Advertisement

Ontology-based knowledge management in NGAIEs

  • A. KameasEmail author
  • L. Seremeti
Chapter

Abstract

The objective of the knowledge architecture of ATRACO is to enhance communication, as well as to ensure effective knowledge sharing among ATRACO components. It is built around ontologies, ontology managers and agents. Every component of an activity sphere uses an ontology to model its local knowledge and state. These ontologies will certainly be heterogeneous, but they must be used transparently in the context of any sphere. Thus, knowledge management in ATRACO is concerned with the alignment of heterogeneous ontologies, in order to produce the sphere ontology, which encodes the sphere knowledge.

Keywords

Category Theory Domain Ontology Alignment Process Ontology Match Ontology Engineering 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aleksovski, Z., ten Kate,W., van Harmelen, F.: Exploiting the structure of background knowledge used in ontology matching. In: Ontology Matching (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aleksovski, Z., Klein, M., ten Katen, W., van Harmelen, F.: Matching unstructured vocabularies using a background ontology. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW’06), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allemang, D., Hendler, J.: Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist: Effective Modeling in RDFS and OWL. Morgan Kaufmann (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anaya, F., Vazquez, J.: Semantic technologies and techniques for interoperable information. In: 1st International Workshop on Semantic Interoperability for Smart Spaces (SISS), in conjunction with IEEE ISCC2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Awodey, S.: Category Theory. Oxford University Press (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cafezeiro, I., Haeusler, E.: Semantic interoperability via category theory. In: 26th International Conference on Conceptual Modelling - ER Auckland, New Zeland, pp. 197–202 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, H.: An intelligent broker architecture for pervasive context-aware systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, Baltimore (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cruz, I., Antonelli, F., Stroe, C., Keles, U., Maduko, A.: Using agreement maker to align ontologies for oaei 2009 overview, results, and outlook. In: 4th International Semantic Web Conference (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davies, J., Suder, R., Warren, P.: Semantic Web Technologies: Trends and Research in Ontology-based Systems. Wiley (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ehrig, M.: Ontology alignment: bridging the semantic gap. Springer-Verlag New York IncGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Ehrig, M., Sure, Y.: FOAM–Framework for Ontology Alignment and Mapping Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative. In: Integrating Ontologies Workshop Proceedings, p. 72 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ejigu, D., Scuturici, M., Brunie, L.: Coca: a collaborative context-aware service platform for pervasive computing. In: 4th IEEE International Conference on Information Technology, pp. 297–302 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Euzenat, J.: Algebras of ontology alignment relations. In: International Semantic Web Conference, pp. 387–402 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Euzenat, J., Le Bach, T., Barrasa, J., Bouquet, P., De Bo, J., Dieng-Kuntz, R., Ehrig, M., Hauswirth, M., Jarrar, M., Lara, R.: State of the art on ontology alignment. Deliverable 2.2. 3. Tech. rep., IST Knowledge Web NoE (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Euzenat, J., Loup, D., Touzani, M., Valtchev, P.: Ontology alignment with ola. In: 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gomez-Perez, A., Fernandez-Lopez, M., Corcho, O.: Ontological Engineering:With examples from the areas of Knowledge Management, e-Commerce and the Semantic Web. Springer (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gruber, T.: Towards principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer 43, 907–928 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heinroth, T., Kameas, A., Pruvost, G., Seremeti, L., Bellik, Y., Minker, W.: Human-computer interaction in next generation ambient intelligent environments. Intelligent Decision Technologies, special issue on Knowledge-based Environments and Services in Human-Computer Interaction 5(1) (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hitzler, P., Krotzsch, M., Ehrig, M., Sure, Y.: What is ontology merging? - a category theoretic perspective using pushouts. In: 1st International Workshop on Concepts and Ontologies: Theory, Prectice and Applications, pp. 104–107 (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hu, W., Qu, Y., Cheng, G.: Matching large ontologies: A divide-and-conquer approach. Data & Knowledge Engineering 67(1), 140–160 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M.: Information-flow-based ontology mapping. In: Ont the Move to meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, DOA and ODBASE: Confederated International Conferences, pp. 1132–1151. Springer (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M.: Ontology mapping: the state of the art. The knowledge engineering review 18(01), 1–31 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kent, R.: The iff foundation for conceptual knowledge organization. Cataloging and Classification Quarterly 37, 187–203 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kotis, K., Vouros, G., Alonso, J.: Hcome: Tool-supported methodology for collaboratively devising living ontologies. In: Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kutz, O., Mossakowski, T., Codescu, M.: Shapes of alignment: Construction, combination, and computation. In:Workshop on Ontologies: reasoning and modularity,WORM-08, ESWC (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Li, J., Tang, J., Li, Y., Luo, Q.: RiMOM: A dynamic multistrategy ontology alignment framework. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering pp. 1218–1232 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lopez, M., Gomez-Perez, A., Sierra, J., Sierra, A.: Building a chemical ontology using methontology and the ontology design environment. Intelligent Systems and their Applications, IEEE 14(1), 37–46 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nicola, A., Navigli, R., Missikoff, M.: Building an eprocurement ontology with upon methodology. In: The 15th e-Challenge Conference (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Noy, N., McGuinness, D.: Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology. Tech. rep., Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Panagiotopoulos, I., Seremeti, L., Kameas, A., Zorkadis, V.: Proact: An ontology-based model of privacy policies in ambient intelligence environments. In: Proc. 14th Panhellenic Conf. Informatics (PCI), pp. 124–129 (2010)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pierce, B.: Basic Category Theory for Computer Scientists. The MIT Press (1991) 126 A. Kameas and L. SeremetiGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pinto, H., Staab, S., Tempich, C.: Diligent: Towards a fine-grained methodology for distributed loosely-controlled and evolving engineering of ontologies. In: The 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2004)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roman, M., Hess, C., Cerqueira, R., Ranganathan, A., Campbell, R., Nahrstedt, K.: A middleware infrastructure for active spaces. IEEE Pervasive Computing 1(4), 74–83 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sabou, M., d’Aquin, M., Motta, E.: Using the semantic web as background knowledge for ontology mapping. In: Ontology Matching (2006)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Seghrouchni, A., Breitman, K., Sabouret, N., Endler, M., Charif, Y., Briot, J.: Ambient intelligence applications: Introducing the campus framework. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (2008)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Serafini, L., Tamilin, A.: Drago: Distributed reasoning architecture for the semantic web. The Semantic Web: Research and Applications pp. 361–376 (2005)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Seremeti, L., Kameas, A.: A task-based ontology engineering approach for novice ontology depelopers. In: 4th Balkan Conference in Informatics (2009)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Seremeti, L., Kameas, A.: Tools for Ontology Engineering and Management. Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications pp. 131–154 (2010)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Seremeti, L., Kameas, A., Panagiotopoulos, I.: An alignable user profile ontology for ambient intelligence environments. In: Proc. 7th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, IE’11 (2011)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sharman, R., Kishore, R., Ramesh, R.: Ontologies : a handbook of principles, concepts and applications in information systems. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Suarez-Figueroa, M.: Neon development process and ontology life cycle - deliverable d5.3. Tech. rep., NeOn Project (European Commission’s Sixth Framework Programme under grant number IST-2005-027595) (2007). D5.3.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sure, Y.: Methodology, tools and case studies for ontology based knowledge management. Ph.D. thesis, University of Karlsruhe (2003)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Uschold, M., King, M.: Towards a methodology for building ontologies. In: Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing (1995)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wang, X., Dong, J., Chin, C., Hettiarachchi, S., Zhang, D.: Semantic space: An infrastructure for smart spaces. IEEE Pervasive Computing 3(3), 32–39 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zimmermann, A., Krotzsch, M., Euzenat, J., Hitzler, P.: Formalizing ontology alignment and its operations with category theory. In: FOIS’06 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Hellenic Open University and DAISy research unitPatrasHellas

Personalised recommendations