The paper defines three logical criteria for semantic adequacy of an applied ontology. All criteria are based on the idea to the effect that when an ontology construed as a formal theory allows for swapping some items in its vocabulary, then it does not sufficiently differentiate between the meanings of these items and, consequently, the semantic aspect of this vocabulary cannot be claimed to be sufficiently characterised. Besides providing the formal definitions of those criteria and proving some simple correlations therebetween I present the empirical results of their implementation.
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
Tel.: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300 email@example.com
(Corporate matters and books only) IOS Press c/o Accucoms US, Inc.
For North America Sales and Customer Service
West Point Commons
Lansdale PA 19446
Tel.: +1 866 855 8967
Fax: +1 215 660 5042 firstname.lastname@example.org