A Multi-strategy Approach for Detecting and Correcting Conservativity Principle Violations in Ontology Alignments

In order to enable interoperability between ontology-based systems, ontology matching techniques have been proposed. However, when the generated mappings suffer from logical flaws, their usefulness may be diminished. In this paper we present a multi-strategy approach to detect and correct violations of the so-called conservativity principle where novel subsumption entailments between named concepts in one of the input ontologies are considered as unwanted. The practical applicability of the proposed approach is experimentally demonstrated on the datasets from the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI).

[1]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Modular Reuse of Ontologies: Theory and Practice , 2008, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[2]  York Sure-Vetter,et al.  Learning Disjointness , 2007, ESWC.

[3]  Giovanna Guerrini,et al.  Detecting and Correcting Conservativity Principle Violations in Ontology-to-Ontology Mappings , 2014, SEMWEB.

[4]  Valentina Ivanova,et al.  A Unified Approach for Aligning Taxonomies and Debugging Taxonomies and Their Alignments , 2013, ESWC.

[5]  Emanuel Santos,et al.  To repair or not to repair: reconciling correctness and coherence in ontology reference alignments , 2013, OM.

[6]  P. Wang,et al.  Debugging Ontology Mappings: A Static Approach , 2008, Comput. Informatics.

[7]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  Depth-First Search and Linear Graph Algorithms , 1972, SIAM J. Comput..

[8]  Mansur R. Kabuka,et al.  Ontology matching with semantic verification , 2009, J. Web Semant..

[9]  Heiner Stuckenschmidt,et al.  Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative: Six Years of Experience , 2011, J. Data Semant..

[10]  Jean H. Gallier,et al.  Linear-Time Algorithms for Testing the Satisfiability of Propositional Horn Formulae , 1984, J. Log. Program..

[11]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Logic-based assessment of the compatibility of UMLS ontology sources , 2011, J. Biomed. Semant..

[12]  Stefan Schlobach,et al.  Debugging and Semantic Clarification by Pinpointing , 2005, ESWC.

[13]  Christian Meilicke,et al.  Alignment incoherence in ontology matching , 2011 .

[14]  Boris Konev,et al.  The Logical Difference Problem for Description Logic Terminologies , 2008, IJCAR.

[15]  Jérôme Euzenat,et al.  Ontology Matching: State of the Art and Future Challenges , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[16]  Zohra Bellahsene,et al.  YAM++ : A Multi-strategy Based Approach for Ontology Matching Task , 2012, EKAW.

[17]  Markus Krötzsch,et al.  Concurrent Classification of EL Ontologies , 2011, International Semantic Web Conference.

[18]  Wolfgang Faber.  Answer Set Programming , 2013, Reasoning Web.

[19]  Luciano Serafini,et al.  Distributed Description Logics: Assimilating Information from Peer Sources , 2003, J. Data Semant..

[20]  Sebastian Rudolph,et al.  Advocatus Diaboli - Exploratory Enrichment of Ontologies with Negative Constraints , 2012, EKAW.

[21]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Evaluating Mapping Repair Systems with Large Biomedical Ontologies , 2013, Description Logics.

[22]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Ontology Integration Using Mappings: Towards Getting the Right Logical Consequences , 2009, ESWC.

[23]  Boris Motik,et al.  Hypertableau Reasoning for Description Logics , 2009, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[24]  Johanna Völker,et al.  Learning Disjointness for Debugging Mappings between Lightweight Ontologies , 2008, EKAW.

[25]  Bernardo Cuenca Grau,et al.  LogMap: Logic-Based and Scalable Ontology Matching , 2011, SEMWEB.

[26]  Olivier Bodenreider,et al.  The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS): integrating biomedical terminology , 2004, Nucleic Acids Res..

[27]  Emanuel Santos,et al.  Ontology Alignment Repair through Modularization and Confidence-Based Heuristics , 2013, PloS one.