Mapping System for Merging Ontologies

Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 488)


In this paper we present a new mapping system for merging OWL ontologies. This work is situated in the general context of stored information heterogeneity in a decisional system such as data, metadata and knowledge, for cohabitation and reconciliation of these information by mediation. Our Mapping approach focuses on computing semantic similarity between concepts of ontologies to merge, it is based on a weighted combination of computing similarity methods, we use syntactic, lexical, structural, and semantic technics. The proposed mapping process makes use of several types of information in a manner that increases the mapping accuracy.


Mapping ontologies similarity measure semantic similarity structural similarity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Cyganiak, R., Ives, Z.G.: DBpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In: Aberer, K., et al. (eds.) ISWC/ASWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 722–735. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Montanelli, S.: Matching ontologies in open networked systems: Techniques and applications. In: Spaccapietra, S., Atzeni, P., Chu, W.W., Catarci, T., Sycara, K. (eds.) Journal on Data Semantics V. LNCS, vol. 3870, pp. 25–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Elbyed, A.: ROMIE, une approche d’alignement d’ontologies à base d’instances. Doctoral thesis. National Institute of telecommunications (2009),
  4. 4.
    Euzenat, J., Valtchev, P.: Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-lite. In: Proc. 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), Valencia, ES, pp. 333–337 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jerome, E., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fergnani, A.: Ontology dynamics for Semantic Web: the MOMIS approach (2002),
  7. 7.
    Gangemi, A., Steve, G., Giacomelli, F.: ONIONS: An Ontological Methodology for Taxonomic Knowledge Integration. In: ECAI 1996 Workshop on Ontological Engineering, Budapest (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P.: Semantic matching. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(3), 265–280 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gotoh, O.: An improved algorithm for matching biological sequences. Journal of Molecular Biology 162(3), 705–708 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jaro, M.A.: Advances in record linking methodology as applied to the 1985 census of Tampa Florida. Journal of the American Statistical Society 84(406), 414–420 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jiang, J., Conrath, D.: Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. In: Proceedings on International Conference on Research in Computational Linguistics, Taiwan (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ahmed, K.A.: A Multi-Matching Technique for Combining Similarity Measures in Ontology Integration, A Thesis, Concordia, University,Montréal, Québec, Canada (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levenshtein, V.: Binary Codes Capable of Correcting Deletions, Insertions and Reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady 10, 707 (1966)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, Y., Zhong, Q., Li, J., Tang, J.: Results of ontology alignment with RiMOM. In: Proc. International workshop on Ontology Matching (OM), Busan, Korea, November 11, pp. 227–235 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McGuinness, D.L., Fikes, R., Rice, J., Wilder, S.: An environment for merging and testing large ontologies. In: Proceeding of KR, pp. 483–493 (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Monge, A., Elkan, C.: The field-matching problem: algorithm and applications. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 267–270 (1996)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: The prompt suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 59(6), 983–1024 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initative, Benchmarks results (2010),
  19. 19.
    Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative Test5 library (2011),
  20. 20.
    Rada, R., Mili, H., Bicknel, E., Blettner, M.: Development and application of a metric on semantic nets. IEEE Transaction on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 19(1), 17–30 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Resnik, P.: Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. Journal of 2. Artificial Intelligence Research 11, 95–130 (1999)MATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smith, T., Waterman, M.: Identification of common molecular subsequences. Journal of Molecular Biology 147, 195–197 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stumme, G., Maedche, A.: FCA-merge: bottom-up merging of ontologies. In: 17th IJCAI, Seattle (WA US), pp. 225–230 (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Suchanek, F., Kasneci, G., Weikum, G.Y.: A Large Ontology from Wikipedia and WordNet. Elsevier Journal of Web Semantics 6(3), 203–217 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Umer, Q., Mundy, D.: Semantically Intelligent Semi-Automated Ontology Integration. In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, WCE 2012, London, U.K., July 4 - 6, vol. II (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Winkler, W.E.: The State of Record Linkage and Current Research Problems. Rapport interne, Statistical Research Division, U.S. Census Bureau (1999)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wu, Z., Palmer, M.: Verb Semantics and Lexical Selection. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meetings of the Associations for Computational Linguistics, pp. 133–138 (1994)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zahaf, A., Malki, M., Fellah, A.: Alignement des ontologies: utilisation de WordNet et une nouvelle mesure structurelle. In: Proceeding CORIA, pp. 401–408 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LRDSI LaboratoryBlida UniversityBlidaAlgeria
  2. 2.ERIC LaboratoryLyon 2 UniversityLyonFrance
  3. 3.LMCS LaboratoryESIOued-SmarAlgeria

Personalised recommendations