Requirements for and Evaluation of User Support for Large-Scale Ontology Alignment

  • Valentina Ivanova
  • Patrick Lambrix
  • Johan Åberg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9088)


Currently one of the challenges for the ontology alignment community is the user involvement in the alignment process. At the same time, the focus of the community has shifted towards large-scale matching which introduces an additional dimension to this issue. This paper aims to provide a set of requirements that foster the user involvement for large-scale ontology alignment tasks. Further, we present and discuss the results of a literature study for 7 ontology alignments systems as well as a heuristic evaluation and an observational user study for 3 ontology alignment systems to reveal the coverage of the requirements in the systems and the support for the requirements in the user interfaces.


User Involvement Alignment Process Heuristic Evaluation Alignment System Ontology Engineering 
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.



We thank the National Graduate School in Computer Science (CUGS) and the Swedish e-Science Research Centre (SeRC) for financial support.


  1. 1.
    Aumüller, D., Do, H.H., Maßmann, S., Rahm, E.: Schema and ontology matching with COMA++. In: SIGMOD, pp. 906–908 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brooke, J.: SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland, I.L. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp. 189–194. Taylor and Francis, London (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brooke, J.: SUS: a retrospective. J. Usability Stud. 8(2), 29–40 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cruz, I.F., Loprete, F., Palmonari, M., Stroe, C., Taheri, A.: Pay-As-You-Go multi-user feedback model for ontology matching. In: Janowicz, K., Schlobach, S., Lambrix, P., Hyvönen, E. (eds.) EKAW 2014. LNCS, vol. 8876, pp. 80–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cruz, I.F., Stroe, C., Palmonari, M.: Interactive user feedback in ontology matching using signature vectors. In: ICDE, pp. 1321–1324 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Do, H.H.: Schema matching and mapping-based data integration. Ph.D. Thesis (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: User involvement. In: Ontology Matching, pp. 353–375. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Falconer, S.M., Storey, M.-A.: A cognitive support framework for ontology mapping. In: Aberer, K., et al. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 114–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fu, B., Noy, N.F., Storey, M.-A.: Indented tree or graph? A usability study of ontology visualization techniques in the context of class mapping evaluation. In: Alani, H., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2013, Part I. LNCS, vol. 8218, pp. 117–134. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Granitzer, M., Sabol, V., Onn, K.W., et al.: Ontology alignment-a survey with focus on visually supported semi-automatic techniques. Future Internet 2, 238–258 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ivanova, V., Bergman, J.L., Hammerling, U., Lambrix, P.: Debugging taxonomies and their alignments: the ToxOntology-MeSH use case. In: WoDOOM, pp. 25–36 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ivanova, V., Lambrix, P., Åberg, J.: Extended version of this paper.
  13. 13.
    Jiménez-Ruiz, E., Grau, B.C., Zhou, Y., Horrocks, I.: Large-scale interactive ontology matching: algorithms and implementation. In: ECAI, pp. 444–449 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jiménez-Ruiz, E., Meilicke, C., Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I.: Evaluating mapping repair systems with large biomedical ontologies. In: Description Logics, pp. 246–257 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kirsten, T., Gross, A., et al.: GOMMA: a component-based infrastructure for managing and analyzing life science ontologies and their evolution. J. Biomed. Semant. 2, 6 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lambrix, P., Ivanova, V.: A unified approach for debugging is-a structure and mappings in networked taxonomies. J. Biomed. Semant. 4, 10 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lambrix, P., Kaliyaperumal, R.: A session-based approach for aligning large ontologies. In: Cimiano, P., Corcho, O., Presutti, V., Hollink, L., Rudolph, S. (eds.) ESWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7882, pp. 46–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lambrix, P., Tan, H.: SAMBO - a system for aligning and merging biomedical ontologies. J. Web Semant. 4(3), 196–206 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lanzenberger, M., Sampson, J., Rester, M.: Ontology visualization: Tools and techniques for visual representation of semi-structured meta-data. J. UCS 16(7), 1036–1054 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lanzenberger, M., Sampson, J., Rester, M., Naudet, Y., Latour, T.: Visual ontology alignment for knowledge sharing and reuse. J. Knowl. Manag. 12(6), 102–120 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Massmann, S., Raunich, S., Aumüller, D., Arnold, P., Rahm, E.: Evolution of the COMA match system. In: OM, pp. 49–60 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1993) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: Algorithm and tool for automated ontology merging and alignment. In: AAAI, pp. 450–455 (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Otero-Cerdeira, L., Rodríguez-Martínez, F.J., Gómez-Rodríguez, A.: Ontology matching: a literature review. Expert Syst. Appl. 42(2), 949–971 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Paulheim, H., Hertling, S., Ritze, D.: Towards evaluating interactive ontology matching tools. In: Cimiano, P., Corcho, O., Presutti, V., Hollink, L., Rudolph, S. (eds.) ESWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7882, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Payne, T.R., Tamma, V.: A dialectical approach to selectively reusing ontological correspondences. In: Janowicz, K., Schlobach, S., Lambrix, P., Hyvönen, E. (eds.) EKAW 2014. LNCS, vol. 8876, pp. 397–412. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rahm, E.: Towards large-scale schema and ontology matching. In: Bellahsene, Z., et al. (eds.) Schema Matching and Mapping, pp. 3–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shi, F., Li, J., Tang, J., Xie, G., Li, H.: Actively learning ontology matching via user interaction. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 585–600. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: Ontology matching: state of the art and future challenges. Knowl. Data Eng. 25(1), 158–176 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentina Ivanova
    • 1
    • 2
  • Patrick Lambrix
    • 1
    • 2
  • Johan Åberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information ScienceLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden
  2. 2.The Swedish e-Science Research CentreLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations