Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMyron Price Modified over 9 years ago
1
Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings: A Linguistic-based Approach Patrick Arnold, Erhard Rahm University of Leipzig, Germany 17th East-European Conference on Advances in Databases and Information Systems
2
2 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 1. Introduction Ontology Matching: Detecting corresponding concepts between two Ontologies O and O' Most matching tools do not consider the relation type that holds between corresponding concepts
3
3 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 1. Introduction Importance of Relation Types Ontology Merging and Ontology Evolutions More precise results Effectively preventing false conclusions Related fields Text Mining, Entity Resolution, Linked Data Key Question: Given two items, words etc.: What is the logical relation between them?
4
4 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 1. Introduction - Example
5
5 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 1. Introduction Some existing tools regarding relation types S-Match: Ineffective in our evaluations Returned about 20,000 correspondences where around 400 were expected Further tools: LogMap, TaxoMap, etc.
6
6 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings Our Contributions 1.Introduction 2.Semantic Enrichment Architecture 3.Implemented Strategies 4.Evaluation 5.Outlook
7
7 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 2. Semantic Enrichtment Architecture We provide a 2-step architecutre Step 1: Classic Ontology Matching Step 2: Enrichment
8
8 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 2. Semantic Enrichtment Architecture Approach consists of 4 strategies Each strategy returns one of the following relation types: equal is-a / inverse is-a part-of / has-a related undecided Take the relation which was returned most In case of draw: User feedback required If all strategies return undecided: Decide on equal by default
9
9 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.1 Compound Strategy Compound: Two words A, B form a new word AB. Examples: high-school, blackbird, database conference A is called the modifier, B is called the head Compounds often express is-a relations (endocentric compounds) High-school is a school Blackbird is a bird...
10
10 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.1 Compound Strategy If there is a correspondence (AB, B) or (B, AB), we derive the is-a or inv. is-a relation Example: (main memory, memory) Problem: Exocentric compounds butterfly, redhead, computer mouse Exocentric matches extremely rare in mappings If AB is an exocentric compound, there usually is no head B in the opposite ontology Example: sawtooth – tooth
11
11 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.1 Compound Strategy Possibilities to reduce false conclusions Check modifier length: Must be at least 3 inroad – road Use dictionary to check the modifier marriage – age nausea – sea holiday – day? No solutions for “Pseudo-Compounds“ question – ion justice – ice
12
12 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.2 Background Knowledge WordNet for English-language scenarioes Reliable, extensive thesaurus Excellent precision, good recall Limited in domain-specific areas Problem: Compounds Example: Vintage Car Repair Shop Very simple word, but not contained by WordNet
13
13 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.2 Background Knowledge Gradual Modifier Removal Remove modifiers gradually from the left After each removal: Check whether word is contained by WordNet Example: Vintage Car Repair Shop ↔ Company WordNet: Repair Shop is a Company Vintage Car Repair Shop is a Company StepWordIn WordNet? 1Vintage Car Repair Shop 2Car Repair Shop 3Repair Shop
14
14 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.3 Itemization Itemization: List of items (words or phrases) Most frequently in product taxonomies Examples: Laptops and Computers Bikes, Scooters and Motorbikes More complex: Need special treatment Itemization Strategy: Triggers if at least one concept is an itemization Exploits previous strategies Approach: Remove items from item sets Goal: Empty set
15
15 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.3 Itemization Example Correspondence: books, e-books, movies, films, cds novels and compact discs Step 1: Build item sets { books, e-books, movies, films, cds } { novels, compact discs } Step 2: Intra-Synonym Removal { books, e-books, movies, films, cds }In each item set, remove synonyms (A,B) by crossing off either A or B. { novels, compact discs } Step 2: Intra-Synonym Removal { books, e-books, movies, films, cds }In each item set, remove synonyms (A,B) by crossing off either A or B. { novels, compact discs } Step 3: Intra-Hyponym Removal { books, e-books, movies, cds }In each item set, remove existing hyponyms. { novels, compact discs } Step 3: Intra-Hyponym Removal { books, e-books, movies, cds }In each item set, remove existing hyponyms. { novels, compact discs } Step 4: Inter-Synonym Removal { books, movies, cds }Remove each synonym pair between the two item sets. { novels, compact discs } Step 4: Inter-Synonym Removal { books, movies, cds }Remove each synonym pair between the two item sets. { novels, compact discs } Step 5: Intra-Hyponym Removal { books, movies }Remove each word H to which a hypernym H’ in the opposite item set exists. { novels } Step 5: Intra-Hyponym Removal { books, movies }Remove each word H to which a hypernym H’ in the opposite item set exists. { novels } Step 6: Determine the Relation Type { books, movies }Second item set more specific than first one: Inverse is-a { }
16
16 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.4 Structure Strategy Focus: Structured schemas (hierarchies) Issue: A relation between two matching concepts X, Y cannot be derived Check the relation between X' and Y resp. X and Y' Prime (') denotes father element
17
17 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 3. Implemented Strategies 3.4 Structure Strategy Example:
18
18 3. Implemented Strategies 3.5 Subset Verification In some cases, is-a relations only appear to be correct
19
19 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 4. Evaluation 3 Benchmark Scenarios Input: Perfect mapping without relation types Evaluation: How many non-trivial relations were detected? (recall) How many of them were correct? (precision) ScenarioDomain / TraitsCorresp.Non-trivial corresp. 1Web DirectoriesGerman language, product catalog34062 2DiseasesHealth, medical domain39541 3Text Mining Taxon.TM Taxonomy (Everyday Language)762692
20
20 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 4. Evaluation Evaluation (as of April 2013) Evaluation against S-Match No reasonable evaluation feasible Scenario 1: Returned only 4 correspondences, all wrong Scenario 2: Returned 19,600 correspondences 3 % recall, precision close to 0 % RecallPrecisionF-Measure Web Directories46.7 %69.0 %57.8 % Health58.5 %80.0 %69.2 % TM Taxonomies65.4 %97.7 %81.1 %
21
21 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 4. Evaluation Evaluating the Strategies RecallPrecision Compound18.9 %82.2 % Background Knowledge19.6 %94.0 % Itemization17.1 %88.8 % Structure1.0 %50.0 %
22
22 10/14/2015Semantic Enrichment of Ontology Mappings 5. Outlook Relation types needed for different mapping tasks Two general approaches: Linguistic or background knowledge Linguistic Strategies More generic and more error-prone Background Knowledge Less generic and more precise Improvements Exploit more background knowledge Example: Yago Taxonomy, DBPedia, UMLS Combine it with linguistic / NLP technologies Exploit further linguistic techniques
23
23 Thank You
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.