Ontology matching ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥ ΤΜΗΜΑ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ...

54
Ontology matching ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥ ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥ ΤΜΗΜΑ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ ΠΛΗΡΟΦΟΡΙΑΚΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΤΜΗΜΑ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ ΠΛΗΡΟΦΟΡΙΑΚΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΙΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑΚΩΝ ΣΥΣΤΗΜΑΤΩΝ ΕΠΙΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑΚΩΝ ΣΥΣΤΗΜΑΤΩΝ Πρόγραμμα Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών Πρόγραμμα Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών http://www.icsd.aegean.gr/kotis/ Κώτης Κων/νος - Copyright Ai-Lab, ICSEng. Dept. University of the Aegean - - Copyright Ai-Lab, ICSEng. Dept. University of the Aegean - 2007 2007

Transcript of Ontology matching ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥ ΤΜΗΜΑ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ...

Ontology matching

ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΑΙΓΑΙΟΥ

ΤΜΗΜΑ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ ΠΛΗΡΟΦΟΡΙΑΚΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΙΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑΚΩΝ ΤΜΗΜΑ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ ΠΛΗΡΟΦΟΡΙΑΚΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΙΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑΚΩΝ ΣΥΣΤΗΜΑΤΩΝΣΥΣΤΗΜΑΤΩΝ

Πρόγραμμα Μεταπτυχιακών ΣπουδώνΠρόγραμμα Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών

http://www.icsd.aegean.gr/kotis/

Κώτης Κων/νος - Copyright Ai-Lab, ICSEng. Dept. University of the Aegean - 2007 - Copyright Ai-Lab, ICSEng. Dept. University of the Aegean - 2007

Outline

• Information integrationInformation integration• Schema and Ontology (Semantic) integrationSchema and Ontology (Semantic) integration• The matching problem - Terminology• Matching Dimensions (classification)• Techniques• Matching strategies (methods)• Systems

04/19/23 2Ontology Matching - K Kotis

Integration

• a large number of information sources need a single point of global access via a single and unified view

• Need for a specific conceptualization and a specific vocabulary whose entries provide lexicalizations of the concepts used for shaping information

• Ontologies play a key role to shaping information as they provide conceptualizations of domains

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 3

Information/data integration

• for meaningful information exchange or integration, providers and consumers (humans or software agents) need compatible semantics

• A traditional example for information integration is the Catalog Integration example

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 4

Information integration

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 5

Information/data integration• B2B applications represent and store their products in

electronic catalog-type models. • A typical example of such a model is the product directory

of http://www.amazon.com• A company to participate in a specific marketplace in

which amazon.com participates, it must identify correspondences between entries of its catalogs and entries of the catalogs of www.amazon.com.

• Having identified the correspondences between the entries of the catalogs, it can be assumed that the catalogs are aligned.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 6

7

New faculty member

Find houses with 2 bedrooms priced under

200K

homes.comrealestate.com homeseekers.com

Information/data integration

…sources on the Web which provide house listings

8

Architecture of Data Integration System

mediated schema

homes.comrealestate.com

source schema 2

homeseekers.com

source schema 3source schema 1

Find houses with 2 bedrooms priced under 200K

simply pose the query in the

mediated schema

9

price agent-name address

Semantic Matches between Schemas

1-1 match complex match

homes.com

listed-price contact-name city state

Mediated schema

320K Jane Brown Seattle WA240K Mike Smith Miami FL

Source schema

the schema-matching problem is to find semantic mappings between the elements of the two schemas

10

Schema Matching is Everywhere!• Fundamental problem in numerous applications• Databases

– data integration– data translation– schema/view integration– data warehousing– semantic query processing– model management– peer data management

• AI– knowledge bases, ontology merging, information gathering

agents, ...• Web

– e-commerce– marking up data using ontologies (e.g., on Semantic Web)

Schema matching vs. ontology matching: differences

• Schemas often do not provide explicit semantics for their data– Relational schemas provide no generalization

• Ontologies are logical systems that constrain the meaning– Ontology definitions as a set of logical axioms

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 11

Schema matching vs. ontology matching: commonalities

• Schemas and ontologies provide a vocabulary of terms that describes a– domain of interest

• Schemas and ontologies constrain the meaning of terms used in the– vocabulary

Techniques developed for both problems are of a mutual benefit

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 12

13

Why Schema Matching is Difficult• Schema & data never fully capture semantics!

– not adequately documented – schema creator has retired to Florida!

• Must rely on clues in schema & data – using names, structures, types, data values, etc.

• Such clues can be unreliable– same names => different entities: area => location or square-feet– different names => same entity: area & address => location

• Intended semantics can be subjective– house-style = house-description?– military applications require committees to decide!

• Cannot be fully automated, needs user feedback!

14

Ontology Matching• Increasingly critical for

– knowledge bases, Semantic Web

• An ontology – concepts organized into a taxonomy tree– each concept has

• a set of attributes• a set of instances

– relations among concepts

• Matching– concepts – attributes – relations

name: Mike Burnsdegree: Ph.D.

Entity

UndergradCourses

GradCourses

People

StaffFaculty

AssistantProfessor

AssociateProfessor

Professor

CS Dept. US

15

Matching Taxonomies of Concepts

Entity

Courses Staff

Technical StaffAcademic Staff

Lecturer Senior Lecturer

Professor

CS Dept. Australia

Entity

UndergradCourses

GradCourses

People

StaffFaculty

AssistantProfessor

AssociateProfessor

Professor

CS Dept. US

Outline

• Information integration• Schema and Ontology (Semantic) integration• The matching problem - TerminologyThe matching problem - Terminology• Matching Dimensions (classification)• Techniques• Matching strategies (methods)• Systems

04/19/23 16Ontology Matching - K Kotis

Ontology definition

• An ontology is a pair O=(S, A)

– S = ontological signature (terms that lexicalize concepts and the relations between concepts)

– A = ontological axioms (restricting the intended meaning of the terms included in the signature)

(Kalfoglou & Schorlemmer, 2003; Kotis et al, 2006)

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 17

Ontology Mapping

O1 = (S1, A1) to O2 = (S2, A2)

a morphism f:S1→S2 such that A2 f(A⊨ 1),

i.e. all interpretations that satisfy O2’s axioms also satisfy O1’s translated axioms

(Kalfoglou & Schorlemmer, 2003)04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 18

a set of binary relations between

the ontological signatures

inclusion ( ) and ⊑equivalence (≡)

relations

Definition

• Mapping of ontologies:

The mapping between two ontologies can be defined as a morphism from one ontology to the other i.e. a collection of functions assigning the symbols used in one vocabulary to the symbols of the other

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 19

Definition

• Alignment of ontologies:

The task of establishing a collection of binary relations between the vocabularies of two ontologies, i.e. pairs of ontology mappings.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 20

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 21

Ontology Alignment• Articulate a set of binary relations (inclusion

( ) and equivalence (≡)) between the ⊑ontological signatures

==> an alignment of the two ontologies • Instead of aligning two ontologies “directly”

through their signatures, we may specify the alignment of two ontologies O1 and O2 by means of a pair of ontology mappings from an intermediate source ontology O3

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 22

S-morphism

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 23

We can consider O3 to be part of a larger intermediate ontology and define the alignment of ontologies O1 and O2 by means of morphisms f1: S1→S3 and f2: S2 →S3, i.e. by means of their mapping to the intermediate ontology

Hidden intermediate ontology and the

semantic morphism

WordNet plays the role of an “intermediate”

Outline

• Information integration• Schema and Ontology (Semantic) integration• The matching problem - Terminology• Matching Dimensions (classification)Matching Dimensions (classification)• Techniques• Matching strategies (methods)• Systems

04/19/23 24Ontology Matching - K Kotis

Mediated vs point-to-point• Mediated approaches = use of an intermediate reference

ontology that provides more general concepts and adequate axioms for clarifying the meaning of domain-specific concepts– possibly not work in the “real world” of the Web, since a intermediate-

reference ontology that preserves the axioms of the source ontologies may not be always available or may be hard to be constructed

• Point-to-point approaches = missing the valuable knowledge that a reference ontology can provide in respect to the semantic relations among concepts

• Alternative = hidden intermediate reference ontology that is built on the fly using lexicons (senses) that express the intended meaning of ontologies’ concepts and user-specified semantic relations among concepts

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 25

External knowledge• Apart from using an intermediate ontology as

an external source for facilitating the mapping/merging process other external source of information can be used as well:– Instances of concepts, – corpora of documents that have been annotated

using the specific ontologies, – previously identified mappings between ontologies, – other ontologies or lexicons.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 26

Classification

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 27

Classification – most common

• OWL models• Schema-level• Exact matching (0 or 1)• 1:1 and 1:many cardinality• Equivalence and Subsumption relations• Absolute Confidence (trust the mappings)

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 28

Common interest

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 29

Matching dimensions

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 30

Granularitylayer

P. Shvaiko, J. Euzenat:  A Survey of Schema-based Matching Approaches  Journal on Data Semantics, 2005.

Techniquelayer

Input typelayer

Outline

• Information integration• Schema and Ontology (Semantic) integration• The matching problem - Terminology• Matching Dimensions (classification)• TechniquesTechniques• Matching strategies (methods)• Systems

04/19/23 31Ontology Matching - K Kotis

Terminological

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 32

Terminological

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 33

Terminological

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 34

Terminological

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 35

Terminological

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 36

Structural

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 37

Structural

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 38

Structural (with formal semantics)

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 39

Semantic (informal semantics)

• semantic matching explores the mapping between the meanings of concept specifications by exploiting domain knowledge.

• Semantic matching specifies a similarity function in the form of a semantic relation (hyperonym, hyponym, meronym, part-of, etc) between the intension (necessary and/or sufficient conditions) of concepts.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 40

Semantic (informal semantics)• Semantic matching may rely to external information found in

lexicons, thesauruses or reference ontologies, incorporating semantic knowledge (mostly domain-dependent) into the process.

• An example is the exploitation of semantic knowledge in the WordNet lexicon by mapping senses to ontology concepts using information retrieval techniques (Kotis et al, 2006).

• Although semantic matching is considered to be the most important of the three, it is still rather difficult to be done completely automatically, avoiding any user involvement (Uschold, 2003; Kotis et al, 2006).

Human involvement vs. automation

• Automating the ontology matching process is still a key research issue. – There must always be a minimum set of human decisions

present. – Early techniques require human involvement in the final

stages of the process, for the users to verify the results and specify further mappings.

– Latest efforts, (e.g. in Kotis et al, 2006) place human involvement at the early stages of the mapping process, where humans validate and/or provide the intended informal meaning of ontology concepts.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 42

Human involvement vs. automation

• Automating the ontology matching process is still a key research issue. – Fully Automated methods result in lower precision and

recall of resulted mapping pairs (concepts and properties)– OAEI contest (since 2005) evaluates ontology matching

tools towards automating the process with the minimum precision and recall cost

– http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 43

Human involvement vs. automation

• Latest algorithms attempt to approximate similarities between concepts in an iterative way– combining also different kinds of matching

algorithms, without any user involvement.

Although they are promising efforts, more need to be done towards improving the mapping results.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 44

Outline

• Information integration• Schema and Ontology (Semantic) integration• The matching problem - Terminology• Matching Dimensions (classification)• Techniques• Matching strategies (methods)Matching strategies (methods)• Systems

04/19/23 45Ontology Matching - K Kotis

Matching strategies

• Ontology matching:

the computation of similarity functions towards discovering similarities between ontology concepts or/and properties pairs using combinations of lexical, structural, and semantic knowledge.

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 46

Matching strategies

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 47

Matching strategies

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 48

Outline

• Information integration• Schema and Ontology (Semantic) integration• The matching problem - Terminology• Matching Dimensions (classification)• Techniques• Matching strategies (methods)• SystemsSystems

04/19/23 49Ontology Matching - K Kotis

Sequential approach

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 50

Sequential approach

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 51

AUTOMS : a synthesis of methods

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 52

OAEI contest 2006

Challenges

• Prior Matches (background knowledge)• Large scale evaluation

– Match very large real ontologies (e.g. Gene Ontology, Anatomy Ontology)

• Interactive approaches – Human involvement for 100% precision/recall

• Performance of systems– Precision/recall/complexity/speed– Runtime matching (e.g. in SW query answering)

04/19/23 Ontology Matching - K Kotis 54