Ontology-based Services to help solving the heterogeneity problem in e-commerce negotiations

In a dynamic environment of e-commerce negotiations where transactions involve interaction among different enterprises, using different representations and terminologies, a common understanding is crucial. This paper combines the use of ontologies and agent technologies to help in solving the heterogeneity problem in e-commerce negotiations. The result is an implementation of the Ontology-based Services, which apply a methodology that assesses lexical and semantic similarity among concepts represented in different ontologies. A solution integrating the Jade platform and OWL format is presented as well as an Ontology Interaction Protocol, which is combined with the FIPA Contract Net Protocol.

[1]  Alun D. Preece,et al.  Detecting mismatches among experts' ontologies acquired through knowledge elicitation , 2002, Knowl. Based Syst..

[2]  Mark A. Musen,et al.  PROMPT: Algorithm and Tool for Automated Ontology Merging and Alignment , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[3]  Michel Klein,et al.  Combining and relating ontologies: an analysis of problems and solutions , 2001, OIS@IJCAI.

[4]  M Damashek,et al.  Gauging Similarity with n-Grams: Language-Independent Categorization of Text , 1995, Science.

[5]  Peishen Qi,et al.  Ontology Translation on the Semantic Web , 2003, J. Data Semant..

[6]  Monique Calisti,et al.  Multilingual Agents: Ontologies, Languages and Abstractions , 2001 .

[7]  L. Camarinha-Matos.  Virtual Enterprises and Collaborative Networks , 2004, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing.

[8]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  On Agent-Mediated Electronic Commerce , 2003, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[9]  Henrik Eriksson,et al.  The evolution of Protégé: an environment for knowledge-based systems development , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[10]  Michel C. A. Klein,et al.  Finding and specifying relations between ontology versions , 2002 .

[11]  Farshad Hakimpour,et al.  Resolving semantic heterogeneity in schema integration , 2001, FOIS.

[12]  Marinos Kavouras.  A unified ontological framework for semantic integration , 2004 .

[13]  H. S. Pinto.  Towards Ontology Reuse , 2003 .

[14]  Gerd Stumme,et al.  Ontology Merging for Federated Ontologies on the Semantic Web , 2001, OIS@IJCAI.

[15]  M. Brian Blake,et al.  Local consensus ontologies for B2B-oriented service composition , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[16]  Andreia Malucelli,et al.  Ontology-Services Agent to Help in the Structural and Semantic Heterogeneity , 2004, Virtual Enterprises and Collaborative Networks.

[17]  Farshad Hakimpour,et al.  Resolving Semantic Heterogeneity in Schema Integration: an Ontology Based Approach , 2001 .

[18]  Deborah L. McGuinness,et al.  An Environment for Merging and Testing Large Ontologies , 2000, KR.

[19]  C. V. Aart.  Creating and Using Ontologies in Agent Communication � , 2002 .

[20]  Graeme Hirst,et al.  Semantic distance in WordNet: An experimental, application-oriented evaluation of five measures , 2004 .

[21]  Eiichiro Kodama,et al.  Implementation of FIPA Ontology Service , 2001 .

[22]  Vladimir I. Levenshtein,et al.  Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals , 1965 .

[23]  M. Huhns.  Software Development with Objects , Agents , and Services , 2004 .

[24]  George A. Miller,et al.  WordNet: A Lexical Database for English , 1995, HLT.

[25]  Walter Truszkowski,et al.  Ontology negotiation between scientific archives , 2001, Proceedings Thirteenth International Conference on Scientific and Statistical Database Management. SSDBM 2001.

[26]  Gloria J. A. Guth,et al.  Surname Spellings and Computerized Record Linkage , 1976 .

[27]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  An Analysis of Ontology Mismatches; Heterogeneity versus Interoperability , 2007 .