Semantic Querying based Concept Hierarchy Construction for Ontology Learning
Authors: 
B. Sathiya, T. V. GeethaAuthors Info & Claims
B. Sathiya, T. V. GeethaAuthors Info & ClaimsArticle No.: 25, Pages 1 - 6
Editorial Notes
NOTICE OF CONCERN: ACM has received evidence that casts doubt on the integrity of the peer review process for the ICIA 2016 Conference. As a result, ACM is issuing a Notice of Concern for all papers published and strongly suggests that the papers from this Conference not be cited in the literature until ACM's investigation has concluded and final decisions have been made regarding the integrity of the peer review process for this Conference.
Abstract
The method of identifying a set of concepts (domain specific) and the relations among these concepts from text is called ontology learning. These relations can be taxonomical (hypernym and hyponym) or non-taxonomical relations. The important step in ontology learning is to, extract the concepts representing the domain and building the concept hierarchy based on the taxonomical relations prevailing between them. The important resources of the text used for concept hierarchy construction are domain-specific corpus and vast text from web pages. The former resource is static and most likely outdated information, whereas the latter resource is uncertain. Therefore, to tackle these drawbacks, we have proposed a new two-level semantic query formation methodology which is based on lexical-syntactic patterns. It utilizes both the resources of text: corpus and web pages for automatic concept hierarchy construction by discovering the hypernyms and hyponyms. Specifically, it resolves the limited and static content problem of the corpus by utilizing the vast and current knowledge available from the web. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of the knowledge in the web is removed by adding two new contextual information to the semantic queries. From the experimental results, it is evident that the proposed concept hierarchy construction method achieved enhancement of 6.5%, 5.65% and 6.8% for metrics such as Precision, Recall, and F-Measure respectively.
References
[1]
Brank, J., Madenic, D., Groblenik, M. 2006. Gold standard based ontology evaluation using instance assignment. In Proceedings of the fourth workshop on evaluating ontologies for the web (EON2006). Edinburgh, Scotland.
[2]
Cederberg, S., Widdows, D. 2003. Using LSA and noun coordination information to improve the precision and recall of automatic hyponymy extraction. In Proceedings 7th conference on natural language learning at HLTNAACL. 4, 111--118. Association for Computational Linguistics.
[3]
Church K. W., Hanks, P. 1990. Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Computational Linguistics. 16 (1990), 22--29.
[4]
Cimiano, P. and Staab, S. 2004. Learning by googling. ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter. 6, 2 (2004), 24--33.
[5]
Cimiano, P. and Staab, S. 2005. Learning concept hierarchies from text with a guided agglomerative clustering algorithm. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Learning and Extending Lexical Ontologies with Machine Learning Methods.
[6]
Cimiano, P., Hotho, A. and Staab, S. 2005. Learning Concept Hierarchies from Text Corpora using Formal Concept Analysis. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR). 24, 305--339.
[7]
Dellschaft, K. and Staab, S. 2006. On how to perform a gold standard based evaluation of ontology learning. In The Semantic Web. ISWC 2006. 228--241. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[8]
Fellbaum, C. WordNet: an electronic lexical database. MIT Press, 1998, https://wordnet.princeton.edu/wordnet/.
[9]
Gruber T. R. 1993. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge acquisition. 5, 2 (1993), 199--220.
[10]
Hearst, M. 1992. Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In proceedings of the 14th conference on computational linguistics. 2, 539--545. Association for Computational Linguistics.
[11]
Hindle, D. 1990. Noun classification from predicate-argument structures. In proceedings of the 28th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics. ACL '90. 268--275. Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
[12]
Jiang, X., and Tan, A. H. 2010. Crctol: A semantic-based domain ontology learning system. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61, 150--168.
[13]
Maedche, A., and Staab, S. 2001. Ontology learning for the semantic web. Intelligent Systems, IEEE. 16, 72--79.
[14]
Stanford Parser, http://nlp.stanford.edu/software/lex-parser.shtml.
[15]
Ortega-Mendoza, R., Villaseñor-Pineda, L., and Gómez, M. M. 2007. Using lexical-syntactic patterns for extracting hyponyms from the web. In MICAI 2007: Advances in artificial intelligence. 904--911, Springer.
[16]
Pantel, P., and Lin, D. 2002. Discovering word senses from text. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. 613--619. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
[17]
Ponzetto, S. P., and Strube, M. 2011. Taxonomy induction based on a collaboratively built knowledge repository. Artif. Intell. 175 (9-10), 1737--1756.
[18]
Rios-Alvarado, A. B., Lopez-Arevalo, I., and Sosa-Sosa, V. J. 2013. Learning concept hierarchies from textual resources for ontologies construction. Expert Systems with Applications. 40, 15 (2013), 5907--5915.
[19]
Ritter, A., Soderland, S., and Etzioni, O. 2009. What is this, anyway: Automatic hypernym discovery. In Proceedings of AAAI-09 spring symposium on learning by reading and learning to read. 88--93.
[20]
Sang, E. 2007. Extracting hypernym pairs from the web. In Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the ACL on interactive poster and demonstration sessions. 165--168. Association for Computational Linguistics.
[21]
Snow, R., Jurafsky, D., and Ng, A. 2005. Learning syntactic patterns for automatic hypernym discovery. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 17, 1297--1304.
[22]
Suchanek, F. M., Ifrim, G., and Weikum, G. 2006. Combining linguistic and statistical analysis to extract relations from web documents. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 712--717.
[23]
Tuan, L. A., Kim, J. J., and Kiong, N. S. 2014. Taxonomy construction using syntactic contextual evidence. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). 810--819.
[24]
Wong, W., Liu, W., and Bennamoun, M. 2012. Ontology learning from text: A look back and into the future. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 44, 4 (2012), 1--36.
[25]
Wu, W., Hongsong, L., Haixun, W., and Kenny, Q. Z. 2012. Probase: A probabilistic taxonomy for text understanding. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data. 481--492. ACM.
Recommendations
Semantic Web Mining
Semantic Web Mining aims at combining the two fast-developing research areas Semantic Web and Web Mining. This survey analyzes the convergence of trends from both areas: More and more researchers are working on improving the results of Web Mining by ...
Automatic Ontology Learning from Multiple Knowledge Sources of Text
The prime textual sources used for ontology learning are a domain corpus and dynamic large text from web pages. The first source is limited and possibly outdated, while the second is uncertain. To overcome these shortcomings, a novel ontology learning ...
Axiom-based ontology matching
K-CAP '05: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Knowledge captureThis paper introduces a new approach of ontology matching named axiom-based ontology matching. As this approach is founded on the use of axioms, it is mainly dedicated to heavyweight ontology, but it can also be applied to lightweight ontology as a ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
August 2016
868 pages
ISBN:9781450347563
DOI:10.1145/2980258
- Conference Chairs:
- V. Akila,
- N. Sivakumar,
- K. Saruladha,
- G. Zayaraz,
- E. Ilavarasan
Copyright © 2016 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 25 August 2016
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
ICIA-16
ICIA-16: International Conference on Informatics and Analytics
August 25 - 26, 2016
Pondicherry, India
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 83Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)1
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 10 Oct 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in