{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2024:UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB","short_pith_number":"pith:UKIX4L3P","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"a2917e2f6f8cc5e652ec8ce52dcb8078625d970097dce98ece1bb8bb9c87bdde","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2412.13688","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Discerning and Characterising Types of Competency Questions for Ontologies","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CL"],"primary_cat":"cs.AI","authors_text":"C. Maria Keet, Zubeida Casmod Khan","submitted_at":"2024-12-18T10:26:29Z","abstract_excerpt":"Competency Questions (CQs) are widely used in ontology development by guiding, among others, the scoping and validation stages. However, very limited guidance exists for formulating CQs and assessing whether they are good CQs, leading to issues such as ambiguity and unusable formulations. To solve this, one requires insight into the nature of CQs for ontologies and their constituent parts, as well as which ones are not. We aim to contribute to such theoretical foundations in this paper, which is informed by analysing questions, their uses, and the myriad of ontology development tasks. This res"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2412.13688","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.AI","submitted_at":"2024-12-18T10:26:29Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.CL"],"title_canon_sha256":"99e0c285222a5e9742d85e0b4d1c88ae2f7598f37a9357ff1b76b9bc3f3a35ae","abstract_canon_sha256":"0213f2c9cc1c6635b767a0226b01d15d5bdc3995f1bf750afaef07314889420c"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545456Z","signature_b64":"7NdyRioiJXpwOZlOnJNlMYVZ+weYBciTkTyWsMiSuIwv3WobMhh8/qpK32QbIp358B5xOq8vGScfuVtadQFjCA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"a2917e2f6f8cc5e652ec8ce52dcb8078625d970097dce98ece1bb8bb9c87bdde","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.544949Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.544949Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Discerning and Characterising Types of Competency Questions for Ontologies","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CL"],"primary_cat":"cs.AI","authors_text":"C. Maria Keet, Zubeida Casmod Khan","submitted_at":"2024-12-18T10:26:29Z","abstract_excerpt":"Competency Questions (CQs) are widely used in ontology development by guiding, among others, the scoping and validation stages. However, very limited guidance exists for formulating CQs and assessing whether they are good CQs, leading to issues such as ambiguity and unusable formulations. To solve this, one requires insight into the nature of CQs for ontologies and their constituent parts, as well as which ones are not. We aim to contribute to such theoretical foundations in this paper, which is informed by analysing questions, their uses, and the myriad of ontology development tasks. This res"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2412.13688","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2412.13688/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2412.13688","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2412.13688v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2412.13688","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"UKIX4L3PRTC6","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXM","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"UKIX4L3P","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":2,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.24619","citing_title":"When CQs Go Wrong: Challenges in CQ Verification with OE-Assist","ref_index":16,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2604.02545","citing_title":"Competency Questions as Executable Plans: a Controlled RAG Architecture for Cultural Heritage Storytelling","ref_index":22,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB","json":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/UKIX4L3P"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/UKIX4L3P","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2412.13688&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/UKIX4L3PRTC6MUXMRTSS3S4APB/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T09:51:06.545008+00:00"}