Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A weighted graph-oriented ontology matching algorithm for enhancing ontology mapping and alignment in Semantic Web

  • Focus
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ontologies support the intelligent systems in which information needs to be handled, reused and transferred. This paper is about a weighted graph-oriented ontology matching algorithm, namely the WeGO++ algorithm that helps ontology matching in a pragmatic manner. It considers predominantly the graph-structured nature of ontology models. The methods and approaches in obtaining matching across ontologies use the basic principles of similarity identifications among graph structures. WeGO++ ontology matching frame work is able to successfully match all the data sets. The algorithmic process that is contained in the work looks for nine types of Similarity Scores between members of the ontologies to be matched. Each score is given a specific weight for arriving at the final Similarity Score for each element, and the overall Similarity Score for the ontology is computed using these values. The pragmatic nature of this matching solution is an advantage which approaches the task in a simplistic and efficient manner. The computations are not very complicated and do not use large computing power. It is possible to add more features such as incorporating a sophisticated GUI, changing the matching threshold at runtime and adding a new module to introduce a graphical representation of Similarity Scores of the ontology elements. Threshold values can be fixed to accept levels of matching between elements and classify the quality of match that exists between the ontologies concerned. This provides some room for the manual decision making which can be efficient in deciding matching levels in certain hesitant matches. The algorithms have been tested with OAEI test data sets and some popular ontology library data sets apart from ontologies built from conventional database data sets.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-Namiy AQ (2013) Algorithm to match ontologies on the semantic web. Editorial Preface, vol 4, no 3, pp 221–227

  • Bechhofer S, van Harmelen F, Hendler J, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein BLA, Franklin W (2004) OWL web ontology language reference. W3C Recommendation

  • Bollegala D, Matsuo Y, Ishizuka M (2007) Measuring semantic similarity between words using web search engines. WWW 7:757–766

  • Bryl V, Sergienya I, Tonelli S, Giuliano C (2007) Role repository linking framenet and wordnet 10(5):237–241

  • Cruz F, Xiao H (2005) The Role of Ontologies in Data Integration. J Eng Intell Syst 13(4):245–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruz F, Xiao H, Hsu F (2004) An Ontology-based framework for semantic interoperability between XML sources. In: International database engineering and applications symposium (IDEAS), pp 217–226

  • Dean M, Connolly D, van Harmelen F, Hendler J, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein LA (2002) OWL web ontology language 1.0 reference

  • Decker S, Melnik S, van Harmelen F, Fensel D, Klein MCA, Broekstra J, Erdmann M, Horrocks I (2000) The semantic web. The roles of XML and RDF. IEEE Internet Comput 4(5):63–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Didion J, Walenz B (2004) Jwnl (java wordnet library)

  • Doan AH, Madhavan J, Dhamankar R, Domingos P, Halevy A (2003) Learning to match ontologies on the semantic web. VLDB J 12:303–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenza G, Loia V, Senatore S (2009) Local semantic context analysis for automatic ontology matching. In: IFSA/EUSFLAT Conference, pp 1315–1320

  • Gan M, Dou X, Wang D, Jiang R (2011) DOPCA: a new method for calculating ontology based semantic similarity. In: 2011 10th IEEE/ACIS international conference on computer and information science

  • Garcia-solaco M, Saltor F, Castellanos M (2006) Semantic heterogeneity in multidatabase systems. In: Bukhres O, Elmagarmid A (eds) Object-oriented multidatabase systems. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 129–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendler J, Berners-Lee T, Miller E (2002) Integrating Applications on the Semantic Web. J Inst Electron Eng Jpn 122(10):676–680

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffart J, Suchanek FM, Berberich K, Weikum G (2013) YAGO2: a spatially and temporally enhanced knowledge base from Wikipedia. Artif Intell 194:28–61

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jorge G, Bernad J, Mena E (2011) Ontology matching with CIDER: evaluation report for OAEI. In: Proceedings of the sixth international workshop on ontology matching

  • Koumenides CL, Shadbolt NR (2014) Ranking methods for entity‐oriented semantic web search. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 65(6):1091–1106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoblock CA, Szekely P, Ambite JL, Goel A, Gupta S, Lerman K, Muslea M, Taheriyan M, Mallick P (2012) Semi-automatically mapping structured sources into the semantic web. In: Extended semantic web conference. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 375–390

  • Leacock C, Chodorow M (1998) Combining local context and wordnet similarity for word sense identification. In: Fellbaum C (ed) WordNet: an electronic lexical database. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 265–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathur I, Joshi N, Darbari H, Kumar A (2014) Shiva: a framework for graph based ontology matching. Int J Comput Appl Vol 87

  • Miller GA (1995) WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun ACM 38:39–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagvenkar A, Pawar JD, Bhattacharyya P (2016) Indowordnet conversion to web ontology language (OWL)

  • Patel-Schneider PF, Hayes P, Horrocks I (2004) OWL web ontology language: semantics and abstract syntax. W3C Recommendation

  • Pedersen T, Banerjee S, Patwardhan S (2005) Maximizing semantic relatedness to perform word sense disambiguation. Research Report UMSI 2005/25, University of Minnesota Supercomputing Institute

  • Rajeswari V, Selvan A, Varughese DK (2013) A novel method for ontology integration by evaluating member equivalence. In: 2013 IEEE seventh international conference on semantic computing

  • Sagi E, Kaufmann S, Clark B (2009) Semantic density analysis: comparing word meaning across time and phonetic space. In: Proceedings of the workshop on geometrical models of natural language semantics. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp 104–111

  • Sanfilippo AP, Tratz SC, Gregory ML, Chappell AR, Whitney PD, Posse C, Paulson PR, Baddeley B, Hohimer RE, White AM (2006) Ontological annotation with wordnet. No. PNNL-SA-54089. Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)

  • Shekarpour SA, Katebi M, Katebi SD (2009) A trust model for semantic web. IJSSST 10(2):13–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiva, Kumar A, Joshi N (2014) An enhanced graph based ontology matcher. Int J Comput Appl (0975–8887) 92(16)

  • Simon J, Raja K, Arasu GT (2012) Relevant pages in semantic web search engines using. Int J Electron Comput Sci Eng 1(2):578–584

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow R, Prakash S, Jurafsky D, Ng AY (2007) Learning to merge word senses. In: Proceedings of the 2007 joint conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and computational natural language learning (emnlp-conll), pp 1005–1014

  • Spagnola S, Lagoze C (2011) Edge dependent pathway scoring for calculating semantic similarity in ConceptNet. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on computational semantics. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp 385–389

  • Supekar K, Patel C, Lee Y (2004) Characterizing quality of knowledge on semantic web. In: FLAIRS conference, pp 472–478

  • Tayal MA, Raghuwanshi MM, Malik L (2014) Word net based method for determining semantic sentence similarity through various word senses. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on natural language processing, pp 139–145

  • Taye MM, Alalwan N (2010) Ontology alignment technique for improving semantic integration. In: The fourth international conference on advances in semantic processing

  • Tsang V, Stevenson S (2004) Calculating semantic distance between word sense probability distributions. In: Proceedings of the eighth conference on computational natural language learning (CoNLL-2004) at HLT-NAACL

  • Weikum G, Graupmann J, Schenkel R, Theobald M (2004) Towards a statistically semantic web. In: International conference on conceptual modeling. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 3–17

  • Xiao H, Cruz IF (2006) Integrating and exchanging XML data using ontologies’. In: Journal on data semantics VI, volume 4090 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, pp 67–89

  • Yang C-Y, Wu S-J (2012) Semantic web information retrieval based on the Wordnet. Int J Digit Content Technol Appl. https://doi.org/10.4156/jdcta.vol6.issue6

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang R, Wang Y, Wang J (2008) Research on ontology matching approach in semantic web. In: International conference on internet computing in science and engineering

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IT Department, Karpagam College of Engineering, Coimbatore, India

    V. Rajeswari

  2. MCA Department, Karpagam College of Engineering, Coimbatore, India

    M. Kavitha

  3. ECE Department, Karpagam College of Engineering, Coimbatore, India

    Dharmistan K. Varughese

Authors
  1. V. Rajeswari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Kavitha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dharmistan K. Varughese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Rajeswari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors state that there is no conflict of interest

Human and animal rights

We agree that no animals/humans are involved in the research work. We used our own data.

Additional information

Communicated by Sahul Smys.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rajeswari, V., Kavitha, M. & Varughese, D.K. A weighted graph-oriented ontology matching algorithm for enhancing ontology mapping and alignment in Semantic Web. Soft Comput 23, 8661–8676 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04148-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04148-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation