Advertisement

Methodological Guidelines for Matching Ontologies

  • Jérôme EuzenatEmail author
  • Chan Le Duc
Chapter

Abstract

Finding alignments between ontologies is a very important operation for ontology engineering. It allows for establishing links between ontologies, either to integrate them in an application or to relate developed ontologies to context. It is even more critical for networked ontologies. Incorrect alignments may lead to unwanted consequences throughout the whole network, and incomplete alignments may fail to provide the expected consequences. Yet, there is no well-established methodology available for matching ontologies. We propose methodological guidelines that build on previously disconnected results and experiences.

Keywords

Design Time Methodological Guideline Ontology Match Ontology Engineering Ontology Alignment 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Pavel Shvaiko for his comments on a previous version of this chapter. This work has been partly supported by the European Commission IST project NeOn (IST-2006-027595).

References

  1. Aumüller D, Do H-H, Maßmann S, Rahm E (2005) Schema and ontology matching with COMA++. In: Proceedings of the 24th international conference on management of data (SIGMOD), software demonstration, Baltimore, MD, USA, pp 906–908Google Scholar
  2. Corcho Ó (2005) A layered declarative approach to ontology translation with knowledge preservation. Ios Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  3. Corcho Ó, Gómez-Pérez A (2007) ODEDialect: a set of declarative languages for implementing ontology translation systems. J Univers Comput Sci 13(12):1805–1834Google Scholar
  4. d’Aquin M, Motta E (2011) Watson, more than a semantic web search engine. Semant Web J 2:55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. d’Aquin M, Euzenat J, Le Duc C, Lewen H (2009) Sharing and reusing aligned ontologies with cupboard. In: Proceedings of 5th ACM KCap poster session, Redondo Beach, CA, USA, pp 179–180. URL ftp://ftp.inrialpes.fr/pub/exmo/publications/daquin2009a.pdf
  6. David J, Guillet F, Briand H (2007) Association rule ontology matching approach. Int J Semant Web Inf Syst 3(2):27–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. David J, Euzenat J, Scharffe F, Trojahn dos Santos C (2011) The Alignment API 4.0. Semant Web J 2(1):3–10. URL http://iospress.metapress.com/content/4164891n48p5v826/
  8. Ehrig M (2007) Semantic web and beyond: computing for human experience. In: Ontology alignment: bridging the semantic gap. Springer, New York. Acitrezza, Italy, ISBN 0–387–32805-XGoogle Scholar
  9. El Jerroudi Z, Ziegler J (2008) iMERGE: interactive ontology merging. In: Proceedings of the 16th EKAW demonstration track, Acitrezza, Italy, pp 52–56Google Scholar
  10. Euzenat J (2004) An API for ontology alignment. In: Proceedings of 3rd international semantic web conference (ISWC), Hiroshima, Japan, Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3298. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 698–712Google Scholar
  11. Euzenat J, Shvaiko P (2007) Ontology matching. Springer, HeidelbergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Euzenat J, Ehrig M, Jentzsch A, Mochol M, Shvaiko P (2006) Case-based recommendation of matching tools and techniques. Deliverable 1.2.2.2.1, knowledge web. URL ftp://ftp.inrialpes.fr/pub/exmo/reports/kweb-126.pdf
  13. Euzenat J, Mocan A, Scharffe F (2008) Ontology alignment: an ontology management perspective. In: Hepp M, De Leenheer P, De Moor A, Sure Y (eds) Ontology management: semantic web, semantic web services, and business applications. Springer, New York, pp 177–206Google Scholar
  14. Hartmann J, Palma R, Sure Y, Haase P, Suárez-Figueroa MC, Haase P, Gómez-Pérez A, Studer R (2005) Ontology metadata vocabulary and applications. In: Meersman R, Tari Z, Herrero P et al (eds) Proceedings of the International conference on ontologies, databases and applications of semantics (ODBASE-2005), Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3762. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 906–915Google Scholar
  15. Herrero Cárcel G, Pariente T (2009) Revision of ontologies for semantic nomenclature: pharmaceutical networked ontologies. Deliverable 8.3.2, NeOn projectGoogle Scholar
  16. Horrocks I, Patel-Schneider P, van Harmelen F (2003) From SHIQ and RDFto OWL: the making of a web ontology language. J Web Semant 1(1):7–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huza M, Harzallah M, Trichet F (2006) OntoMas: a tutoring system dedicated to ontology matching. In: Proceedings of the 1st ISWC international workshop on ontology matching (OM), Athens, GA, USA, pp 228–323Google Scholar
  18. Kerrigan M, Mocan A, Tanler M, Fensel D (2007) The web service modeling toolkit – an integrated development environment for semantic web services. In: Proceedings of the 4th European semantic web conference (ESWC) system description track, Innsbruck, Austria, pp 303–317Google Scholar
  19. Meilicke C, Stuckenschmidt H (2009) An efficient method for computing alignment diagnoses. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on web reasoning and rule systems (RR-2009), Chantilly, VA, USA, pp 182–196Google Scholar
  20. Melnik S, Rahm E, Bernstein P (2003) Rondo: a programming platform for model management. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on management of data (SIGMOD), San Diego, CA, USA, pp 193–204Google Scholar
  21. Miles A, Bechhofer S (2009) SKOS simple knowledge organization system: reference. Recommendation, W3C. URL http://www.w3.org/TR/skosreference
  22. Mocan A, Cimpian E, Kerrigan M (2006) Formal model for ontology mapping creation. In: Proceedings of the 5th international semantic web conference (ISWC), Athens, GA, USA, Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4273. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 459–472Google Scholar
  23. Mochol M (2009) The methodology for finding suitable ontology matching approaches. PhD thesis, Freie Universität Berlin. URL http://www.diss.fuberlin.de/diss/receive/FUDISS_thesis_000000008124
  24. Mork Peter, Seligman Len, Rosenthal Arnon, Korb Joel, Wolf Chris (2008) The harmony integration workbench. J Data Semant XI:65–93Google Scholar
  25. Noy N, Musen M (2003) The PROMPT suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 59(6):983–1024. ISSN: 1071–5819. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.08.002
  26. Noy N, Griffith N, Musen M (2008) Collecting community-based mappings in an ontology repository. In: Proceedings of the 7th international semantic web conference (ISWC), Karlsruhe, Germany, pp 371–386Google Scholar
  27. Patrick Lambrix, Qiang Liu (2009) Using partial reference alignments to align ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 6th European semantic web conference (ESWC 2009), Heraklion, Germany, Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5554. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 188–202Google Scholar
  28. Roussey C, Corcho Ó, Vilches Blázquez LM (2009) A catalogue of owl ontology antipatterns. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on knowledge capture (KCap-2009), Redondo Beach, CA, USA, pp 205–206Google Scholar
  29. Sayyadian M, Lee Y, Doan A-H, Rosenthal A (2005) Tuning schema matching software using synthetic scenarios. In: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on very large data bases (VLDB), Trondheim, Norway, pp 994–1005Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INRIA & LIGMontbonnot Saint-MartinFrance
  2. 2.Université Paris 8Saint-DenisFrance

Personalised recommendations