Semantic integration: a survey of ontology-based approaches

ABSTRACT

Semantic integration is an active area of research in several disciplines, such as databases, information-integration, and ontologies. This paper provides a brief survey of the approaches to semantic integration developed by researchers in the ontology community. We focus on the approaches that differentiate the ontology research from other related areas. The goal of the paper is to provide a reader who may not be very familiar with ontology research with introduction to major themes in this research and with pointers to different research projects. We discuss techniques for finding correspondences between ontologies, declarative ways of representing these correspondences, and use of these correspondences in various semantic-integration tasks

REFERENCES

• 1: Jon Barwise , Jerry Seligman, Information flow: the logic of distributed systems, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1997
• 2: D. Calvanese, G. Giacomo, and M. Lenzerini. Ontology of integration and integration of ontologies. In Description Logic Workshop (DL 2001), pages 10--19, 2001.
• 3: D. Calvanese, G. D. Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, R. Rosati, and G. Vetere. DL-lite: Practical Reasoning for Rich DLs. In International Workshop on Description Logics (DL2004), Whistler, Canada, 2004.
• 4: M. Crubézy and M. A. Musen. Ontologies in support of problem solving. In S. Staab and R. Studer, editors, Handbook on Ontologies, pages 321--342. Sringer, 2003.
• 5: AnHai Doan , Jayant Madhavan , Pedro Domingos , Alon Halevy, Learning to map between ontologies on the semantic web, Proceedings of the 11th international conference on World Wide Web, May 07-11, 2002, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA [doi>10.1145/511446.511532]
• 6: D. Dou, D. McDermott, and P. Qi. Ontology translation on the semantic web. In International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics, 2003.
• 7: J. Euzenat and P. Valtchev. Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-Lite. In The 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-04), Valencia, Spain, 2004.
• 8: Aldo Gangemi , Nicola Guarino , Claudio Masolo , Alessandro Oltramari, Sweetening WORDNET with DOLCE, AI Magazine, v.24 n.3, p.13-24, September 2003
• 9: Bernhard Ganter , C. Franzke , Rudolf Wille, Formal Concept Analysis: Mathematical Foundations, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus, NJ, 1997
• 10: F. Giunchiglia, P. Shvaiko, and M. Yatskevich. Semantic matching. In 1st European semantic web symposium (ESWS'04), pages 61--75, Heraklion, Greece, 2004.
• 11: M. Grüninger. A guide to the ontology of the process specification language. In S. Staab and R. Studer, editors, Handbook on Ontologies. Sringer, 2003.
• 12: M. Grüninger and J. Kopena. Semantic integration through invariants. In A. Doan, A. Halevy, and N. Noy, editors, Workshop on Semantic Integration at ISWC-2003, Sanibel Island, FL, 2003.
• 13: E. Hovy. Combining and standardizing largescale, practical ontologies for machine translation and other uses. In The First International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), pages 535--542, Granada, Spain, 1998.
• 14: Y. Kalfoglou and M. Schorlemmer. IF-Map: an ontology mapping method based on information flow theory. Journal on Data Semantics, 1(1):98--127, Oct. 2003.
• 15: Yannis Kalfoglou , Marco Schorlemmer, Ontology mapping: the state of the art, The Knowledge Engineering Review, v.18 n.1, p.1-31, January 2003 [doi>10.1017/S0269888903000651]
• 16: M. Klein. Combining and relating ontologies: an analysis of problems and solutions. In IJCAI-2001 Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing, pages 53--62, Seattle, WA, 2001.
• 17: Jayant Madhavan , Philip A. Bernstein , Erhard Rahm, Generic Schema Matching with Cupid, Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, p.49-58, September 11-14, 2001
• 18: Alexander Maedche , Boris Motik , Nuno Silva , Raphael Volz, MAFRA - A MApping FRAmework for Distributed Ontologies, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Ontologies and the Semantic Web, p.235-250, October 01-04, 2002
• 19: Ian Niles , Adam Pease, Towards a standard upper ontology, Proceedings of the international conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, p.2-9, October 17-19, 2001, Ogunquit, Maine, USA [doi>10.1145/505168.505170]
• 20: Natalya F. Noy , Mark A. Musen, The PROMPT suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.59 n.6, p.983-1024, December 2003 [doi>10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.08.002]
• 21: S. Polyak, J. Lee, M. Gruninger, and C. Menzel. Applying the process interchange format(PIF) to a supply chain process interoperability scenario. In Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and Problem Solving Methods, ECAI'98, Brighton, England, 1998.
• 22: Erhard Rahm , Philip A. Bernstein, A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching, The VLDB Journal — The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases, v.10 n.4, p.334-350, December 2001 [doi>10.1007/s007780100057]
• 23: G. Stumme and A. Mädche. FCA-Merge: Bottom-up merging of ontologies. In 7th Intl. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '01), pages 225--230, Seattle, WA, 2001.
• 24: Michael Uschold , Michael Gruninger, Ontologies and semantics for seamless connectivity, ACM SIGMOD Record, v.33 n.4, December 2004 [doi>10.1145/1041410.1041420]
• 25: Andre Valente , Thomas Russ , Robert MacGregor , William Swartout, Building and (Re)Using an Ontology of Air Campaign Planning, IEEE Intelligent Systems, v.14 n.1, p.27-36, January 1999 [doi>10.1109/5254.747903]
• 26: Christopher Welty, Guest editorial: ontology research, AI Magazine, v.24 n.3, p.11-12, September 2003