Ontology generation for large email collections

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a new approach to identifying concepts expressed in a collection of email messages, and organizing them into an ontology or taxonomy for browsing. It incorporates techniques from text mining, information retrieval, natural language processing and machine learning to generate a concept ontology. Nominal N-gram mining is used to identify candidate concepts. Wordnet and surface text pattern matching are used to identify relationships among the concepts. A supervised clustering algorithm is then used to further cluster the concepts. The experiments show that the approach is effective.

REFERENCES

• 1: Jaime Arguello , Jamie Callan, A bootstrapping approach for identifying stakeholders in public-comment corpora, Proceedings of the 8th annual international conference on Digital government research: bridging disciplines & domains, May 20-23, 2007, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
• 2: E. Blomqvist. Fully automatic construction of enterprise ontologies using design patterns: Initial method and first experiences. In The 5th International Conference on Ontologies, DataBases, and Applications of Semantics. ODBASE, 2005.
• 3: P. Cimiano, A. Hotho, and S. Staab. Comparing conceptual, divisive and agglomerative clustering for learning taxonomies from text. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 435--439. ECAI, 2004.
• 4: P. Cimiano and J. Völker. Text2onto: A framework for ontology learning and data-driven change discovery. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems. NLDB, 2005.
• 5: F. Colace, M. D. Santo, and M. Vento. An automatic algorithm for building ontologies from data. In International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies: From Theory to Applications, 2004.
• 6: Melania Degeratu , Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou, Building automatically a business registration ontology, Proceedings of the 2002 annual national conference on Digital government research, p.1-7, May 19-22, 2002, Los Angeles, California
• 7: D. Elliman and J. R. G. Pulido. Automatic derivation of on-line document ontologies. In International Workshop on Mechanisms for Enterprise Integration: From Objects to Ontology, 15th European Conference on Object Oriented Programming. MERIT, 2001.
• 8: C. Fellbaum. WordNet:An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, 1998.
• 9: B. Fortuna, D. Mladenic, and M. Grobelnik. Semi-automatic construction of topic ontology. In Conference on Data Mining and Data Warehouses. SiKDD, 2005.
• 10: T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and J. Friedman. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
• 11: A. Jaimes , J. R. Smith, Semi-automatic, data-driven construction of multimedia ontologies, Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, p.781-784, July 06-09, 2003
• 12: L. Karoui, M.-A. Aufaure, and N. Bennacer. Ontology discovery from web pages: Application to tourism. In In the Workshop of Knowledge Discovery and Ontologies. KDO, 2004.
• 13: L. Khan and L. Wang. Automatic ontology derivation using clustering for image classification. In In Proc. of 8th International Workshop on Multimedia Information Systems. IWMIS, 2002.
• 14: M. Sabou. Extracting ontologies from software documentation. In Workshop on Ontology Learning and Population, European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 22--23. ECAI, 2004.
• 15: Mark Sanderson , Bruce Croft, Deriving concept hierarchies from text, Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, p.206-213, August 15-19, 1999, Berkeley, California, United States [doi>10.1145/312624.312679]
• 16: Stuart Shulman , Eduard Hovy , Jamie Callan , Stephen Zavestoski, Language processing technologies for electronic rulemaking: a project highlight, Proceedings of the 2005 national conference on Digital government research, May 15-18, 2005, Atlanta, Georgia
• 17: C. J. Thomas, A. P. Sheth, and W. S. York. Modular ontology design using canonical building blocks in the biochemistry domain. In International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems. FOIS, 2006.
• 18: R. Tibshirani, G. Walther, and T. Hastie. Estimating the number of clusters in a dataset via the gap statistic. In Tech. Rep. 208, Dept. of Statistics, Stanford University., 2000.
• 19: Y. Wang, J. Volker, and P. Haase. Towards semi-automatic ontology building supported by large-scale knowledge acquisition. In In AAAI Fall Symposium On Semantic Web for Collaborative Knowledge Acquisition, pages 70--77. AAAI, 2006.
• 20: Hui Yang , Jamie Callan, Near-duplicate detection by instance-level constrained clustering, Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, August 06-11, 2006, Seattle, Washington, USA [doi>10.1145/1148170.1148243]
• 21: Hui Yang , Jamie Callan , Stuart Shulman, Next steps in near-duplicate detection for eRulemaking, Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Digital government research, May 21-24, 2006, San Diego, California [doi>10.1145/1146598.1146663]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.4 INFORMATION SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS

Keywords:
concept ontology, eRulemaking, supervised clustering