Ontology Extraction by Collaborative Tagging with Social Networking

This paper proposes integration of a social network with collaborative tagging for ontology extraction. Tripartite models of emergent ontologies based on three dimensions (i.e. users, tags, and instances) have been proposed by several researchers, but we integrate another important dimension: user-user relations, such as the friend relation in social networking services and a knows relation in Friend-Of-A-Friend (FOAF) documents. Because a lightweight ontology is a minimum commitment shared within a community, who communicates with whom is an important source of information that can be used to improve the emergent ontology. We also discuss the advanced model in where each concept in each community is considered dierent (and called p-concept), and show the possibility of using this model to resolve the polysemy/hononymy problem. Two case studies using our algorithms are shown: we analyze tagging and social networking data from an academic conference support system POLYPHONET and also from an advanced social system called Blue Dot. We evaluate the extracted ontologies for information recommendation, and show that our algorithm works better than others.

[1]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Gimme''The Context: Automatic Semantic Annotation with C-PANKOW , 2005 .

[2]  Judith Hollis-Triantafillou Folk wisdom , 1995 .

[3]  Vittorio Loreto,et al.  Collaborative Tagging and Semiotic Dynamics , 2006, ArXiv.

[4]  Paolo Avesani,et al.  Controversial Users Demand Local Trust Metrics: An Experimental Study on Epinions.com Community , 2005, AAAI.

[5]  P. Bonacich Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification , 1972 .

[6]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing? , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[7]  Yong Yu,et al.  Optimizing web search using social annotations , 2007, WWW '07.

[8]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Social Networks Applied , 2005, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[9]  Mor Naaman,et al.  HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read , 2006, HYPERTEXT '06.

[10]  Bernardo A. Huberman,et al.  The Structure of Collaborative Tagging Systems , 2005, ArXiv.

[11]  Peter Mika Ontologies Are Us: A Unified Model of Social Networks and Semantics , 2005, International Semantic Web Conference.

[12]  Kôiti Hasida,et al.  POLYPHONET: an advanced social network extraction system from the web , 2006, WWW '06.

[13]  M E J Newman,et al.  Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[14]  Thomas Gruber,et al.  Ontology of Folksonomy: A Mash-Up of Apples and Oranges , 2007, Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst..

[15]  Peter Mika,et al.  Flink: Semantic Web technology for the extraction and analysis of social networks , 2005, J. Web Semant..

[16]  Jennifer Golbeck,et al.  Inferring Trust Relationships in Web-Based Social Networks , 2006 .

[17]  Marcel Ausloos,et al.  Contextualising tags in collaborative tagging systems , 2009, HT '09.

[18]  Yong Yu,et al.  Exploring social annotations for the semantic web , 2006, WWW '06.

[19]  Steffen Staab Emergent Semantics , 2002, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[20]  Grigory Begelman,et al.  Automated Tag Clustering: Improving search and exploration in the tag space , 2006 .

[21]  Mor Naaman,et al.  Why we tag: motivations for annotation in mobile and online media , 2007, CHI.

[22]  Adam Mathes,et al.  Folksonomies-Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata , 2004 .

[23]  Kôiti Hasida,et al.  Spinning Multiple Social Networks for Semantic Web , 2006, AAAI.

[24]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.