Ontology Relation Alignment Based on Attribute Semantics

  • Marcin Mirosław Pietranik
  • Ngoc Thanh Nguyen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7654)


The problem of ontology alignment is based on finding mappings between instances, concepts and relations of two ontologies which (following Gruber’s work [8]) can be defined as explicit specification of decomposition of some part of reality. This specification spreads over three levels of detail: the concept attribute level, the concept level and the relation level. This paper concentrates on identifying matches between relations of concepts which describe how these entities interact with each other. After careful analysis we have noticed that this level can be a source of many inconsistencies when two ontologies are blindly integrated. We take our work on attribute-based concept alignment and the consensus theory as a starting point. We extend it to handle the issues that appear when aligning relations. We give formal definitions along with careful formalization of set of requirements that eventual mapping algorithm should satisfy in order to reliably designate matches between ontologies on relation level.


Attribute Semantic Ontology Match Logic Sentence Ontology Alignment Source Ontology 
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.
    Batet, M., Sanchez, D., Valls, A.: An ontology-based measure to compute semantic similarity in biomedicine. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 44(1), 118–125 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Day, W.H.E.: Consensus methods as tools for data analysis. In: Bock, H.H. (ed.) Classification and Related Methods for Data Analysis, pp. 312–324. North-Holland (1988)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dellschaft, K., Staab, S.: On How to Perform a Gold Standard Based Evaluation of Ontology Learning. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 228–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Duong, T.H., Jo, G.S., Jung, J.J., Nguyen, N.T.: Complexity analysis of ontology integration methodologies: A comparative study. Journal of Universal Computer Science 15, 877–897 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Euzenat, J., Meilicke, C., Stuckenschmidt, H., Shvaiko, P., Trojahn, C.: Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative: Six Years of Experience. In: Spaccapietra, S. (ed.) Journal on Data Semantics XV. LNCS, vol. 6720, pp. 158–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P., Yatskevich, M.: Semantic Schema Matching. In: Meersman, R. (ed.) OTM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3760, pp. 347–365. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gruber, T.R.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2), 199–220 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Motik, B., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P., Sattler, U.: OWL 2: The next step for OWL. Web Semantics: Science. Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 6, 309–322 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nguyen, N.T.: Advanced Methods for Inconsistent Knowledge Management. Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nguyen, N.T.: A Method for Ontology Conflict Resolution and Integration on Relation Level. Cybernetics and Systems 38(8), 781–797 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pietranik, M., Nguyen, N.T.: A Method for Ontology Alignment Based Attribute Semantics. Cybernetics and Systems 43(4), 319–339 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pietranik, M., Nguyen, N.T.: A Multi-attribute and Logic-Based Framework of Ontology Alignment. In: Zgrzywa, A., Choroś, K., Siemiński, A. (eds.) Multimedia and Internet Systems: Theory and Practice. AISC, vol. 183, pp. 99–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pietranik, M., Nguyen, N.T.: Attribute Mapping as a Foundation of Ontology Alignment. In: Nguyen, N.T., Kim, C.-G., Janiak, A. (eds.) ACIIDS 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6591, pp. 455–465. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pietranik, M., Nguyen, N.T.: Semantic Distance Measure between Ontology Concept’s Attributes. In: König, A., Dengel, A., Hinkelmann, K., Kise, K., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6881, pp. 210–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J., Giunchiglia, F., Stuckenschmidt, H., Mao, M., Cruz, I.: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Ontology Matching (2010),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcin Mirosław Pietranik
    • 1
  • Ngoc Thanh Nguyen
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of InformaticsWroclaw University of TechnologyWroclawPoland

Personalised recommendations