Ontology similarity in the alignment space

david2010bInternational audienceMeasuring similarity between ontologies can be very useful for different purposes, e.g., finding an ontology to replace another, or finding an ontology in which queries can be translated. Classical measures compute similarities or distances in an ontology space by directly comparing the content of ontologies. We introduce a new family of ontology measures computed in an alignment space: they evaluate the similarity between two ontologies with regard to the available alignments between them. We define two sets of such measures relying on the existence of a path between ontologies or on the ontology entities that are preserved by the alignments. The former accounts for known relations between ontologies, while the latter reflects the possibility to perform actions such as instance import or query translation. All these measures have been implemented in the OntoSim library, that has been used in experiments which showed that entity preserving measures are comparable to the best ontology space measures. Moreover, they showed a robust behaviour with respect to the alteration of the alignment space

Minimizing conservativity violations in ontology alignments: algorithms and evaluation

In order to enable interoperability between ontology-based systems, ontology matching techniques have been proposed. However, when the generated mappings lead to undesired logical consequences, their usefulness may be diminished. In this paper, we present an approach to detect and minimize the violations of the so-called conservativity principle where novel subsumption entailments between named concepts in one of the input ontologies are considered as unwanted. The practical applicability of the proposed approach is experimentally demonstrated on the datasets from the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative

Reasoning on a network of aligned ontologies

zimmermann2008bInternational audienceIn the context of the Semantic Web or semantic peer to peer systems, many ontologies may exist and be developed independently. Ontology alignments help integrating, mediating or reasoning with a system of networked ontologies. Though different formalisms have already been defined to reason with such systems, they do not consider ontology alignments as first class objects designed by third party ontology matching systems. Correspondences between ontologies are often asserted from an external point of view encompassing both ontologies. We study consistency checking in a network of aligned ontologies represented in Integrated Distributed Description Logics (IDDL). This formalism treats local knowledge (ontologies) and global knowledge (inter-ontology semantic relations, i.e., alignments) separately by distinguishing local interpretations and global interpretation so that local systems do not need to directly connect to each other. We consequently devise a correct and complete algorithm which, although being far from tractable, has interesting properties: it is independent from the local logics expressing ontologies by encapsulating local reasoners. This shows that consistency of a IDDL system is decidable whenever consistency of the local logics is decidable. Moreover, the expressiveness of local logics does not need to be known as long as local reasoners can handle at least ALC

Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative 2017

Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between semantically related entities of different ontologies. The Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI) aims at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. These test cases can be based on ontologies of different levels of complexity (from simple thesauri to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different evaluation modalities (e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation, or consensus). The OAEI 2017 campaign offered 9 tracks with 23 test cases, and was attended by 21 participants. This paper is an overall presentation of that campaign

Detecting and Correcting Conservativity Principle Violations in Ontology-to-Ontology Mappings

In order to enable interoperability between ontology-based systems, ontology matching techniques have been proposed. However, when the generated mappings suffer from logical flaws, their usefulness may be diminished. In this paper we present an approximate method to detect and correct violations to the so-called conservativity principle where novel subsumption entailments between named concepts in one of the input ontologies are considered as unwanted. We show that this is indeed the case in our application domain based on the EU Optique project. Additionally, our extensive evaluation conducted with both the Optique use case and the data sets from the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI) suggests that our method is both useful and feasible in practice.Copyright 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland. The final publication is available at http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-11915-1_