A comparison of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for the ontology meta-matching problem

In recent years, several ontology-based systems have been developed for data integration purposes. The principal task of these systems is to accomplish an ontology alignment process capable of matching two ontologies used for modeling heterogeneous data sources. Unfortunately, in order to perform an efficient ontology alignment, it is necessary to address a nested issue known as ontology meta-matching problem consisting in appropriately setting some regulating parameters. Over years, evolutionary algorithms are appeared to be the most suitable methodology to address this problem. However, almost all of existing approaches work with a single function to be optimized even though a possible solution for the ontology meta-matching problem can be viewed as a compromise among different objectives. Therefore, approaches based on multi-objective optimization are emerging as techniques more efficient than conventional evolutionary algorithms in solving the meta-matching problem. The aim of this paper is to perform a systematic comparison among well-known multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) in order to study their effects in solving the meta-matching problem. As shown through computational experiments, among the compared multi-objective EAs, OMOPSO statistically provides the best performance in terms of the well-known measures such as hypervolume, Δ index and coverage of two sets.

[1]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[2]  Qingfu Zhang,et al.  MOEA/D: A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Based on Decomposition , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach , 1999, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[4]  Carlos A. Coello Coello,et al.  Improving PSO-Based Multi-objective Optimization Using Crowding, Mutation and epsilon-Dominance , 2005, EMO.

[5]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  SPEA2: Improving the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm , 2001 .

[6]  Alejandra Cechich,et al.  Ontology-Based Data Integration Methods: A Framework for Comparison , 2010, Rev. Colomb. de Computación.

[7]  Uzay Kaymak,et al.  Applying NSGA-II for Solving the Ontology Alignment Problem , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[8]  Rubén Ruiz,et al.  A Review and Evaluation of Multiobjective Algorithms for the Flowshop Scheduling Problem , 2008, INFORMS J. Comput..

[9]  José Francisco Aldana Montes,et al.  Evaluation of two heuristic approaches to solve the ontology meta-matching problem , 2010, JISBD.

[10]  Martin J. Oates,et al.  PESA-II: region-based selection in evolutionary multiobjective optimization , 2001 .

[11]  Heiner Stuckenschmidt,et al.  Ontology-Based Integration of Information - A Survey of Existing Approaches , 2001, OIS@IJCAI.

[12]  Giovanni Acampora,et al.  A hybrid evolutionary approach for solving the ontology alignment problem , 2012, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[13]  Xingsi Xue,et al.  Using MOEA/D for optimizing ontology alignments , 2013, Soft Computing.

[14]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  Comparison of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Empirical Results , 2000, Evolutionary Computation.

[15]  Yaochu Jin,et al.  A Critical Survey of Performance Indices for Multi-Objective Optimisation , 2003 .

[16]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  MULTI-OBJECTIVE FUNCTION OPTIMIZATION USING NON-DOMINATED SORTING GENETIC ALGORITHMS , 1994 .

[17]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Muiltiobjective Optimization Using Nondominated Sorting in Genetic Algorithms , 1994, Evolutionary Computation.

[18]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Changing Focus on Interoperability in Information Systems:From System, Syntax, Structure to Semantics , 1999 .

[19]  Adrian Iftene,et al.  Using a genetic algorithm for optimizing the similarity aggregation step in the process of ontology alignment , 2010, 9th RoEduNet IEEE International Conference.

[20]  Enrique Alba,et al.  Optimizing Ontology Alignments by Using Genetic Algorithms , 2008, NatuReS.

[21]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[22]  David Greiner,et al.  Enhancing the Multiobjective Optimum Design of Structural Trusses with Evolutionary Algorithms Using DENSEA , 2006 .