Conclusions

  • Jérôme Euzenat
  • Pavel Shvaiko

Abstract

In this book, we have attempted at covering ontology matching in its diversity. In particular, we have shown that many applications may need ontology matching (Chap. 1) and that there are different forms of ontologies that may need to be matched (Chap. 2). Based on reasonable methodological rules (Chap. 3), ontology matching can take advantage of innumerable basic (Chap. 5) and advanced (Chap. 6) techniques composed and supervised in diverse ways (Chap. 7). This has led to a profusion of available systems (Chap. 8). The output of matching can be provided according to different representations (Chap. 10) or executable forms (Chap. 12) which may need to be communicated to users (Chap. 11).

References

  1. Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: Ten challenges for ontology matching. In: Proc. 7th of International Conference on Ontologies, DataBases, and Applications of Semantics (ODBASE), Monterrey, Mexico. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5332, pp. 1164–1182 (2008) Google Scholar
  2. Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: Ontology matching: state of the art and future challenges. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 25(1), 158–176 (2013) CrossRefGoogle 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