A Tool for Evaluating Ontology Alignment Strategies

  • Patrick Lambrix
  • He Tan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4380)

Abstract

Ontologies are an important technology for the Semantic Web. In different areas ontologies have already been developed and many of these ontologies contain overlapping information. Often we would therefore want to be able to use multiple ontologies. To obtain good results, we need to find the relationships between terms in the different ontologies, i.e. we need to align them. Currently, there exist a number of systems that support users in aligning ontologies, but not many comparative evaluations have been performed and there exists little support to perform such evaluations. However, the study of the properties, the evaluation and comparison of the alignment strategies and their combinations, would give us valuable insight in how the strategies could be used in the best way. In this paper we propose the KitAMO framework for comparative evaluation of ontology alignment strategies and their combinations and present our current implementation. We evaluate the implementation with respect to performance. We also illustrate how the system can be used to evaluate and compare alignment strategies and their combinations in terms of performance and quality of the proposed alignments. Further, we show how the results can be analyzed to obtain deeper insights into the properties of the strategies.

Keywords

ontologies alignment evaluation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ashpole, B.:Ontology translation protocol (ontrapro). In: Proceedings of the Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems Workshop (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bard, J.L., Kaufman, M.H., Dubreuil, C., Brune, R.M., Burger, A., Baldock, R.A., Davidson, D.R.: An internet-accessible database of mouse developmental anatomy based on a systematic nomenclature. Mechanisms of Development 74, 111–120 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, B., Tan, H., Lambrix, P.: Structure-based filtering for ontology alignment. In: Proceedings of the IEEE WETICE Workshop on Semantic Technologies in Collaborative Applications. (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Collins, F., Green, E., Guttmacher, A., Guyer, M.: A vision for the future of genomics research. Nature 422, 835–847 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doan, A., Madhavan, J., Domingos, P., Halevy, A.: Ontology matching: A machine learning approach. In: Staab, Studer, (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies in Information Systems, pp. 397–416. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ehrig, M., Haase, P., Stojanovic, N., Hefke, M.: Similarity for Ontologies - A Comprehensive Framework. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Euzenat, J.: An API for Ontology alignment (version 1.3) (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Euzenat, J., Loup, D., Touzani, D., Valtchev, D.: Ontology Alignment with OLA. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Evaluation of Ontology-based Tools (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Euzenat, J., Stuckenschmidt, H., Yatskevich, M.: Introduction to the Ontology Alignment Evaluation 2005. In: Proceedings of the K-CAP 2005 Workshop on Integrating Ontologies (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Euzenat, J.: Introduction to the EON ontology alignment context. Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on the Evaluation of Ontology-based Tools (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Euzenat, J: An API for ontology alignment. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 698–712. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    http, F.: //www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/meh/foam/Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    The Gene Ontology Consortium Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nature Genetics, 25(1):25–29 (2000) http://www.geneontology.org/Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gómez-Pérez, A.: Ontological Engineering: A state of the Art. Expert Update 2(3), 33–43 (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P., Yatskevich, M.: S-Match: an algorithm and an implementation of semantic matching. In: Bussler, C.J., Davies, J., Fensel, D., Studer, R. (eds.) ESWS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3053, pp. 61–75. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hayamizu TF, Mangan M, Corradi JP, Kadin JA, Ringwald M (2005) The Adult Mouse Anatomical Dictionary: a tool for annotating and integrating data. Genome Biology, 6(3):R29Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    I3CON (2004) http://www.atl.lmco.com/projects/ontology/i3con.htmlGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jena, A.: Semantic Web Framework for Java. http://jena.sourceforge.net/Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M.: IF-Map: an ontology mapping method based on information flow theory. In: Spaccapietra, S., March, S., Aberer, K. (eds.) Journal on Data Semantics I. LNCS, vol. 2800, pp. 98–127. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    KnowledgeWeb Consortium (2004) Deliverable 2.2.4 (Specification of a methodology, general criteria, and benchmark suites for benchmarking ontology tools). http://knowledgeweb.semanticweb.org/Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kotis, K., Vouros, G.A.: The HCONE Approach to Ontology Merging. In: Bussler, C.J., Davies, J., Fensel, D., Studer, R. (eds.) ESWS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3053, pp. 137–151. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lambrix, P.: Ontologies in Bioinformatics and Systems Biology. In: Azuaje, F., Azuaje, F. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence Methods and Tools for Systems Biology, vol. 8, pp. 129–146. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lambrix, P., Edberg, A.: Evaluation of ontology merging tools in bioinformatics. Proceedings of the Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 8, 589–600 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lambrix, P., Tan, H.: Merging DAML+OIL Ontologies. In: Barzdins, Caplinskas, (eds.) Databases and Information Systems, pp. 249–258. IOS Press, Trento, Italy (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lambrix, P., Tan, H.: A Framework for Aligning Ontologies. In: Fages, F., Soliman, S. (eds.) PPSWR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3703, pp. 17–31. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lambrix, P., Tan, H.: SAMBO - A System for Aligning and Merging Biomedical Ontologies. Journal of Web Semantics, special issue on Semantic Web for the Life Sciences (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Le, B.T., Dieng-Kuntz, R., Gandon, F.: On ontology matching problem (for building a corporate semantic web in a multi-communities organization). Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Medical Subject Headings. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    McGuinness, D., Fikes, R., Rice, J., Wilder, S.: An Environment for Merging and Testing Large Ontologies. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 483-493 (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mitra, P., Wiederhold, G.: (2002) Resolving terminological heterogeneity in ontologies. In: Proceedings of the ECAI Workshop on Ontologies and Semantic InteroperabilityGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.: PROMPT: Algorithm and Tool for Automated Ontology Merging and Alignment. In: Proceedings of Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 450–455 (2000)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.: Anchor-PROMPT: Using Non-Local Context for Semantic Matching. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing, pp. 63–70 (2001)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    OBO - Open Biomedical Ontologies. http://obo.sourceforge.net/Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    OntoWeb Consortium Deliverables 1.3 (A survey on ontology tools) and 1.4 (A survey on methodologies for developing, maintaining, evaluating and reengineering ontologies). (2002) http://www.ontoweb.orgGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Prasad, S., Peng, Y., Finin, T.: (2002) Using Explicit Information To Map Between Two Ontologies, In: Proceedings of the AAMAS Workshop on Ontologies in Agent SystemsGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    REWERSE. Backofen, R., Badea, M., Burger, A., Fages, F., Lambrix, P., Nutt, W., Schroeder, M., Soliman, S., Will, S.: State-of-the-art in Bioinformatics. REWERSE Deliverable A2-D1. (2004)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    REWERSE. Backofen, R., Badea, R., Barahona, M., Burger, P., Dawelbait, A., Doms, G., Fages, A., Hotaran, F., Jakonienė, A., Krippahl, V., Lambrix, L., McLeod, P., Möller, K., Nutt, S., Olsson, W., Schroeder, B., Soliman, M., Tan, S., Tilivea, H., Will, D., Usage, S.: of bioinformatics tools and identification of information sources. REWERSE Deliverable A2-D2. (2005)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Stevens, R., Goble, C., Bechhofer, S.: Ontology-based knowledge representation for bioinformatics. Briefings in Bioinformatics 1(4), 398–414 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stumme, G., Mädche, A.: FCA-Merge: Bottom-up merging of ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 225-230. (2001)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Su, X.M., Hakkarainen, S., Brasethvik, T.: Semantic enrichment for improving systems interoperability. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp 1634–1641 (2004)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Takai-Igarashi, T., Nadaoka, Y., Kaminuma, T.: A Database for Cell Signaling Networks. Journal of Computational Biology 5(4), 747–754 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tan, H., Jakonienė, V., Lambrix, P., Aberg, J., Shahmehri, S.: Alignment of biomedical ontologies using life science literature. In: Bremer, E.G., Hakenberg, J., Han, E.-H.(S.), Berrar, D., Dubitzky, W. (eds.) KDLL 2006. LNBI (LNCS), vol. 3886, pp. 1–17. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Takai-Igarashi, T., Takagi, T.: SIGNAL-ONTOLOGY: Ontology for Cell Signalling. Genome Informatics 11, 440–441 (2000)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    http, U.: //www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/about_umls.htmlGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    WordNet. http://wordnet.princeton.edu/Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Lambrix
    • 1
  • He Tan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköpings universitetSweden

Personalised recommendations