Formalizing Mappings for OWL Spatiotemporal Ontologies

  • Nacéra Bennacer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4080)


Ontology mappings provide a common layer which allows distributed applications to share and to exchange semantic information. Providing mechanized ways for mapping ontologies is a challenging issue and main problems to be faced are related to structural and semantic heterogeneity. The complexity of these problems increases in the presence of spatiotemporal information such as geometry and topological intrinsic characteristics. Our proposal is intended for spatiotemporal ontologies and focuses on providing an integrated access to information sources using local ontologies. Our approach is set to build a system that guides users to derive meaningful mappings and to reason about them. To achieve this we use a description logic extended to spatiotemporal concrete domain. The ontology of each source is normalized in a common extended Ontology Web Language (OWL) which enables a natural correspondence with the spatiotemporal description logic formalism.


Description Logic Topological Relation Ontology Mapping Local Ontology Ontology Source 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rahm, A., Bernstein, A.: A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. The Very Large Database Journal 10(4), 334–350 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M.: Ontology mapping: the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(1), 1–31 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Noy, N.F., Klein, M.: Ontology evolution: not the same as schema evolution. Knowledge and Information Systems (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haarslev, V., Lutz, C., Möller, R.: A Description Logic with Concrete Domains and a Role-forming Predicate Operator. Journal of Logic and Computation 9(3) (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baader, F., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Description logics as ontology languages for the semantic web. LNCS (LNAI). Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohn, A.G., Hazarika, S.M.: Qualitative Spatial Representation and Reasoning: an Overview. Fundamenta Informaticae 46(1-2), 1–29 (2001)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baader, F., Hanschke, P.: A scheme for integrating concrete domains into concept languages. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 452–457 (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lutz, C.: Description Logics with Concrete Domains - A Survey. In: Advances in Modal Logics, vol. 4. King’s College Publications (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noy, N., Musen, M.: PROMPT: algorithm and tool for automated ontology merging and alignment. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.: PROMPTDIFF: a fixed-point algorithm for comparing ontology versions. In: Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mitra, P., Wiederhold, G.: Resolving terminological heterogeneity in ontologies. In: Proceedings of the ECAI workshop on Ontologies and Semantic Interoperability (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doan, A., Madhavan, J., Domingos, P., Halevy, A.: Learning to map between ontologies on the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the 11th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stumme, G., Maedche, A.: Ontology merging for federated ontologies on the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop for Foundations of Models for Information Integration (FMII) (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maedche, A., Motik, B., Silva, N., Volz, R.: MAFRA – A MApping FRAmework for Distributed Ontologies. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Benjamins, V.R. (eds.) EKAW 2002. LNCS, vol. 2473, p. 235. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mena, E., Kashyap, V., Illarramendi, A., Sheth, A.: Domain Specific Ontologies for Semantic Information Brokering on the Global Information Infrastructure. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS 1998) (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: A Framework for Ontology Integration. In: Proceedings of International Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS 2001), pp. 301–316 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Madhavan, J., Bernstein, P.A., Domingos, P., Halevy, A.: Representing and reasoning about mappings between domain models. In: Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2002) (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nacéra Bennacer
    • 1
  1. 1.Supélec, Ecole Supérieure d’électricitéGif-Sur-YvetteFrance

Personalised recommendations