Assessing the Quality of Mappings Between Semantic Resources in Construction
This paper discusses how to map between Semantic Resources (SRs) specifically created to represent knowledge in the Construction Sector and how to measure and assess the quality of such mappings. In particular results from the FUNSIEC project are presented, which investigated the feasibility of establishing semantic mappings among Construction-oriented SRs. The paper points to the next lines of inquiry to extend such work. In FUNSIEC, a ‘Semantic Infrastructure’ was built using SRs that were semantically mapped among them. After quite positive results from FUNSIEC, the obvious questions arose: how good are the mappings? Can we trust them? Can we use them? This paper presents FUNSIEC research (approach, methodology, and results) and the main directions of investigation to support its continuation, which is based on the application of fuzzy logics to qualify the mappings produced.
KeywordsFuzzy Logic Lexical Entry Construction Sector Semantic Mapping Concept Property
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Lima, C., Ferreira da Silva, C., Sousa, P., Pimentão, J.P., Le-Duc, C.: Interoperability among Semantic Resources in Construction: Is it Feasible? In: CIB-W78 Conference, Dresden, Germany (July 2005)Google Scholar
- 4.Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web: A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American (May 2001)Google Scholar
- 6.Fernandez-Lopez, M.: Overview of methodologies for building ontologies. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI 1999 workshop on ontologies and problem-solving methods (KRR5), Stockholm, August 2 (1999)Google Scholar
- 7.Lima, C., Storer, G., Zarli, A., Ferreira da Silva, C.: Towards a framework for managing standards-base semantic e-Resources in the European Construction Industry. In: Construction Research Congress 2005. ASCE, Chicago, EUA(vol. & page numbers) (2005)Google Scholar
- 8.Benerecetti, M., Bouquet, P., Zanobini, S.: Soundness of Semantic Methods for Schema Matching. In: Bouquet, P., Serafini, L. (eds.) Workshop on Meaning Coordination and Negotiation (MCN 2004) at the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference, Working notes, Hiroshima, Japan, November 8 (2004)Google Scholar
- 9.Euzenat, J., Le Bach, T., Barrasa, J., Bouquet, P., De Bo, J., Dieng, R., et al.: D2.2.3: State of the art on ontology alignment – Knowledge Web project, realizing the semantic web, IST-2004-507482 Programme of the Commission of the European Communities (2004)Google Scholar
- 10.Lima, C.P., Fiès, B., Lefrancois, G., Diraby, T.E.: The challenge of using a domain Ontology in KM solutions: the e-COGNOS experience. In: 10TH ISPE 2003, International Conference on Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications, Funchal, Portugal, pp. 771–778 (2003)Google Scholar
- 12.Noy, N., Musen, M.: Anchor-PROMPT: Using non-local context for semantic matching. In: Proc. IJCAI 2001 workshop on ontology and information sharing, Seattle (WA US), pp. 63–70 (2001), http://sunsite.informatik.rwthaachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-47/
- 13.Xiaomeng, S.: Improving Semantic Interoperability through Analysis of Model Extension. In: Proc. of CAiSE 2003 Doctoral Consortium Velden, Austria (2003), http://www.vf-utwente.nl/~xsu/paper/docConstCRD.pdg