, B., Wandl-Vogt, E.: Sustainable and FAIR Data Sharing in the Humanities (Feb 2020). https://doi.org/10.7486/DRI.tq582c863, https://orbi.uliege. be/handle/2268/246860, publisher: ALLEA - All European Aca...

    2020 doi

  20. [26]

    In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications

    Haslhofer, B., Isaac, A.: data.europeana.eu: The Europeana Linked Open Data Pilot. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (Sep 2011). https://doi.org/10.23106/dcmi.952135673, https://dcpapers.du...

    2011

  21. [27]

    Hiebel, G., Aspöck, E., Kopetzky, K.: Ontological Modeling for Excavation Doc- umentation and Virtual Reconstruction of an Ancient Egyptian Site. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 14(3), 32:1–32:14 (Jul 2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/3439735, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3439735

    2021 doi

  22. [28]

    Heritage Science9(1), 1–19 (Jul 2021).https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00561-w, https://www

    Homburg, T., Cramer, A., Raddatz, L., Mara, H.: Metadata schema and ontology for capturing and processing of 3D cultural heritage objects. Heritage Science9(1), 1–19 (Jul 2021).https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00561-w, https://www. nature.com/articles/s40494-021-00561-w, pub...

    2021 doi

  23. [29]

    Digital Humanities in the Nordic and Baltic Coun- tries Publications2(1), 230–239 (May 2019).https://doi.org/10.5617/dhnbpub

    Hyvönen, E., Rantala, H.: Knowledge-based Relation Discovery in Cultural Her- itage Knowledge Graphs. Digital Humanities in the Nordic and Baltic Coun- tries Publications2(1), 230–239 (May 2019).https://doi.org/10.5617/dhnbpub. 11098, https://journals.uio.no/dhnbpub/article/view/11098

    2019 doi

  24. [30]

    In: Ioannides, M., Baker, D., Agapiou, A., Siegkas, P

    Ioannides, M., Karittevli, E., Panayiotou, P., Baker, D.: Integrating Paradata, Metadata, and Data for an Effective Memory Twin in the Field of Digital Cultural Heritage. In: Ioannides, M., Baker, D., Agapiou, A., Siegkas, P. (eds.) 3D Research Challenges in Cultural Heritage ...

    2025 doi

  25. [31]

    In: Harth, A., Presutti, V., Troncy, R., Acosta, M., Polleres, A., Fernández, J.D., Xavier Parreira, J., Hartig, O., Hose, K., Cochez, M

    Jain, N.: Domain-Specific Knowledge Graph Construction for Semantic Analy- sis. In: Harth, A., Presutti, V., Troncy, R., Acosta, M., Polleres, A., Fernández, J.D., Xavier Parreira, J., Hartig, O., Hose, K., Cochez, M. (eds.) The Semantic Web: ESWC 2020 Satellite Events. pp. 25...

    2020 doi

  26. [32]

    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.08223, http://arxiv.org/ abs/2406.08223, arXiv:2406.08223 [cs]

    Khorashadizadeh, H., Amara, F.Z., Ezzabady, M., Ieng, F., Tiwari, S., Mihin- dukulasooriya, N., Groppe, J., Sahri, S., Benamara, F., Groppe, S.: Research Trends for the Interplay between Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs (Aug 2024). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406...

    2024 doi arXiv

  27. [33]

    NPJ HERITAGE SCIENCE13(1) (2025),https://urn

    Larsson, a.M., Bornsäter, B., Hacke, M.: Developing practices for FAIR and linked data in Heritage Science. NPJ HERITAGE SCIENCE13(1) (2025),https://urn. kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-552424, publisher: Springer Nature

    2025

  28. [34]

    Lebo, T., Sahoo, S., McGuinness, D., Belhajjame, K., Cheney, J., Corsar, D., Garijo, D., Soiland-Reyes, S., Zednik, S., Zhao, J.: PROV-O: The PROV Ontology (Apr 2013), https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/publications/ prov-o-the-prov-ontology, publisher: World Wide Web Consortium

    2013

  29. [35]

    Semantic Web6(2), 167–195 (Mar 2015)

    Lehmann, J., Isele, R., Jakob, M., Jentzsch, A., Kontokostas, D., Mendes, P.N., Hellmann, S., Morsey, M., van Kleef, P., Auer, S., Bizer, C.: DBpedia – A large- scale, multilingual knowledge base extracted from Wikipedia. Semantic Web6(2), 167–195 (Mar 2015). https://doi.org/1...

    2015 doi

  30. [36]

    In: Applications and Practices in Ontology Design, Extraction, and Reasoning, pp

    Mero&#241, o Pe&#241, Uela, A., De Boer, V., Van Erp, M., Zijdeman, R., Mourits, R., Melder, W., Rijpma, A., Schalk, R.: CLARIAH: Enabling Inter- operability Between Humanities Disciplines with Ontologies. In: Applications and Practices in Ontology Design, Extraction, and Reas...

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    Moretti, A., Heibi, I., Peroni, S.: A Workflow for GLAM Metadata Crosswalk (May 2024).https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.02113, http://arxiv.org/ abs/2405.02113, arXiv:2405.02113 [cs]

    2024 doi arXiv

  32. [40]

    Padfield, J., Kontiza, K., Bikakis, A., Vlachidis, A.: Semantic Representation and Location Provenance of Cultural Heritage Information: the National Gallery Col- lection in London. Heritage2(1), 648–665 (Mar 2019).https://doi.org/10.3390/ heritage2010042, https://www.mdpi.com...

    2019

  33. [41]

    Semantic Web 14(2), 323–359 (Dec 2022)

    Pellegrino, M.A., Scarano, V., Spagnuolo, C.: Move cultural heritage knowl- edge graphs in everyone’s pocket. Semantic Web 14(2), 323–359 (Dec 2022). https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-223117, https://journals.sagepub.com/ action/showAbstract, publisher: SAGE Publications

    2022 doi

  34. [42]

    In: Filipe, J., Bernardino, J., Quix, C

    Perez-Arriaga, M.O., Estrada, T., Abad-Mota, S.: Construction of Semantic Data Models. In: Filipe, J., Bernardino, J., Quix, C. (eds.) Data Management Technolo- gies and Applications. pp. 46–66. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-...

    2018 doi

  35. [43]

    (eds.) OWL: Experiences and Directions – Reasoner Evaluation

    Peroni,S.:ASimplifiedAgileMethodologyforOntologyDevelopment.In:Dragoni, M., Poveda-Villalón, M., Jimenez-Ruiz, E. (eds.) OWL: Experiences and Directions – Reasoner Evaluation. pp. 55–69. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54627-8_5

    2017 doi

  36. [44]

    In: Groth, P., Simperl, E., Gray, A., Sabou, M., Krötzsch, M., Lecue, F., Flöck, F., Gil, Y

    Peroni, S., Lodi, G., Asprino, L., Gangemi, A., Presutti, V.: FOOD: FOod in Open Data. In: Groth, P., Simperl, E., Gray, A., Sabou, M., Krötzsch, M., Lecue, F., Flöck, F., Gil, Y. (eds.) The Semantic Web – ISWC 2016. pp. 168–

    2016

  37. [45]

    Publications 12(1), 6 (Mar 2024)

    Poljak Bilić, L., Posavec, K.: FAIRness of Research Data in the European Hu- manities Landscape. Publications 12(1), 6 (Mar 2024). https://doi.org/10. 3390/publications12010006, https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/1/6, num- ber: 1 Publisher: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing ...

    2024

  38. [46]

    Rahman, S., Choi, F., Kim, H., Zhang, D., Hruschka, E.: Knowledge Acquisition and Integration with Expert-in-the-loop (Feb 2024).https://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2402.03291, http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.03291, arXiv:2402.03291 [cs]

    2024 doi arXiv

  39. [47]

    Journal of Integrative Agriculture 11(5), 694–699 (May 2012)

    Rajbhandari, S., Keizer, J.: The AGROVOC Concept Scheme – A Walkthrough. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 11(5), 694–699 (May 2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(12)60058-6, https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095311912600586

    2012 doi

  40. [48]

    Ristoski, P., Gentile, A.L., Alba, A., Gruhl, D., Welch, S.: Large-scale relation extraction from web documents and knowledge graphs with human-in-the-loop. 20 S. Barzaghi et al. Journal of Web Semantics60, 100546 (Jan 2020).https://doi.org/10.1016/j. websem.2019.100546, https...

    2020

  41. [49]

    Riva, P., Žumer, M., Aalberg, T.: LRMoo, a high-level model in an object-oriented framework (Oct 2022), https://2022.ifla.org/, publisher: International Feder- ation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA)

    2022

  42. [50]

    Semantic Web (2021)

    Schleider, T., Troncy, R., Gaitán, M., Alba, E., Sebastián, J., Mladenic, D., Kastelic, A., Massri, M.B., León, A., Puren, M., Vernus, P., Clermont, D., Rotten- steiner, F., Vitella, M., Cicero, G.L.: The SILKNOW Knowledge Graph. Semantic Web (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Research Ideas and Outcomes 8, e83789 (Mar 2022)

    Stocker, M., Heger, T., Schweidtmann, A., Ćwiek Kupczyńska, H., Penev, L., Do- jchinovski, M., Willighagen, E., Vidal, M.E., Turki, H., Balliet, D., Tiddi, I., Kuhn, T., Mietchen, D., Karras, O., Vogt, L., Hellmann, S., Jeschke, J., Krajewski, P., Auer, S.: SKG4EOSC - Scholarl...

    2022 doi

  44. [52]

    Springer International Publishing, Cham (2019).https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-030-30796-7_3

    2019

  45. [53]

    Tóth-Czifra, E.: The risk of losing thick description: Data management challenges Arts and Humanities face in the evolving FAIR data ecosystem (Apr 2019),https: //shs.hal.science/halshs-02115505

    2019

  46. [54]

    Publications 5(1), 2 (Mar 2017)

    Thanos, C.: Research Data Reusability: Conceptual Foundations, Barriers and Enabling Technologies. Publications 5(1), 2 (Mar 2017). https://doi.org/10. 3390/publications5010002, https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/5/1/2, number: 1 Publisher: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute

    2017

  47. [55]

    Com- munications of the ACM 57(10), 78–85 (Sep 2014)

    Vrandečić, D., Krötzsch, M.: Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. Com- munications of the ACM 57(10), 78–85 (Sep 2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/ 2629489, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2629489

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    In: Groth, P., Rula, A., Schneider, J., Tiddi, I., Simperl, E., Alexopoulos, P., Hoekstra, R., Alam, M., Dimou, A., Tamper, M

    Van Assche, D.: Balancing RDF Generation from Heterogeneous Data Sources. In: Groth, P., Rula, A., Schneider, J., Tiddi, I., Simperl, E., Alexopoulos, P., Hoekstra, R., Alam, M., Dimou, A., Tamper, M. (eds.) The Semantic Web: ESWC 2022 Satellite Events. pp. 264–274. Springer I...

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    Heritage Science 11(1), 1–26 (Dec 2023)

    Yang, S., Hou, M.: Knowledge graph representation method for semantic 3D modeling of Chinese grottoes. Heritage Science 11(1), 1–26 (Dec 2023). https: //doi.org/10.1186/s40494-023-01084-2, https://www.nature.com/articles/ s40494-023-01084-2, publisher: Nature Publishing Group ...

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    Sci- entific Data3(1), 160018 (Mar 2016).https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18, https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618, publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    Wilkinson, M.D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I.J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J.W., da Silva Santos, L.B., Bourne, P.E., Bouw- man, J., Brookes, A.J., Clark, T., Crosas, M., Dillo, I., Dumon, O., Edmunds, S., Evelo, C.T., Finkers, R., Gonzalez-Bel...

    2016

  51. [59]

    KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION 45(4), 310– 318 (2018)

    Žumer, M.: IFLA Library Reference Model (IFLA LRM) — Harmonisa- tion of the FRBR Family. KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION 45(4), 310– 318 (2018). https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2018-4-310 , https://www. imrpress.com/journal/KO/45/4/10.5771/0943-7444-2018-4-310

    2018 doi

  52. [60]

    ACM Comput

    Zhong, L., Wu, J., Li, Q., Peng, H., Wu, X.: A Comprehensive Survey on Au- tomatic Knowledge Graph Construction. ACM Comput. Surv.56(4), 94:1–94:62 (Nov 2023). https://doi.org/10.1145/3618295, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10. 1145/3618295

    2023 doi

  53. [176]

    Springer International Publishing, Cham (2016).https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-319-46547-0_18

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.