Journal on Data Semantics

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 25–46 | Cite as

Context-Based Matching: Design of a Flexible Framework and Experiment

  • Angela Locoro
  • Jérôme David
  • Jérôme Euzenat
Original Article


Context-based matching finds correspondences between entities from two ontologies by relating them to other resources. A general view of context-based matching is designed by analysing existing such matchers. This view is instantiated in a path-driven approach that (a) anchors the ontologies to external ontologies, (b) finds sequences of entities (path) that relate entities to match within and across these resources, and (c) uses algebras of relations for combining the relations obtained along these paths. Parameters governing such a system are identified and made explicit. They are used to conduct experiments with different parameter configurations to assess their influence. In particular, experiments confirm that restricting the set of ontologies reduces the time taken at the expense of recall and F-measure. Increasing path length within ontologies increases recall and F-measure as well. In addition, algebras of relations allow for a finer analysis, which shows that increasing path length provides more correct or non precise correspondences, but marginally increases incorrect correspondences.


Context-based ontology matching Knowledge representation and interoperability Algebras of relations Semantic web 



We thank Mathieu d’Aquin (and Open university) for making Watson available to our experiments, and helping us using it. We also thank Duy Hoa Ngo (LIRMM, Montpellier) for running the test with YAM++ for us.


  1. 1.
    Euzenat J, Shvaiko P (2007) Ontology Matching. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sabou M, d’Aquin M, Motta E (2008) Exploring the semantic web as background knowledge for ontology matching. J Data Semant 11:156–190Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mascardi V, Locoro A, Rosso P (2010) Automatic ontology matching via upper ontologies: a systematic evaluation. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 22(5):609–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jiménez-Ruiz E, Cuenca Grau B (2011) LogMap: logic-based and scalable ontology matching. In: Proceeding 10th international semantic web conference (ISWC). Volume 7031 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer, New York, pp 273–288Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ngo D, Bellahsene Z (2012) YAM++: a multi-strategy based approach for ontology matching task. In: Proceeding 18th international conference on engineering and knowledge management (EKAW). Volume 7603 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer, Berlin, pp 421–425Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Euzenat J, Isaac A, Meilicke C, Shvaiko P, Stuckenschmidt H, Šváb O, Svátek V, van Hage WR, Yatskevich M (2007) Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative (2007) In: Proceeding 2nd international workshop on ontology matching (OM) at the international semantic web conference (ISWC) and Asian semantic web conference (ASWC). Busan (KR), pp 96–132Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stumme G, Mädche A (2001) FCA-Merge: bottom-up merging of ontologies. In: Proceeding 17th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI), Seattle (WA US), pp 225–234Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang S, Bodenreider O (2007) Experience in aligning anatomical ontologies. Intern J Semant Web Inform Syst 3(2):1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aleksovski Z (2008) Using background knowledge in ontology matching. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jain P, Yeh P, Verma K, Vasquez R, Damova M, Hitzler P, Sheth P (2011) Contextual ontology alignment of LOD with an upper ontology: a case study with Proton. In: Proceeding 8th extended semantic web conference (ESWC), Heraklion, pp 80–92Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jain P, Hitzler P, Sheth A, Verma K, Yeh P (2010) Ontology alignment for linked open data. In: Proceeding 9th international semantic web conference (ISWC). Volume 6496 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Shanghai (CN), pp 401–416Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu W, Chen J, Zhang H, Qu Y (2011) How matchable are four thousand ontologies on the semantic web. In: Proceeding 8th extended semantic web conference (ESWC). New York, pp 290–304Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Quix C, Roy P, Kensche D (2011) Automatic selection of background knowledge for ontology matching. In: Proceeding international workshop on semantic web information management (SWIM), ACM 5, AthensGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sabou M, d’Aquin M, Motta E (2008) Scarlet: semantic relation discovery by harvesting online ontologies. In: ESWC. Berlin, pp 854–858Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ding L, Pan R, Finin T, Joshi A, Peng Y, Kolari P (2005) Finding and ranking knowledge on the semantic web. In: Proceeding 4th international semantic web conference (ISWC). Galway, pp 156–170Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    d’Aquin M, Motta E (2011) Watson, more than a semantic web search engine. Semant Web J 2(1):55–63Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gracia J, Lopez V, d’Aquin M, Sabou M, Motta E, Mena E (2007) Solving semantic ambiguity to improve semantic web based ontology matching. In: Proceeding 2nd ISWC ontology matching workshop (OM 2007), Busan (KR), pp 1–12Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    David J, Euzenat J (2008) Comparison between ontology distances (preliminary results). In: Proceeding 7th conference on international semantic web conference (ISWC), Karlsruhe (DE), pp 245–260 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    David J, Euzenat J, Sváb-Zamazal O (2010) Ontology similarity in the alignment space. In: Patel-Schneider PF, Pan Y, Hitzler P, Mika P, Zhang L, Pan JZ, Horrocks I, Glimm B (eds) international semantic web conference (1). Volume 6496 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer, Berlin, pp 129–144Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    d’Aquin M, Baldassarre C, Gridinoc L, Angeletou S, Sabou M, Motta E (2007) Characterizing knowledge on the semantic web with Watson. In: EON. New York, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Euzenat J (2008) Algebras of ontology alignment relations. In: Sheth A, Staab S, Dean M, Paolucci M, Maynard D, Finin T, Thirunarayan K (eds) the semantic web-ISWC, (2008) volume 5318 of LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 387–402Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ehrig M, Euzenat J (2005) Relaxed precision and recall for ontology matching. In: Proceeding of the workshop on integrating ontologies, K-CAP 2005. Volume 156 of CEUR workshop proceedings.,
  23. 23.
    David J, Euzenat J (2008) On fixing semantic alignment evaluation measures. In: Shvaiko P, Euzenat J, Giunchiglia F, Stuckenschmidt H (eds) Proceeding 3rd ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Karlsruhe (DE), pp 25–36Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Atencia M, Borgida A, Euzenat J, Ghidini C, Serafini L (2012) A formal semantics for weighted ontology mappings. In: Proceeding 11th International semantic web conference (ISWC), Boston (MA US), pp 17–33Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angela Locoro
    • 1
  • Jérôme David
    • 2
  • Jérôme Euzenat
    • 2
  1. 1.DIBRIS, University of Genova GenovaItaly
  2. 2.INRIA and LIG Montbonnot Saint MartinFrance

Personalised recommendations