Skip to main content

Finding the Most Similar Concepts in Two Different Ontologies

  • Conference paper
MICAI 2004: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (MICAI 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2972))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

A concise manner to send information from agent A to B is to use phrases constructed with the concepts of A: to use the concepts as the atomic tokens to be transmitted. Unfortunately, tokens from A are not understood by (they do not map into) the ontology of B, since in general each ontology has its own address space. Instead, A and B need to use a common communication language, such as English: the transmission tokens are English words.

An algorithm is presented that finds the concept CB in OB (the ontology of B) most closely resembling a given concept CA. That is, given a concept from ontology OA, a method is provided to find the most similar concept in OB, as well as the similarity sim between both concepts. Examples are given.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Everett, J., Bobrow, D., Stolle, R., Crouch, R., de Paiva, V., Condoravdi, C., van den Berg, M., Polyani, L.: Making ontologies work for resolving redundancies across documents. Communication of the ACM 42(2), 55–60 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Forbus, K., Falkenhainer, B., Gentner, D.: The structure mapping engine: algorithms and examples. Artificial Intelligence 41(1), 1–63 (1989)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Gelbukh, A., Sidorov, G., Guzman-Arenas, A.: Use of a weighted document topic hierarchy for document classification. Text, Speech, Dialogue, Pilsen, Chech Republic, September 13-17, 133–138 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gelbukh, A., Sidorov, G., Guzman-Arenas, A.: Document comparison with a weighted topic hierarchy. In: DEXA 1999, 10th International Conference on Database and Expert System applications, Workshop on Document Analysis and Understanding for Document Databases, Florence, Italy, August 30 - September 3, pp. 566–570 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gruber, T.R.: Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing. In: Guarino, N., Poli, R. (eds.) Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Guzman, A., Olivares, J., Demetrio, A., Dominguez, C.: Interaction of purposeful agents that use different ontologies. In: Cairó, O., Cantú, F.J. (eds.) MICAI 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1793, pp. 557–573. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Guzman, A., Dominguez, C., Olivares, J.: Reacting to unexpected events and communicating in spite of mixed ontologies. In: Coello Coello, C.A., de Albornoz, Á., Sucar, L.E., Battistutti, O.C. (eds.) MICAI 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2313, pp. 377–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Holsapple, C.W., Joshi, K.D.: A collaborative approach to ontology design. Comm. ACM 45(2), 42–47 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Huhns, M.N., Singh, M.P., Ksiezyk, T.: Global Information Management Via Local Autonomous Agents. In: Huhns, M.N., Singh, M.P. (eds.) Readings in Agents, Morgan Kauffmann Publishers, Inc., San Francisco (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kim, H.: Predicting how ontologies for the semantic web will evolve. Comm. ACM 45(2), 48–54 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lenat, D.B., Guha, R.V., Pittman, K., Pratt, D., Shepherd, M.: Cyc: Toward Programs with Common Sense. Comm. ACM 33(9), 30–49 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Levachkine, S., Guzman-Arenas, A.: Hierarchy as a new data type for qualitative variables. Submitted to Data and Knowledge Engineering (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Olivares, J.: An Interaction Model among Purposeful Agents, Mixed Ontologies and Unexpected Events. Ph. D. Thesis, CIC-IPN. In Spanish (2002), Available on line at http://www.jesusolivares.com/interaction/publica

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Guzman-Arenas, A., Olivares-Ceja, J.M. (2004). Finding the Most Similar Concepts in Two Different Ontologies. In: Monroy, R., Arroyo-Figueroa, G., Sucar, L.E., Sossa, H. (eds) MICAI 2004: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. MICAI 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2972. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24694-7_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24694-7_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-21459-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-24694-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics