Advertisement

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a solution to the problem of merging ontologies when instances associated to two source ontologies are available. The solution we propose is based on Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) and considers that ontologies are formalized in expressive Description Logics. Our approach creates a merged ontology which captures the knowledge of the two source ontologies. Contributions of this work are (i) enabling the creation of concepts not originally in the source ontologies, (ii) providing a definition to these concepts in terms of elements of both ontologies and (iii) optimizing the merged ontology. We have studied our approach in the context of spatial information, a domain which exploits many existing ontologies represented with Description Logics.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, New York (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baader, F., Ganter, B., Sertkaya, B., Sattler, U.: Completing Description Logic Knowledge Bases Using Formal Concept Analysis. In: Proc. IJCAI 2007, pp. 230–235 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Curé, O., Jeansoulin, R.: An FCA-based Solution for Ontology Mediation. In: Proc. CIKM workshops (2008) (to appear)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davey, B., Priestley, H.: Introduction to lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, New York (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dong, X., Halevy, A., Madhavan, J.: Reference reconciliation in complex information spaces. In: Proc. SIGMOD 2005, pp. 85–96 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dou, D., McDermott, D., Qi, P.: Ontology translation by ontology merging and automated reasoning. In: Proc. EKAW 2002, pp. 3–18 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehrig, M.: Ontology Alignment: Bridging the Semantic Gap. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ganter, B., Wille, R.: Formal Concept Analysis: mathematical foundations. Springer, New York (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M.: Ontology mapping: the state of the art. Knowledge Engineering Review 18(1), 1–31 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kanellakis, P.C.: Elements of relational database theory. In: Handbook of theoretical computer science. Formal models and semantics, vol. B, pp. 1073–1156. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Motik, B., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Bridging the gap between OWL and relational databases. In: Proc. WWW 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noy, N., Musen, M.: PROMPT: Algorithm and tool for automated ontology merging and alignment. In: Proc. AAAI 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Poggi, A., Lembo, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Linking Data to Ontologies. In: Spaccapietra, S. (ed.) Journal on Data Semantics X. LNCS, vol. 4900, pp. 133–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stumme, G., Maedche, A.: FCA-MERGE: Bottom-Up Merging of Ontologies. In: Proc. IJCAI 2001, pp. 225–234 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olivier Curé
    • 1
  1. 1.IGM Terre DigitaleUniversité Paris-EstMarne-la-ValléeFrance

Personalised recommendations