An Automatic Biomedical Ontology Meta-matching Technique

Biomedical ontology matching aims at determining the heterogeneous biomedical concepts, and bridging the semantic gap between heterogeneous biomedical ontologies. The foundation of a biomedical ontology matching technique is the Biomedical Concept Similarity Measure (BCSM), which calculates the similarity value between two biomedical concepts. Since various BCSMs have different advantages, usually several BCSMs are aggregated together to improve the result’s confidence. How to tune the aggregating weights to ensure the quality of the alignment is called biomedical ontology meta-matching problem, which is a challenge in the ontology matching domain. Currently, researchers mainly focus on how to tune the aggregating weights for various similarity measures to improve the quality of the ontology alignments. However, the ignorance of the effects brought about by different biomedical concept mapping’s preference on different similarity measures significantly reduces the alignment’s quality. To overcome this drawback, in this work, we formally define the biomedical ontology meta-matching problem, and then present an Ordered Weighted Average (OWA) based approach to automatically aggregate various biomedical concept similarity measures. In our method, the aggregating weights determined for each concept mapping is associated with the ordered position of the similarity value instead of a particular concept similarity measure. The experiment utilizes the large biomed track provided by Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI) to test our proposal’s performance, and the experimental results show the effectiveness of our proposal.

[1]  Jürgen Bock,et al.  Discrete particle swarm optimisation for ontology alignment , 2012, Inf. Sci..

[2]  Matthew A. Jaro,et al.  Advances in Record-Linkage Methodology as Applied to Matching the 1985 Census of Tampa, Florida , 1989 .

[3]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

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

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

[6]  Alexander Dekhtyar,et al.  Information Retrieval , 2018, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[7]  Stefanos D. Kollias,et al.  A String Metric for Ontology Alignment , 2005, SEMWEB.

[8]  Stefan Conrad,et al.  Ontology Matching using multiple similarity measures , 2015, 2015 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K).

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

[10]  Jeng-Shyang Pan,et al.  A Compact Co-Evolutionary Algorithm for sensor ontology meta-matching , 2017, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[11]  Giovanni Acampora,et al.  Enhancing ontology alignment through a memetic aggregation of similarity measures , 2013, Inf. Sci..

[12]  Xingsi Xue,et al.  Optimizing ontology alignments through a Memetic Algorithm using both MatchFmeasure and Unanimous Improvement Ratio , 2015, Artif. Intell..

[13]  P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? % ? ? ? ? , 1991 .