Summary
This chapter studies ontology matching: the problem of finding the semantic mappings between two given ontologies. This problem lies at the heart of numerous information processing applications. Virtually any application that involves multiple ontologies must establish semantic mappings among them, to ensure interoperability. Examples of such applications arise in myriad domains, including e-commerce, knowledge management, e-learning, information extraction, bio-informatics, web services, and tourism (see Part D of this book on ontology applications).
Despite its pervasiveness, today ontology matching is still largely conducted by hand, in a labor-intensive and error-prone process. The manual matching has now become a key bottleneck in building large-scale information management systems. The advent of technologies such as the WWW, XML, and the emerging Semantic Web will further fuel information sharing applications and exacerbate the problem. Hence, the development of tools to assist in the ontology matching process has become crucial for the success of a wide variety of information management applications.
In response to the above challenge, we have developed GLUE, a system that employs learning techniques to semi-automatically create semantic mappings between ontologies. We shall begin the chapter by describing a motivating example: ontology matching on the Semantic Web. Then we present our GLUE solution. Finally, we describe a set of experiments on several real-world domains, and show that GLUE proposes highly accurate semantic mappings.
Work done while the author was at the University of Washington, Seattle
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
IEEE Intelligent Systems,16(2), 2001.
A. Agresti. Categorical Data Analysis. Wiley, New York, NY, 1990.
T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. The Semantic Web. Scientific American, 279, 2001.
D. Brickley and R. Guha. Resource Description Framework Schema Specification 1. 0, 2000.
J. Broekstra, M. Klein, S. Decker, D. Fensel, F. van Harmelen, and I. Horrocks. Enabling knowledge representation on the Web by Extending RDF Schema. In Proceedings of the Tenth International World Wide Web Conference, 2001.
D. Calvanese, D. G. Giuseppe, and M. Lenzerini. Ontology of Integration and Integration of Ontologies. In Proceedings of the Description Logic Workshop, 2001.
S. Chakrabarti, B. Dom, and P. Indyk. Enhanced Hypertext Categorization Using Hyper-links. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference, 1998.
H. Chalupsky. Ontomorph: A Translation system for symbolic knowledge. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 2000.
A. Doan, P. Domingos, and A. Halevy. Reconciling Schemas of Disparate Data Sources: A Machine Learning Approach. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference, 2001.
A. Doan, J. Madhavan, P. Domingos, and A. Y. Halevy. Learning to Map between Ontologies on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the World Wide Web Confernce (WWW), 2002.
P. Domingos and M. Pazzani. On the Optimality of the Simple Bayesian Classifier under Zero-One Loss. Machine Learning, 29: 103–130, 1997.
D. Fensel. Ontologies: Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and Electronic Commerce. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
J. Heflin and J. Hendler. A Portrait of the Semantic Web in Action. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16 (2), 2001.
R. Hummel and S. Zucker. On the Foundations of Relaxation Labeling Processes. PAMI, 5 (3): 267–287, May 1983.
R. Ichise, H. Takeda, and S. Honiden. Rule Induction for Concept Hierarchy Alignment. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontology Learning at IJCAI, 2001.
M. Lacher and G. Groh. Facilitating the exchange of explixit knowledge through ontology mappings. In Proceedings of the 14th Int. FLAIRS conference, 2001.
D. Lin. An Information-Theoritic Definiton of Similarity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 1998.
J. Madhavan, P. Bernstein, and E. Rahm. Generic Schema Matching with Cupid. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Databases (VLDB), 2001.
A. Maedche. A Machine Learning Perspective for the Semantic Web. Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS) Position Paper, 2001.
A. Maedche and S. Saab. Ontology Learning for the Semantic Web. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16 (2), 2001.
D. McGuinness, R. Fikes, J. Rice, and S. Wilder. The Chimaera Ontology Environment. In Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2000.
S. Melnik, H. Molina-Garcia, and E. Rahm. Similarity Flooding: A Versatile Graph Matching Algorithm. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), 2002.
T. Milo and S. Zohar. Using Schema Matching to Simplify Heterogeneous Data Translation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Databases (VLDB), 1998.
P. Mitra, G. Wiederhold, and J. Jannink. Semi-automatic Integration of Knowledge Sources. In Proceedings of Fusion’99.
N. Noy and M. Musen. PROMPT: Algorithm and Tool for Automated Ontology Merging and Alignment. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2000.
N. Noy and M. Musen. Anchor-PROMPT: Using Non-Local Context for Semantic Matching. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing at IJCAI, 2001.
B. Omelayenko. Learning of Ontologies for the Web: the Analysis of Existent approaches. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Web Dynamics, 2001.
L. Padro. A Hybrid Environment for Syntax-Semantic Tagging, 1998.
N. Pernelle, M.-C. Rousset, and V. Ventos. Automatic Construction and Refinement of a Class Hierarchy over Semi-Structured Data. In Proceeding of the Workshop on Ontology Learning at IJCAI, 2001.
E. Rahm and P. Bernstein. On Matching Schemas Automatically. VLDB Journal, 10 (4), 2001.
K. M. Ting and I. H. Witten. Issues in stacked generalization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR), 10: 271–289, 1999.
M. Uschold. Where is the semantics in the Semantic Web? In Workshop on Ontologies in Agent Systems (OAS) at the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents, 2001.
van Rijsbergen. Information Retrieval. London:Butterworths, 1979. Second Edition.
D. Wolpert. Stacked generalization. Neural Networks, 5: 241–259, 1992.
L. Yan, R. Miller, L. Haas, and R. Fagin. Data Driven Understanding and Refinement of Schema Mappings. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD, 2001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Doan, A., Madhavan, J., Domingos, P., Halevy, A. (2004). Ontology Matching: A Machine Learning Approach. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds) Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24750-0_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24750-0_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-11957-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-24750-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive