Advertisement

Towards Semantic Social Networks

  • Jason J. Jung
  • Jérôme Euzenat
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4519)

Abstract

Computer manipulated social networks are usually built from the explicit assertion by users that they have some relation with other users or by the implicit evidence of such relations (e.g., co-authoring). However, since the goal of social network analysis is to help users to take advantage of these networks, it would be convenient to take more information into account. We introduce a three-layered model which involves the network between people (social network), the network between the ontologies they use (ontology network) and a network between concepts occurring in these ontologies. We explain how relationships in one network can be extracted from relationships in another one based on analysis techniques relying on this network specificity. For instance, similarity in the ontology network can be extracted from a similarity measure on the concept network. We illustrate the use of these tools for the emergence of consensus ontologies in the context of semantic peer-to-peer systems.

Keywords

Social Network Social Network Analysis Distance Network Concept Network Ontology Match 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Wasserman, S., Faust, K.: Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kleinberg, J.M.: Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. J. of the ACM 46(5), 604–632 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mika, P.: Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 522–536. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alani, H., Brewster, C.: Ontology ranking based on the analysis of concept structures. In: Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Knowledge capture (K-CAP ’05), pp. 51–58. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broekstra, J., Ehrig, M., Haase, P., van Harmelen, F., Menken, M., Mika, P., Schnizler, B., Siebes, R.: Bibster - a semantics-based bibliographic peer-to-peer system. In: Proc. of the 2nd Work. on Semantics in Peer-to-Peer and Grid Computing (SemPGRID ’04), New York, USA, pp. 3–22 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Euzenat, J.: Alignment infrastructure for ontology mediation and other applications. In: Proc. of the 1st Int. Work. on Mediation in Semantic Web Services, Amsterdam, NL, pp. 81–95 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freeman, L.: Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1, 215–239 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fortunato, S., Latora, V., Marchiori, M.: Method to find community structures based on information centrality. Physical review E 70, 056104 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: A survey of schema-based matching approaches. J. on data semantics 4, 146–171 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Euzenat, J., Valtchev, P.: Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-Lite. In: de Mántaras, R.L., Saitta, L. (eds.) Proc. of the 16th Euro. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 333–337. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haase, P., Siebes, R., van Harmelen, F.: Peer selection in peer-to-peer networks with semantic topologies. In: Bouzeghoub, M., Goble, C.A., Kashyap, V., Spaccapietra, S. (eds.) ICSNW 2004. LNCS, vol. 3226, pp. 108–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Valencia, E., Sansonnet, J.P.: Building semantic channels between heterogeneous agents with topological tools. In: Proc. of the 2nd Euro. Work. on Multi-Agent Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jung, J.J.: Collaborative web browsing based on semantic extraction of user interests with bookmarks. J. of Universal Computer Science 11(2), 213–228 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alani, H., Dasmahapatra, S., O’Hara, K., Shadbolt, N.: Identifying communities of practice through ontology network analysis. IEEE Intelligent Systems 18(2), 18–25 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Staab, S., Domingos, P., Mika, P., Golbeck, J., Ding, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A., Nowak, A., Vallacher, R.R.: Social networks applied. IEEE Intelligent Systems 20(1), 80–93 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hoser, B., Hotho, A., Jäschke, R., Schmitz, C., Stumme, G.: Semantic network analysis of ontologies. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 514–529. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jung, J.J., Ha, I., Jo, G.-S.: BlogGrid: Towards an efficient information pushing service on blogspace. In: Zhuge, H., Fox, G.C. (eds.) GCC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3795, pp. 178–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason J. Jung
    • 1
  • Jérôme Euzenat
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information Engineering, Inha University, Incheon,402-751Republic of Korea
  2. 2.INRIA Rhône-Alpes & LIG, MontbonnotFrance

Personalised recommendations