It can have serious implications in critical application scenarios like that of Knowledge Graph-based multilingual data integration. In view of the above, the thesis argues that the current understanding of the problem of semantic heterogeneity as the'existence of variance', while being crucially necessary, is not sufficient and under-characterized. There can be no variance without a prior notion of a unifying reference taken as the basis for computing the variance itself. To that end, the thesis proposes the problem of representation heterogeneity to emphasize the fact that heterogeneity is an intrinsic property of any representation, wherein, different observers encode different representations of the same target reality in a stratified manner using different concepts, language and knowledge (as well as data). The thesis then advances a top-down solution approach to the above stratified problem of representation heterogeneity in terms of several solution components, namely: (i) a representation formalism stratified into concept level, language level, knowledge level and data level to accommodate representation heterogeneity, (ii) a top-down language representation using Universal Knowledge Core (UKC), UKC namespaces and domain languages to tackle the conceptual and language level heterogeneity, (iii) a top-down knowledge representation using the notions of language teleontology and knowledge teleontology to tackle the knowledge level heterogeneity, (iv) the usage and further development of the existing LiveKnowledge catalog for enforcing iterative reuse and sharing of language and knowledge representations, and, (v) the kTelos methodology integrating the solution components above to iteratively generate the language and knowledge representations absolving representation heterogeneity. The thesis also includes proof-of-concepts of the language and knowledge representations developed for two international research projects - DataScientia (data catalogs) and JIDEP (materials modelling). Finally, the thesis concludes with future lines of research.

Knowledge Organization (KO) and Knowledge Representation (KR) have been the two mainstream methodologies of knowledge modelling in the Information Science community and the Artificial Intelligence community, respectively. The facet-analytical tradition of KO has developed an exhaustive set of guiding canons for ensuring quality in organising and managing knowledge but has remained limited in terms of technology-driven activities to expand its scope and services beyond the bibliographic universe of knowledge. KR, on the other hand, boasts of a robust ecosystem of technologies and technology-driven service design which can be tailored to model any entity or scale to any service in the entire universe of knowledge. This paper elucidates both the facet-analytical KO and KR methodologies in detail and provides a functional mapping between them. Out of the mapping, the paper proposes an integrated KR-enriched KO methodology with all the standard components of a KO methodology plus the advanced technologies provided by the KR approach. The practical benefits of the methodological integration has been exemplified through the flagship application of the Digital University at the University of Trento, Italy.

Knowledge Representation (KR) and facet-analytical Knowledge Organization (KO) have been the two most prominent methodologies of data and knowledge modelling in the Artificial Intelligence community and the Information Science community, respectively. KR boasts of a robust and scalable ecosystem of technologies to support knowledge modelling while, often, underemphasizing the quality of its models (and model-based data). KO, on the other hand, is less technology-driven but has developed a robust framework of guiding principles (canons) for ensuring modelling (and model-based data) quality. This paper elucidates both the KR and facet-analytical KO methodologies in detail and provides a functional mapping between them. Out of the mapping, the paper proposes an integrated KO-enriched KR methodology with all the standard components of a KR methodology plus the guiding canons of modelling quality provided by KO. The practical benefits of the methodological integration has been exemplified through a prominent case study of KR-based image annotation exercise.