Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

A faster and less aggressive algorithm for correcting conservativity violations in ontology alignments

Published: 01 January 2021 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Ontologies are computational artifacts that model consensual aspects of reality. In distributed contexts, applications often need to utilize information from several distinct ontologies. In order to integrate multiple ontologies, entities modeled in each ontology must be matched through an ontology alignment. However, imperfect alignments may introduce inconsistencies. One kind of inconsistency, which is often introduced, is the violation of the conservativity principle, that states that the alignment should not introduce new subsumption relations between entities from the same source ontology. We propose a two-step quadratic-time algorithm for automatically correcting such violations, and evaluate it against datasets from the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2019, comparing the results to a state-of-the-art approach. The proposed algorithm was significantly faster and less aggressive; that is, it performed fewer modifications over the original alignment when compared to the state-of-the-art algorithm.

    References

    [1]
    Antunes, C.R., Rademaker, A. & Abel, M. (2019). A category-theoretic approach for the detection of conservativity violations in ontology alignments. In J.P.A. Almeida, M. Bax, R. Berardi and F. Baião (Eds.), XII Seminar on Ontology Research in Brazil (pp. 11–20). Porto Alegre.
    [2]
    Bodenreider, O. (2004). The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS): Integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic Acids Research, 32, 267–270.
    [3]
    Ivanova, V. & Lambrix, P. (2013). A unified approach for aligning taxonomies and debugging taxonomies and their alignments. In P. Cimiano, O. Corcho, V. Presutti, L. Hollink and S. Rudolph (Eds.), The Semantic Web: Semantics and Big Data (pp. 1–15). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
    [4]
    Jean-Mary, Y.R., Shinoroshita, E.P. & Kabuka, M.R. (2009). Ontology matching with semantic verification. Journal of Web Semantics, 7, 235–251.
    [5]
    Jiménez-Ruiz, E. & Grau, B.C. (2011). Logmap: Logic-based and scalable ontology matching. In L. Aroyo, C. Welty, H. Alani, J. Taylor, A. Bernstein, L. Kagal, N. Noy and E. Blomqvist (Eds.), The Semantic Web – ISWC 2011 (pp. 273–288). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
    [6]
    Jiménez-Ruiz, E., Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I. & Berlanga, R. (2011). Logic-based assessment of the compatibility of UMLS ontology sources. Journal of Biomedical Semantics, 2, S2.
    [7]
    Karakostas, G. (2005). A better approximation ratio for the vertex cover problem. In L. Caires, G.F. Italiano, L. Monteiro, C. Palamidessi and M. Yung (Eds.), Automata, Languages and Programming (pp. 1043–1050). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
    [8]
    Karp, R.M. (1972). Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In R.E. Miller, J.W. Thatcher and J.D. Bohlinger (Eds.), Complexity of Computer Computations (pp. 85–103). Boston: Springer.
    [9]
    Lambrix, P. & Liu, Q. (2013). Debugging the missing is-a structure within taxonomies networked by partial reference alignments. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 86, 179–205.
    [10]
    Lamy, J.B. (2017). Owlready: Ontology oriented programming in Python with automatic classification and high level constructs for biomedical ontologies. Artificial Inteligence in Medicine, 80, 11–28.
    [11]
    Meilicke, C. (2006). Reasoning about ontology mappings in distributed description logics. PhD thesis, University of Mannheim.
    [12]
    Papadimitriou, C.H. & Steiglitz, K. (1998). Combinatorial Optimization: Algorithms and Complexity. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
    [13]
    Solimando, A., Jiménez-Ruiz, E. & Guerrini, G. (2014a). Detecting and correcting conservativity principle violations in ontology-to-ontology mappings. In P. Mika, T. Tudorache, A. Bernstein, C. Welty, C. Knoblock, D. Vrandecic, P. Groth, N. Noy, K. Janowicz and C. Goble (Eds.), The Semantic Web – ISWC 2014 (pp. 1–16). Cham: Springer.
    [14]
    Solimando, A., Jiménez-Ruiz, E. & Guerrini, G. (2014b). A multi-strategy approach for detecting and correcting conservativity principle violations in ontology alignments. In C.M. Keet and V. Tamma (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (pp. 13–14). Cham: Springer.
    [15]
    Solimando, A., Jiménez-Ruiz, E. & Guerrini, G. (2017). Minimizing conservativity violations in ontology alignments: Algorithms and evaluation. Knowledge and Information Systems, 51, 775–819.
    [16]
    Studer, R., Benjamins, V.R. & Fensel, D. (1998). Knowledge engineering: Principles and methods. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 25, 161–198.
    [17]
    Zamazal, O. & Svátek, V. (2017). The ten-year OntoFarm and its fertilization within the onto-sphere. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 43, 46–53.
    [18]
    Zhang, S., Mork, P. & Bodenreider, O. (2004). Lessons learned from aligning two representations of anatomy. In U. Han (Ed.), Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Formal Biomedical Knowledge Representation (pp. 102–108).

    Index Terms

    1. A faster and less aggressive algorithm for correcting conservativity violations in ontology alignments
            Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Information & Contributors

            Information

            Published In

            cover image Applied Ontology
            Applied Ontology  Volume 16, Issue 3
            2021
            128 pages

            Publisher

            IOS Press

            Netherlands

            Publication History

            Published: 01 January 2021

            Author Tags

            1. Ontology
            2. ontology alignment
            3. semantic interoperability

            Qualifiers

            • Research-article

            Contributors

            Other Metrics

            Bibliometrics & Citations

            Bibliometrics

            Article Metrics

            • 0
              Total Citations
            • 0
              Total Downloads
            • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
            Reflects downloads up to 12 Aug 2024

            Other Metrics

            Citations

            View Options

            View options

            Get Access

            Login options

            Media

            Figures

            Other

            Tables

            Share

            Share

            Share this Publication link

            Share on social media