Juliana Medeiros Destro
Julio Cesar dos Reis
ABSTRACT
Cross-language mappings establish relations between ontology concepts defined in different languages. Similarity measures calculate the degree of relatedness between concepts to support matching between two distinct ontologies. Cross-language matching remains an open research issue due to the difficulties in taking advantage of similarity computation. This article investigates the effects of different semantic similarity measures on the identification of cross-language mappings. We carry out experiments exploring real-world biomedical ontology mappings to comprehend the behaviour of computed similarity values. The obtained results indicate the relevance of the domain-related background knowledge in the effectiveness of semantic measures for ontology cross-language alignment.
- Z. Aleksovski, M. Klein, W. ten Kate, and F. van Harmelen. Matching unstructured vocabularies using a background ontology. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Managing Knowledge in a World of Networks, EKAW'06, pages 182--197, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006. Springer-Verlag. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- T. Charen. The etymology of medicine. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 39:216--221, 1951.Google Scholar
- B. Fu, R. Brennan, and D. O 'sullivan. Cross-lingual ontology mapping - an investigation of the impact of machine translation. In The Semantic Web, ASWC. Springer, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. N. Garla and C. Brandt. Semantic similarity in the biomedical domain: an evaluation across knowledge sources. BMC Bioinformatics, 13(1):1--13, 2012. Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Hamdi, B. Safar, C. Reynaud, and N. Niraula. TaxoMap alignment and refinement modules: Results for OAEI 2010. In The Fifth International Workshop on Ontology Matching, pages 212--219, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. T. P. José Camacho-Collados and R. Navigli. a novel approach to a semantically-aware representation of items. In North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics (NAACL 2015), pages 567--577, Denver,USA, 2015.Google Scholar
- J. Jung, A. Håkansson, and R. Hartung. Indirect alignment between multilingual ontologies: A case study of korean and swedish ontologies. In Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, volume 5559. Springer, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. T. McInnes, T. Pedersen, and S. V. Pakhomov. Umls-interface and umls-similarity: open source software for measuring paths and semantic similarity. In AMIA Annual Symposium, page 431, 2009.Google Scholar
- C. Meilicke, C. Trojahn, O. Šváb-Zamazal, and D. Ritze. Multilingual ontology matching evaluation-a first report on using multifarm. In The Semantic Web: ESWC 2012 Satellite Events, pages 132--147. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012.Google Scholar
- S. Mohammad, I. Gurevych, G. Hirst, and T. Zesch. Cross-lingual distributional profiles of concepts for measuring semantic distance. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, pages 571--580, 2007.Google Scholar
- R. Navigli and S. P. Ponzetto. BabelNet: The automatic construction, evaluation and application of a wide-coverage multilingual semantic network. Artificial Intelligence, 193:217--250, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Patwardhan and T. Pedersen. Using wordnet-based context vectors to estimate the semantic relatedness of concepts. In Proceedings of the EA CL 2006 Workshop Making Sense of Sense - Bringing Computational Linguistics and Psycholinguistics Together, volume 1501, pages 1--8, Trento, Italy, April 2006.Google Scholar
- C. Pesquita, D. Faria, A. O. Falcão, P. Lord, and F. M. Couto. Semantic similarity in biomedical ontologies. PLoS Computational Biology, 5(7):1--12, 07 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Sabou, M. d'Aquin, and E. Motta. Exploring the semantic web as background knowledge for ontology matching. Journal on data semantics XI, pages 156--190, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Shvaiko and J. Euzenat. Ontology matching: State of the art and future challenges. Knowledge and Data Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 25(1):158--176, Jan 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Spohr, L. Hollink, and P. Cimiano. A machine learning approach to multilingual and cross-lingual ontology matching. In The Semantic Web-ISWC 2011. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. K. Stoutenburg. Acquiring advanced properties in ontology mapping. In Proceedings of the 2nd PhD workshop on Information and knowledge management, pages 9--16. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Trojahn, B. Fu, O. Zamazal, and D. Ritze. Towards the Multilingual Semantic Web: Principles, Methods and Applications, chapter State-of-the-Art in Multilingual and Cross-Lingual Ontology Matching. Springer, 2014.Google Scholar
- S. Zhang and O. Bodenreider. Experience in aligning anatomical ontologies. International journal on Semantic Web and information systems, 3(2):1, 2007. Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Influence of semantic similarity measures on ontology cross-language mappings
Recommendations
A framework for unifying ontology-based semantic similarity measures
Display Omitted Analysis of measures used to estimate the similarity of biomedical concepts.Definition of a theoretical framework unifying several semantic measure paradigms.Identification of the core elements commonly used for semantic similarity ...
A review on semantic similarity measures for ontology
Ontologies are the extensively used structural and semantic knowledge representation to describe any entities with non-ambiguous meaning and relations. A large number of general and domain specific semantic similarity measures are available in the ...
Ontology-based semantic similarity: A new feature-based approach
Estimation of the semantic likeness between words is of great importance in many applications dealing with textual data such as natural language processing, knowledge acquisition and information retrieval. Semantic similarity measures exploit knowledge ...
Comments