Frameworks and Formats: Representing Alignments

  • Jérôme Euzenat
  • Pavel Shvaiko


Once matching has been performed, the resulting alignments are usually used in a wider context than a matching system itself. Several proposals have been made for representing the alignments and exchanging them among tools. This chapter presents some frameworks and formats for doing so. In particular, we address the following aspects:


Ontology Language Ontology Match Match Operation Simple Knowledge Organisation System Ontology Alignment 
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.


  1. Atzeni, P., Cappellari, P., Bernstein, P.: ModelGen: model independent schema translation. In: Proc. 21st International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), Tokyo, Japan, pp. 1111–1112 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atzeni, P., Cappellari, P., Bernstein, P.: Model-independent schema and data translation. In: Proc. 10th Conference on Extending Database Technology (EDBT), Munich, Germany. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3896, pp. 368–385 (2006) Google Scholar
  3. Atzeni, P., Bellomarini, L., Bugiotti, F., Gianforme, G.: MISM: a platform for Model-Independent Solutions to Model management problems. J. Data Semant. XIV, 133–161 (2009) Google Scholar
  4. Bechhofer, S., Volz, R., Lord, P.: Cooking the semantic web with the OWL API. In: Proc. 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Sanibel Island, FL, USA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2870, pp. 659–675 (2003) Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, P., Halevy, A., Pottinger, R.: A vision of management of complex models. SIGMOD Rec. 29(4), 55–63 (2000) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boley, H., Kifer, M. (eds.): RIF basic logic dialect. Recommendation, W3C (2010).
  7. Bouquet, P., Giunchiglia, F., van Harmelen, F., Serafini, L., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Contextualizing ontologies. J. Web Semant. 1(1), 325–343 (2004b) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen, K., Kannan, A., Madhavan, J., Halevy, A.: Exploring schema repositories with Schemr. SIGMOD Rec. 40(1), 11–16 (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, J., DeRose, S. (eds.): XML path language (XPath) version 1.0. Recommendation, W3C (1999) Google Scholar
  10. Corcho, Ó., Gómez-Pérez, A.: ODEDialect: a set of declarative languages for implementing ontology translation systems. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. 13(12), 1805–1834 (2007) Google Scholar
  11. David, J., Euzenat, J., Scharffe, F., Trojahn, C.: The Alignment API 4.0. Semant. Web 2(1), 3–10 (2011) Google Scholar
  12. Davis, M., Putnam, H.: A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7(3), 201–215 (1960) MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, M., Longemann, G., Loveland, D.: A machine program for theorem proving. Commun. ACM 5(7), 394–397 (1962) CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. de Bruijn, J., Foxvog, D., Zimmerman, K.: Ontology mediation patterns library. Deliverable D4.3.1, SEKT (2004) Google Scholar
  15. Do, H.-H.: Schema matching and mapping-based data integration. PhD thesis, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany (2005) Google Scholar
  16. Do, H.-H., Rahm, E.: COMA—a system for flexible combination of schema matching approaches. In: Proc. 28th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), Hong Kong, China, pp. 610–621 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dragut, E., Lawrence, R.: Composing mappings between schemas using a reference ontology. In: Proc. 3rd International Conference on Ontologies, DataBases, and Applications of Semantics (ODBASE), Larnaca, Cyprus. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3290, pp. 783–800 (2004) Google Scholar
  18. Ehrig, M.: Ontology Alignment: Bridging the Semantic Gap. Springer, New York (2007). 0-387-32805-X Google Scholar
  19. Euzenat, J.: An API for ontology alignment. In: Proc. 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Hiroshima, Japan. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3298, pp. 698–712 (2004) Google Scholar
  20. Euzenat, J.: Alignment infrastructure for ontology mediation and other applications. In: Proc. International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic Web Services (MEDIATE) at the 3rd International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 81–95 (2005) Google Scholar
  21. Euzenat, J., Le Duc, C.: Methodological guidelines for matching ontologies. In: Suárez Figueroa, M., Gómez Pérez, A., Motta, E., Gangemi, A. (eds.) Ontology Engineering in a Networked World, pp. 257–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Chap. 12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Euzenat, J., Scharffe, F., Zimmermann, A.: Expressive alignment language and implementation. Deliverable 2.2.10, Knowledge web (2007b) Google Scholar
  23. Hartmann, J., Palma, R., Sure, Y., Haase, P., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Haase, P., Gómez-Pérez, A., Studer, R.: Ontology metadata vocabulary and applications. In: Proc. 4th International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics (ODBASE), Agia Napa, Cyprus. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3762, pp. 906–915 (2005) Google Scholar
  24. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., Dean, M.: SWRL: a semantic web rule language combining OWL and RuleML (2004).
  25. Kirsten, T., Groß, A., Hartung, M., Rahm, E.: GOMMA: a component-based infrastructure for managing and analyzing life science ontologies and their evolution. J. Biomed. Semant. 2(6), 1–24 (2011) Google Scholar
  26. Laera, L., Blacoe, I., Tamma, V., Payne, T., Euzenat, J., Bench-Capon, T.: Argumentation over ontology correspondences in MAS. In: Proc. 6th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), Honolulu, HA, USA, pp. 1285–1292 (2007) Google Scholar
  27. Mädche, A., Motik, B., Silva, N., Volz, R.: MAFRA—a mapping framework for distributed ontologies. In: Proc. 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW), Siguenza, Spain. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2473, pp. 235–250 (2002) Google Scholar
  28. Madhavan, J., Bernstein, P., Domingos, P., Halevy, A.: Representing and reasoning about mappings between domain models. In: Proc. 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), Edmonton, Canada, pp. 122–133 (2002) Google Scholar
  29. Masolo, C., Borgo, S., Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A.: Ontology library. Deliverable D18, Wonderweb (2003) Google Scholar
  30. Melnik, S.: Generic Model Management: Concepts and Algorithms. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Melnik, S., Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.: Developing metadata-intensive applications with Rondo. J. Web Semant. 1(1), 47–74 (2003a) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Melnik, S., Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.: Rondo: a programming platform for model management. In: Proc. 22nd International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD), San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 193–204 (2003b) Google Scholar
  33. Melnik, S., Bernstein, P., Halevy, A., Rahm, E.: Supporting executable mappings in model management. In: Proc. 24th International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD), Baltimore, MD, USA, pp. 167–178 (2005) Google Scholar
  34. Miles, A., Bechhofer, S. (eds.): SKOS: Simple Knowledge Organization System: reference. Recommendation, W3C (2009) Google Scholar
  35. Mork, P., Seligman, L., Rosenthal, A., Korb, J., Wolf, C.: The harmony integration workbench. J. Data Semant. XI, 65–93 (2008) Google Scholar
  36. Noy, N.: Tools for mapping and merging ontologies. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 365–384. Springer, Berlin (2004b). Chap. 18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Noy, N., Musen, M.: PromptDiff: a fixed-point algorithm for comparing ontology versions. In: Proc. 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), Edmonton, Canada, pp. 744–750 (2002b) Google Scholar
  38. Noy, N., Musen, M.: The PROMPT suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 59(6), 983–1024 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Noy, N., Chugh, A., Alani, H.: The CKC challenge: exploring tools for Collaborative Knowledge Construction. IEEE Intell. Syst. 23(1), 64–68 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oberle, D., Volz, R., Staab, S., Motik, B.: An extensible ontology software environment. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 299–319. Springer, Berlin (2004). Chap. 15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pinto da Silva, N.A.: Multi-dimensional service-oriented ontology mapping. PhD thesis, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Villa Real, Portugal (2004) Google Scholar
  42. Raunich, S., Rahm, E.: ATOM: Automatic Target-driven Ontology Merging. In: Proc. 27th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), Hannover, Germany, pp. 1276–1279 (2011) Google Scholar
  43. Seligman, L., Mork, P., Halevy, A., Smith, K., Carey, M., Chen, K., Wolf, C., Madhavan, J., Kannan, A., Burdick, D.: OpenII: an open source information integration toolkit. In: Proc. 29th International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD), Indianapolis, IN, USA, pp. 1057–1060 (2010) Google Scholar
  44. Serafini, L., Stuckenschmidt, H., Wache, H.: A formal investigation of mapping language for terminological knowledge. In: Proc. 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Edinburgh, UK, pp. 576–581 (2005) Google Scholar
  45. Smith, K., Morse, M., Mork, P., Li, M., Rosenthal, A., Allen, D., Seligman, L.: The role of schema matching in large enterprises. In: Proc. 4th Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR), Asilomar, CA, USA (2009) Google Scholar
  46. Smith, K., Mork, P., Seligman, L., Leveille, P., Yost, B., Li, M.H., Wolf, C.: Unity: speeding the creation of community vocabularies for information integration and reuse. In: Proc. 10th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI), Las Vegas, NV, USA, pp. 129–135 (2011) Google Scholar
  47. Smolka, G.: Feature constraints logics for unification grammars. J. Log. Program. 12(1), 324–343 (1992) MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  48. Tu, K., Yu, Y.: CMC: combining multiple schema-matching strategies based on credibility prediction. In: Proc. 10th International Conference on Database Systems for Advanced Applications (DASFAA), Beijing, China. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3453, pp. 888–893 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Uschold, M.: Achieving semantic interoperability using RDF and OWL—v4 (2005).
  50. Zhdanova, A., Shvaiko, P.: Community-driven ontology matching. In: Proc. 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC), Budva, Montenegro. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4011, pp. 34–49 (2006) Google Scholar
  51. Zimmermann, A., Euzenat, J.: Three semantics for distributed systems and their relations with alignment composition. In: Proc. 5th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Athens, GA, USA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4273, pp. 16–29 (2006) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jérôme Euzenat
    • 1
  • Pavel Shvaiko
    • 2
  1. 1.INRIA and LIGGrenobleFrance
  2. 2.Informatica Trentina SpA, while at Department of Engineering and Computer Science (DISI), University of Trento, while at Web of Data, Bruno Kessler Foundation - IRSTTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations