Skip to:Content
|
Bottom
Cover image for Ontology alignment : bridging the semantic gap
Title:
Ontology alignment : bridging the semantic gap
Personal Author:
Series:
Semantic web and beyond ; 4
Publication Information:
New York, NY : Springer, 2007
Physical Description:
Available online version
ISBN:
9780387328058
Electronic Access:
FullText

Available:*

Library
Item Barcode
Call Number
Material Type
Item Category 1
Status
Searching...
30000010139589 TK5105.88815 E37 2007 Open Access Book Book
Searching...
Searching...
30000010159663 TK5105.88815 E37 2007 Open Access Book Book
Searching...

On Order

Summary

Summary

A large number of information systems use many different individual schemas to represent data. Semantically linking these schemas is a necessary precondition to establish interoperability between agents and services. Consequently, ontology alignment and mapping for data integration has become central to building a world-wide semantic web.

Ontology Alignment: Bridging the Semantic Gap introduces novel methods and approaches for semantic integration. In addition to developing new methods for ontology alignment, the author provides extensive explanations of up-to-date case studies. The topic of this book, coupled with the application-focused methodology, will appeal to professionals from a number of different domains.

Designed for practitioners and researchers in industry, Ontology Alignment: Bridging the Semantic Web Gap is also suitable for advanced-level students in computer science and electrical engineering.


Table of Contents

Prefacep. xv
Acknowledgementsp. xvii
1 Introduction and Overviewp. 1
1.1 Motivationp. 1
1.2 Contributionp. 3
1.2.1 Problem Outlinep. 3
1.2.2 Solution Pathwayp. 4
1.3 Overviewp. 5
1.3.1 Structurep. 5
1.3.2 Reader's Guidep. 6
Part I Foundations
2 Definitionsp. 11
2.1 Ontologyp. 11
2.1.1 Ontology Definitionp. 11
2.1.2 Semantic Web and Web Ontology Language (OWL)p. 14
2.1.3 Ontology Examplep. 16
2.2 Ontology Alignmentp. 19
2.2.1 Ontology Alignment Definitionp. 19
2.2.2 Ontology Alignment Representationp. 20
2.2.3 Ontology Alignment Examplep. 21
2.3 Related Termsp. 23
2.4 Ontology Similarityp. 25
2.4.1 Ontology Similarity Definitionp. 25
2.4.2 Similarity Layersp. 26
2.4.3 Specific Similarity Measuresp. 28
2.4.4 Similarity in Related Workp. 34
2.4.5 Heuristic Definitionp. 34
3 Scenariosp. 37
3.1 Use Casesp. 37
3.1.1 Alignment Discoveryp. 38
3.1.2 Agent Negotiation / Web Service Compositionp. 38
3.1.3 Data Integrationp. 39
3.1.4 Ontology Evolution / Versioningp. 40
3.1.5 Ontology Mergingp. 40
3.1.6 Query and Answer Rewriting / Mappingp. 41
3.1.7 Reasoningp. 42
3.2 Requirementsp. 42
4 Related Workp. 45
4.1 Theory of Alignmentp. 45
4.1.1 Algebraic Approachp. 45
4.1.2 Information-Flow-based Approachp. 46
4.1.3 Translation Frameworkp. 47
4.2 Existing Alignment Approachesp. 47
4.2.1 Classification Guidelines for Alignment Approachesp. 47
4.2.2 Ontology Alignment Approachesp. 49
4.2.3 Schema Alignment Approachesp. 53
4.2.4 Global as View / Local as Viewp. 56
Part II Ontology Alignment Approach
5 Processp. 61
5.1 General Processp. 61
5.2 Alignment Approachp. 64
5.2.0 Inputp. 64
5.2.1 Feature Engineeringp. 65
5.2.2 Search Step Selectionp. 67
5.2.3 Similarity Computationp. 68
5.2.4 Similarity Aggregationp. 69
5.2.5 Interpretationp. 72
5.2.6 Iterationp. 74
5.2.7 Outputp. 75
5.3 Process Description of Related Approachesp. 76
5.3.1 Prompt, Anchor-Promptp. 76
5.3.2 Gluep. 78
5.3.3 Olap. 79
5.4 Evaluation of Alignment Approachp. 81
5.4.1 Evaluation Scenariop. 81
5.4.2 Evaluation Measuresp. 82
5.4.3 Absolute Qualityp. 88
5.4.4 Data Setsp. 88
5.4.5 Strategiesp. 91
5.4.6 Resultsp. 92
5.4.7 Discussion and Lessons Learnedp. 95
6 Advanced Methodsp. 97
6.1 Efficiencyp. 97
6.1.1 Challengep. 97
6.1.2 Complexityp. 98
6.1.3 An Efficient Approachp. 100
6.1.4 Evaluationp. 104
6.1.5 Discussion and Lessons Learnedp. 106
6.2 Machine Learningp. 107
6.2.1 Challengep. 107
6.2.2 Machine Learning for Ontology Alignmentp. 108
6.2.3 Runtime Alignmentp. 113
6.2.4 Explanatory Component of Decision Treesp. 114
6.2.5 Evaluationp. 115
6.2.6 Discussion and Lessons Learnedp. 117
6.3 Active Alignmentp. 119
6.3.1 Challengep. 119
6.3.2 Ontology Alignment with User Interactionp. 120
6.3.3 Evaluationp. 121
6.3.4 Discussion and Lessons Learnedp. 123
6.4 Adaptive Alignmentp. 124
6.4.1 Challengep. 124
6.4.2 Overviewp. 125
6.4.3 Create Utility Functionp. 125
6.4.4 Derive Requirements for Result Dimensionsp. 127
6.4.5 Derive Parametersp. 128
6.4.6 Examplep. 131
6.4.7 Evaluationp. 132
6.4.8 Discussion and Lessons Learnedp. 133
6.5 Integrated Approachp. 135
6.5.1 Integrating the Individual Approachesp. 135
6.5.2 Summary of Ontology Alignment Approachesp. 136
6.5.3 Evaluationp. 136
6.5.4 Discussion and Lessons Learnedp. 138
Part III Implementation and Application
7 Toolsp. 145
7.1 Basic Infrastructure for Ontology Alignment and Mapping-Foamp. 145
7.1.1 User Examplep. 145
7.1.2 Process Implementationp. 146
7.1.3 Underlying Softwarep. 147
7.1.4 Availability and Open Usagep. 148
7.1.5 Summaryp. 149
7.2 Ontology Mapping Based on Axiomsp. 149
7.2.1 Logics and Inferencingp. 150
7.2.2 Formalization of Similarity Rules as Logical Axiomsp. 151
7.2.3 Evaluationp. 152
7.3 Integration into Ontology Engineering Platformp. 153
7.3.1 OntoStudiop. 153
7.3.2 OntoMapp. 154
7.3.3 Foam in OntoMapp. 155
8 Semantic Web and Peer-to-Peer - SWAPp. 157
8.1 Project Descriptionp. 157
8.1.1 Core Technologiesp. 158
8.1.2 Case Studiesp. 159
8.2 Bibsterp. 159
8.2.1 Scenariop. 160
8.2.2 Designp. 160
8.2.3 Ontology Alignment / Duplicate Detectionp. 163
8.2.4 Applicationp. 166
8.3 Xaropp. 167
8.3.1 Scenariop. 167
8.3.2 Designp. 169
8.3.3 Ontology Alignmentp. 173
8.3.4 Applicationp. 174
9 Semantically Enabled Knowledge Technologies - SEKTp. 175
9.1 Project Descriptionp. 175
9.1.1 Core Technologiesp. 176
9.1.2 Case Studiesp. 176
9.1.3 Ontology Alignmentp. 176
9.2 Intelligent Integrated Decision Support for Legal Professionalsp. 177
9.2.1 Scenariop. 177
9.2.2 Use Casesp. 177
9.2.3 Designp. 178
9.3 Retrieving and Sharing Knowledge in a Digital Libraryp. 179
9.3.1 Scenariop. 179
9.3.2 Use Casesp. 179
9.3.3 Designp. 180
9.4 Heterogeneous Groups in Consultingp. 180
9.4.1 Scenariop. 180
9.4.2 Use Casesp. 180
9.4.3 Designp. 181
Part IV Towards Next Generation Semantic Alignment
10 Next Stepsp. 185
10.1 Generalizationp. 185
10.1.1 Situationp. 185
10.1.2 Generalized Processp. 186
10.1.3 Alignment of Petri Netsp. 187
10.1.4 Summaryp. 191
10.2 Complex Alignmentsp. 192
10.2.1 Situationp. 192
10.2.2 Types of Complex Alignmentsp. 193
10.2.3 Extended Process for Complex Alignmentsp. 194
10.2.4 Implementation and Discussionp. 195
11 Futurep. 197
11.1 Outlookp. 197
11.2 Limits for Alignmentp. 199
11.2.1 Errorsp. 199
11.2.2 Points of Mismatchp. 200
11.2.3 Implicationsp. 201
12 Conclusionp. 203
12.1 Content Summaryp. 203
12.2 Assessment of Contributionp. 205
12.3 Final Statementsp. 207
Part V Appendix
A Ontologiesp. 211
B Complete Evaluation Resultsp. 215
C Foam Tool Detailsp. 221
C.1 Short descriptionp. 221
C.2 Download and Installationp. 221
C.3 Usagep. 222
C.4 Web Servicep. 222
C.5 Parametersp. 222
C.6 Additional features of the toolp. 224
Referencesp. 227
Indexp. 245
Go to:Top of Page