Can LLMs Faithfully Solve Ontology Engineering Tasks? A Mechanistic Interpretability Study

Ontology matching (OM) enables semantic interoperability between different ontologies and resolves their conceptual heterogeneity by aligning related entities. OM systems currently have two prevailing design paradigms: conventional knowledge-based expert systems and newer machine learning-based predictive systems. While large language models (LLMs) and LLM agents have revolutionised data engineering and have been applied creatively in many domains, their potential for OM remains underexplored. This study introduces a novel agent-powered LLM-based design paradigm for OM systems. With consideration of several specific challenges in leveraging LLM agents for OM, we propose a generic framework, namely Agent-OM (Agent for Ontology Matching), consisting of two Siamese agents for retrieval and matching, with a set of OM tools. Our framework is implemented in a proof-of-concept system. Evaluations of three Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI) tracks over state-of-the-art OM systems show that our system can achieve results very close to the long-standing best performance on simple OM tasks and can significantly improve the performance on complex and few-shot OM tasks.

In active learning, membership queries (MQs) allow a learner to pose questions to a teacher, such as ''Is every apple a fruit?'', to which the teacher responds correctly with yes or no. These MQs can be viewed as subsumption tests with respect to the target ontology. Inspired by the standard reduction of subsumption to satisfiability in description logics, we reformulate each candidate axiom into its corresponding counter-concept and verbalise it in controlled natural language before presenting it to Large Language Models (LLMs). We introduce LLMs as a third component that provides real-world examples approximating an instance of the counter-concept. This design property ensures that only Type II errors may occur in ontology modelling; in the worst case, these errors merely delay the construction process without introducing inconsistencies. Experimental results on 13 commercial LLMs show that recall, corresponding to Type II errors in our framework, remains stable across several well-established ontologies.

Ontology learning (OL) aims to automatically construct structured knowledge models from text, yet progress remains fragmented across methods, domains, and evaluation practices. Despite decades of research, OL lacks a shared infrastructure for systematic evaluation and ontology access. This absence has hindered progress and fragmented research, leaving the central challenges of OL largely unaddressed. We introduce OntoLearner, a modular, cross-domain, and first-of-its-kind framework that unifies ontology access, large language model (LLM)-driven learning pipelines, and standardized benchmarking. OntoLearner releases 180 machine-readable ontologies spanning 22 domains and provides pipeline-ready datasets with train/dev/test splits for three core OL tasks: term typing, taxonomy discovery, and non-taxonomic relation extraction. Using this infrastructure, we conduct a large-scale empirical study of OL, evaluating 22 retrieval models and 12 LLMs across domains and tasks. The results converge on a finding that reframes the central challenge of OL: failure modes scale with ontological complexity rather than model size or architectural sophistication. The primary bottleneck is not model capability, but a structural mismatch between how models encode knowledge and how ontologies organize it. These findings establish that effective OL is reachable through the cross-domain, multi-task benchmarking enabled by OntoLearner. OntoLearner is open-source (MIT license) at https://github.com/sciknoworg/OntoLearner/.