Matching Ontologies in Open Networked Systems: Techniques and Applications

  • Silvana Castano
  • Alfio Ferrara
  • Stefano Montanelli
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3870)


In open networked systems a varying number of nodes interact each other just on the basis of their own independent ontologies and of knowledge discovery requests submitted to the network. Ontology matching techniques are essential to enable knowledge discovery and sharing in order to determine mappings between semantically related concepts of different ontologies. In this paper, we describe the H-Match algorithm and related techniques for performing matching of independent ontologies in open networked systems. A key feature of H-Match is that it can be dynamically configured for adaptation to the semantic complexity of the ontologies to be compared, where the number and type of ontology features that can be exploited during the matching process is not known in advance as it is embedded in the current knowledge request. Furthermore, this number can vary, also for the same ontologies, each time a new matching execution comes into play triggered by a knowledge request. We describe how H-Match enforces this capabilities through a combination of syntactic and semantic techniques as well as through a set of four matching models, namely surface, shallow, deep, and intensive. Then, we describe the application of H-Match and its implementation for knowledge discovery in the framework of the Helios peer-based system. Finally, we present experimental results of using H-Match on different test cases, along with a discussion on precision and recall.


Semantic Relation Match Model Target Concept Ontology Match Compound Term 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Broekstra, J., et al.: A Metadata Model for Semantics-Based Peer-to-Peer Systems. In: Proc. of the 1st WWW Int. Workshop on Semantics in Peer-to-Peer and Grid Computing (SemPGRID 2003), Budapest, Hungary (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nejdl, W., et al.: EDUTELLA: a P2P Networking Infrastructure Based on RDF. In: Proc. of the 11th Int. World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2002), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mitre, J., Navarro-Moldes, L.: P2P Architecture for Scientific Collaboration. In: Proc. of the 13th Int.Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE 2004), pp. 95–100. IEEE Computer Society, Italy (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Iamnitchi, A., Ripeanu, M., Foster, I.T.: Locating Data in (Small-World?) Peer-to-Peer Scientific Collaborations. In: Druschel, P., Kaashoek, M.F., Rowstron, A. (eds.) IPTPS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2429, pp. 232–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Logical Foundations of Peer-To-Peer Data Integration. In: Proc. of the 23rd ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Sym. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS 2004), Paris, France, pp. 241–251 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Motik, B., Maedche, A., Volz, R.: A Conceptual Modeling Approach for Semantics-Driven Enterprise Applications. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., et al. (eds.) CoopIS 2002, DOA 2002, and ODBASE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2519, pp. 1082–1099. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Doan, A., Madhavan, J., Domingos, P., Halevy, A.: Learning to Map between Ontologies on the Semantic Web. In: Proc. of the 11th Int. World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2002), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp. 662–673 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Euzenat, J., Loup, D., Touzani, M., Valtchev, P.: Ontology Alignment with OLA. In: Proc. of the 3rd ISWC Workshop on Evaluation of Ontology-based Tools (EON 2004), Hiroshima, Japan (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Do, H., Rahm, E.: COMA - A System for Flexible Combination of Schema Matching Approaches. In: Proc. of 28th Int. Conference on Very Large Databases (VLDB 2002), Hong Kong, China (2002) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ehrig, M., Sure, Y.: Ontology Mapping - An Integrated Approach. In: Proc. of the 1st European Semantic Web Symposium, Heraklion, Greece, pp. 76–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P.: Semantic Matching. Knowledge engineering review 18, 265–280 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: The PROMPT Suite: Interactive Tools For Ontology Merging And Mapping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59, 983–1024 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.A.: A Survey of Approaches to Automatic Schema Matching. VLDB Journal 10, 334–350 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: A Survey of Schema-based Matching Approaches. Journal on Data Semantics, JoDS (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Noy, N.F.: Semantic Integration: a Survey of Ontology-based Approaches. In: SIGMOD Record Special Issue on Semantic Integration (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M.: Ontology Mapping: the State of the Art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    INTEROP - Network of Excellence: State of the Art and State of the Practice Including Initial Possible Research Orientations. Deliverable D8.1, NoE INTEROP - IST Project n. 508011 - 6th EU Framework Programme (2004) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith, M.K., Welty, C., McGuinness, D.L., (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (2004),
  19. 19.
    Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Montanelli, S., Zucchelli, D.: HELIOS: a General Framework for Ontology-based Knowledge Sharing and Evolution in P2P Systems. In: Proc. of the 2nd DEXA Int. Workshop on Web Semantics (WEBS 2003), IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Montanelli, S.: Dynamic Knowledge Discovery in Open, Distributed and Multi-Ontology Systems: Techniques and Applications. In: Web Semantics and Ontology., Idea Group (2005) (to appear)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Castano, S., De Antonellis, V., De Capitani Di Vimercati, S.: Global Viewing of Heterogeneous Data Sources. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 13, 277–297 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Aumueller, D., Do, H., Massmann, S., Rahm, E.: Schema and Ontology Matching with COMA++. In: Proc. of SIGMOD 2005 - Software Demonstration, Baltimore, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P., Yatskevich, M.: S-Match: an algorithm and an implementation of semantic matching. In: Semantic Interoperability and Integration, Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miller, G.A.: WordNet: A Lexical Database for English. Communications of the ACM (CACM) 38, 39–41 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ouksel, A.M., Naiman, C.F.: Coordinating Context Building in Heterogeneous Information Systems. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 3, 151–183 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lauer, M.: Designing Statistical Language Learners: Experiments on Noun Compounds. In: Proc. of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 1995), Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 47–54 (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ehrig, M., Staab, S.: QOM – quick ontology mapping. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 683–697. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., Winograd, T.: The Pagerank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Technical report, Computer Science Department, Stanford University (1998)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Arasu, A., Cho, J., Garcia-Molina, H., Paepcke, A., Raghavan, S.: Searching the web. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Salton, G.: Automatic Text Processing: The Transformation, Analysis, and Retrieval of Information by Computer. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1989)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ehrig, M., Haase, P., Stojanovic, N., Hefke, M.: Similarity for Ontologies - A Comprehensive Framework. In: Proc. of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems, Regensburg, Germany (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Montanelli, S., Pagani, E., Rossi, G.P., Tebaldi, S.: On Combining a Semantic Engine and Flexible Network Policies for P2P Knowledge Sharing Networks. In: Proc of the 1st DEXA Workshop on Grid and Peer-to-Peer Computing Impacts on Large Scale Heterogeneous Distributed Database Systems (GLOBE 2004), pp. 529–535. IEEE Computer Society, Spain (2004)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Castano, S., Montanelli, S.: Semantic Self-Formation of Communities of Peers. In: Proc. of the ESWC Workshop on Ontologies in Peer-to-Peer Communities, Heraklion, Greece (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvana Castano
    • 1
  • Alfio Ferrara
    • 1
  • Stefano Montanelli
    • 1
  1. 1.DICoUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations