pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.24619 · v1 · pith:GKQ4ZPRTnew · submitted 2026-06-23 · 💻 cs.AI

When CQs Go Wrong: Challenges in CQ Verification with OE-Assist

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords ontologycq-verificationprocesscomplexityquestionsverificationalignmentambiguities
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Competency Questions (CQs) are the central component of CQ-verification, an established process in which an ontology is evaluated against a set of natural language questions to determine whether the intended purpose of the ontology has been properly modelled. However, CQ-verification is often time-consuming and error-prone, as it requires careful interpretation of linguistic nuances and precise alignment with formal ontology constructs. Ambiguities and complexity in CQs can further complicate this process, leading to inconsistent modelling decisions and verification outcomes. In this paper, we investigate what makes a CQ challenging and possible solutions to enhance the users' performance in the CQ-verification process. We experimented with the data of 19 participants who performed CQ-verification on 20 tasks using an LLM assistant to support ontology evaluation. The results show the necessity of a tool to refine CQs before publishing them to avoid ambiguity or excessive complexity in later phases of the ontology engineering process.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.