Ontology Mapping Tools, Methods and Approaches – Analytical Survey

In this paper we present the results of browsing, analyzing and comparing many ontology mapping tools, approaches and methods. We extract and classify valuable parameters for strict and unambiguous tool or method description. Every mapping tool, algorithm or approach must have such a description, practically usable for both human and software agents and sufficient for easy checking if it suitable or not for a given task. We will use our classifications for developing ontology, conceptualizing all valuable metadata for semantic machine-processable mapping tools description

A Large Scale Dataset for the Evaluation of Ontology Matching Systems

Recently, the number of ontology matching techniques and systems has increased significantly. This makes the issue of their evaluation and comparison more severe. One of the challenges of the ontology matching evaluation is in building large scale evaluation datasets. In fact, the number of possible correspondences between two ontologies grows quadratically with respect to the numbers of entities in these ontologies. This often makes the manual construction of the evaluation datasets demanding to the point of being infeasible for large scale matching tasks. In this paper we present an ontology matching evaluation dataset composed of thousands of matching tasks, called TaxME2. It was built semi-automatically out of the Google, Yahoo and Looksmart web directories. We evaluated TaxME2 by exploiting the results of almost two dozen of state of the art ontology matching systems. The experiments indicate that the dataset possesses the desired key properties, namely it is error-free, incremental, discriminative, monotonic, and hard for the state of the art ontology matching systems. The paper has been accepted for publication in "The Knowledge Engineering Review", Cambridge Universty Press (ISSN: 0269-8889, EISSN: 1469-8005)

Ontology alignment through argumentation

Currently, the majority of matchers are able to establish simple correspondences between entities, but are not able to provide complex alignments. Furthermore, the resulting alignments do not contain additional information on how they were extracted and formed. Not only it becomes hard to debug the alignment results, but it is also difficult to justify correspondences. We propose a method to generate complex ontology alignments that captures the semantics of matching algorithms and human-oriented ontology alignment definition processes. Through these semantics, arguments that provide an abstraction over the specificities of the alignment process are generated and used by agents to share, negotiate and combine correspondences. After the negotiation process, the resulting arguments and their relations can be visualized by humans in order to debug and understand the given correspondences.(undefined

Matching Metamodels with Semantic Systems - An Experience Report

Abstract: Ontology and schema matching are well established techniques, which have been applied in various integration scenarios, e.g., web service composition and database integration. Consequently, matching tools enabling automatic matching of various kinds of schemas are available. In the field of model-driven engineering, in contrast to schema and ontology integration, the integration of modeling languages relies on manual tasks such as writing model transformation code, which is tedious and error-prone. Therefore, we propose the application of ontology and schema matching techniques for automatically exploring semantic correspondences between metamodels, which are currently the modeling language definitions of choice. The main focus of this paper is on reporting preliminary results and lessons learned by evaluating currently available ontology matching tools for their metamodel matching potential.

Description of alignment implementation and benchmarking results

stuckenschmidt2005aThis deliverable presents the evaluation campaign carried out in 2005 and the improvement participants to these campaign and others have to their systems. We draw lessons from this work and proposes improvements for future campaigns

Constraints preserving genetic algorithm for learning fuzzy measures with an application to ontology matching

Abstract. Both the fuzzy measure and integral have been widely studied for multi-source information fusion. A number of researchers have proposed optimization techniques to learn a fuzzy measure from training data. In part, this task is difficult as the fuzzy measure can have a large number of free parameters (2 N − 2 for N sources) and it has many (monotonicity) constraints. In this paper, a new genetic algorithm approach to constraint preserving optimization of the fuzzy measure is present for the task of learning and fusing different ontology matching results. Preliminary results are presented to show the stability of the leaning algorithm and its effectiveness compared to existing approaches

Argumentation over Ontology Correspondences in MAS

laera2007aInternational audienceIn order to support semantic interoperation in open environments, where agents can dynamically join or leave and no prior assumption can be made on the ontologies to align, the different agents involved need to agree on the semantics of the terms used during the interoperation. Reaching this agreement can only come through some sort of negotiation process. Indeed, agents will differ in the domain ontologies they commit to; and their perception of the world, and hence the choice of vocabulary used to represent concepts. We propose an approach for supporting the creation and exchange of different arguments, that support or reject possible correspondences. Each agent can decide, according to its preferences, whether to accept or refuse a candidate correspondence. The proposed framework considers arguments and propositions that are specific to the matching task and are based on the ontology semantics. This argumentation framework relies on a formal argument manipulation schema and on an encoding of the agents' preferences between particular kinds of arguments