Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
What Is an Ontology? Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2009 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Ontology Mapping

verfasst von : Natalya F. Noy

Erschienen in: Handbook on Ontologies

Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

However, if we want to have the applications using different ontologies to “talk” to one another, or if we want to integrate data that is annotated with or structured according to different ontologies, we must first find the correspondences between concepts in these ontologies. The process of finding such correspondences is called ontology mapping. Ontology mapping (also referred to as ontology matching, or ontology alignment) is one of the most active areas of ontology research. Creating high-quality ontology mappings automatically is the holy grail of the Semantic Web research. Ontologies have gained popularity in the AI community as a means for establishing explicit formal vocabulary to share between applications. Therefore, one can say that one of the goals of using ontologies is not to have the problem of heterogeneity at all. It is of course unrealistic to hope that there will be an agreement on one or even a small set of ontologies. While having some common ground either within an application area or for some high-level general concepts could alleviate the problem of semantic heterogeneity, we will still need to map between ontologies, whether they extend the same foundational ontology or are developed independently.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Ontology Repositories
Nächstes Kapitel Ontologies and Software Engineering
Fußnoten
1
biointology.org
 
Literatur
1.
Z. Aleksovski, M. Klein, W. ten Kate, and F. van Harmelen. Matching unstructured vocabularies using a background ontology. In 15th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW’06), 2006.
2.
P. Bouquet, F. Giunchiglia, F. van Harmelen, L. Serafini, and H. Stuckenschmidt. C-OWL: Contextualizing ontologies. In International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Sanibel Isalnd, Florida, 2003.
3.
D. Calvanese, G. Giacomo, and M. Lenzerini. Ontology of integration and integration of ontologies. In Description Logic Workshop (DL 2001), pages 10–19, 2001.
4.
D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, R. Rosati, and G. Vetere. DL-lite: Practical Reasoning for Rich DLs. In International Workshop on Description Logics (DL2004), Whistler, Canada, 2004.
5.
M. Crubézy and M. A. Musen. Ontologies in support of problem solving. In S. Staab and R. Studer, editors, Handbook on Ontologies, pages 321–342. Springer, Berlin, 2003.
6.
H. Do. Schema Matching and Mapping-based Data Integration. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Universitt Leipzig, 2006.
7.
A. Doan, J. Madhavan, P. Domingos, and A. Halevy. Learning to map between ontologies on the semantic web. In The Eleventh International WWW Conference, Hawaii, US, 2002.
8.
D. Dou, D. McDermott, and P. Qi. Ontology translation on the semantic web. In International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics, 2003.
9.
M. Ehrig and S. Staab. QOM – Quick Ontology Mapping. In 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2004), Hiroshima, Japan, 2004.
10.
M. Ehrig and Y. Sure. FOAM – framework for ontology alignment and mapping; results of the ontology alignment initiative. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Integrating Ontologies, volume 156, pages 72–76, October 2005.
11.
J. Euzenat, A. Isaac, C. Meilicke, P. Shvaiko, H. Stuckenschmidt, O. Šváb, V. Svátek, W. van Hage, and M. Yatskevich. Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative 2007. In 2nd International Workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2007) at ISWC 2007, 2007.
12.
J. Euzenat and P. Valtchev. Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-Lite. In The 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-04), Valencia, Spain, 2004.
13.
J. Euzenat, M. Mochol, P. Shvaiko, H. Stuckenschmidt, Ondrej Sváb, Vojtech Sváte, Willem Robert van Hage, and Mikalai Yatskevich. Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative 2006. In International Workshop on Ontology Matching at ISWC-2006, Athens, GA, 2006.
14.
S. Falconer, N. Noy, and M. A. Storey. Towards understanding the needs of cognitive support for ontology mapping. In International Workshop on Ontology Matching at ISWC-2006, Athens, GA, 2006.
15.
A. Gangemi, N. Guarino, C. Masolo, and A. Oltramari. Sweetening wordnet with DOLCE. AI Magazine, 24(3):13–24, 2003.MATH
16.
F. Giunchiglia, P. Shvaiko, and M. Yatskevich. S-match: an algorithm and an implementation of semantic matching. In European Conference on Semantic Web (ESWC 2004), pages 61–75, 2004.
17.
F. Giunchiglia, P. Shvaiko, and M. Yatskevich. Semantic matching. In 1st European semantic web symposium (ESWS’04), pages 61–75, Heraklion, Greece, 2004.
18.
R. Gligorov, Z. Aleksovski, W. ten Kate, and F. van Harmelen. Using Google distance to weight approximate ontology matches. In Seventeenth World Wide Web Conference WWWW-07, Banff, Canada, 2007.
19.
M. Grüninger. A guide to the ontology of the process specification language. In S. Staab and R. Studer, editors, Handbook on Ontologies. Springer, Berlin, 2003.
20.
M. Grüninger and J. Kopena. Semantic integration through invariants. In A. Doan, A. Halevy, and N. Noy, editors, Workshop on Semantic Integration at ISWC-2003, Sanibel Island, FL, 2003.
21.
M. Hernandez, R. Miller, L. Haas, L. Yan, C. T. Howard Ho, and X. Tian. Clio: A semi-automatic tool for schema mapping. In SIGMOD Record, 2001.
22.
Y. Jean-Mary and M. Kabuka. ASMOV: ontology alignment with semantic validation. In JointSWDB-ODBIS Workshop on Semantics, Ontologies, Databases, Vienna, Austria, 2007.
23.
N. Jian, W. Hu, G. Cheng, and Y. Qu. Falcon-ao: Aligning ontologies with falcon. In K-Cap Workshop on Integrating Ontologies, 2005.
24.
Y. Kalfoglou and M. Schorlemmer. Ontology mapping: the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 18(1):1–31, 2003.CrossRefMATH
25.
M. Klein. Combining and relating ontologies: an analysis of problems and solutions. In IJCAI-2001 Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing, pages 53–62, Seattle, WA, 2001.
26.
A. Maedche, B. Motik, N. Silva, and R. Volz. MAFRA - a mapping framework for distributed ontologies. In 13th European Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management EKAW, Madrid, Spain, 2002.
27.
I. Niles and A. Pease. Towards a standard upper ontology. In The 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS-2001), Ogunquit, Maine, 2001.
28.
N. F. Noy and M. A. Musen. The PROMPT suite: Interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(6):983–1024, 2003.CrossRef
29.
N. F. Noy. Tools for mapping and merging ontologies. In S. Staab and R. Studer, editors, Handbook on Ontologies, pages 365–384. Springer, Berlin, 2003.
30.
S. Polyak, J. Lee, M. Grüninger, and C. Menzel. Applying the process interchange format(PIF) to a supply chain process interoperability scenario. In Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and Problem Solving Methods, ECAI’98, Brighton, England, 1998.
31.
E. Rahm and P. A. Bernstein. A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB Journal, 10(4), 2001.
32.
D. L. Rubin, S. E. Lewis, C. J. Mungall, S. Misra, M. Westerfield, M. Ashburner, I. Sim, C. G. Chute, H. Solbrig, M. A. Storey, B. Smith, J. Day-Richter, N. F. Noy, and M. A. Musen. The national center for biomedical ontology: Advancing biomedicinethrough structured organization of scientific knowledge. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, 10(2), 2006.
33.
M. Sabou, J. Gracia, S. Angeletou, M. dAquin, and E. Motta. Evaluating the semantic web: A task-based approach. In K. Aberer, K. S. Choi, and N. Noy, editors, 6th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2007), Busan, Korea, 2007. Springer.
34.
P Shvaiko and J Euzenat. A survey of schema-based matching approaches. Journal on Data Semantics, 4:146–171, 2005.MATH
35.
A. Valente, T. Russ, R. MacGrecor, and W. Swartout. Building and (re)using an ontology for air campaign planning. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 14(1):27–36, 1999.CrossRef
36.
S. Zhang and O. Bodenreider. Alignment of multiple ontologies of anatomy: Deriving indirect mappings from direct mappings to a reference. In AMIA Annual Symposium, pages 864–868, 2005.
Metadaten
Titel
Ontology Mapping
verfasst von
Natalya F. Noy
Copyright-Jahr
2009
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Buch
Handbook on Ontologies

Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70999-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-540-92673-3

Copyright-Jahr: 2009

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_26