Benchmarking Matching Applications on the Semantic Web

  • Alfio Ferrara
  • Stefano Montanelli
  • Jan Noessner
  • Heiner Stuckenschmidt
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6644)

Abstract

The evaluation of matching applications is becoming a major issue in the semantic web and it requires a suitable methodological approach as well as appropriate benchmarks. In particular, in order to evaluate a matching application under different experimental conditions, it is crucial to provide a test dataset characterized by a controlled variety of different heterogeneities among data that rarely occurs in real data repositories. In this paper, we propose SWING (Semantic Web INstance Generation), a disciplined approach to the semi-automatic generation of benchmarks to be used for the evaluation of matching applications.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexe, B., Tan, W.C., Velegrakis, Y.: STBenchmark: towards a Benchmark for Mapping Systems. Proc. of the VLDB Endowment 1(1), 230–244 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bollacker, K., Evans, C., Paritosh, P., Sturge, T., Taylor, J.: Freebase: a Collaboratively Created Graph Database for Structuring Human Knowledge. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD Int. Conference on Management of Data, pp. 1247–1250 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bressan, S., Li Lee, M., Guang Li, Y., Lacroix, Z., Nambiar, U.: The XOO7 Benchmark. In: Proc. of the 1st VLDB Workshop on Efficiency and Effectiveness of XML Tools, and Techniques, EEXTT 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Montanelli, S.: Matching Ontologies in Open Networked Systems: Techniques and Applications. Journal on Data Semantics V (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duchateau, F., Bellahse, Z., Hunt, E.: XBenchMatch: a Benchmark for XML Schema Matching Tools. In: Proc. of the 33rd Int. Conference on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Euzenat, J., Ferrara, A., Hollink, L., et al.: Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2009. In: Proc. of the 4th Int. Workshop on Ontology Matching, OM 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ferrara, A., Lorusso, D., Montanelli, S., Varese, G.: Towards a Benchmark for Instance Matching. In: Proc. of the ISWC Int. Workshop on Ontology Matching, OM 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guo, Y., Pan, Z., Heflin, J.: An Evaluation of Knowledge Base Systems for Large OWL Datasets. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 274–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Koepcke, H., Thor, A., Rahm, E.: Evaluation of Entity Resolution Approaches on Real-World Match Problems. In: Proc. of the 36th Int. Conference on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Noessner, J., Niepert, M., Meilicke, C., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Leveraging Terminological Structure for Object Reconciliation. In: Aroyo, L., Antoniou, G., Hyvönen, E., ten Teije, A., Stuckenschmidt, H., Cabral, L., Tudorache, T. (eds.) ESWC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6089, pp. 334–348. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Perry, M.: TOntoGen: A Synthetic Data Set Generator for Semantic Web Applications. AIS SIGSEMIS Bulletin 2(2), 46–48 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yatskevich, M., Giunchiglia, F., Avesani, P.: A Large Scale Dataset for the Evaluation of Matching Systems. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfio Ferrara
    • 1
  • Stefano Montanelli
    • 1
  • Jan Noessner
    • 2
  • Heiner Stuckenschmidt
    • 2
  1. 1.Università degli Studi di MilanoMilanoItaly
  2. 2.KR & KM Research GroupUniversity of Mannheim, B6 26MannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations