Finding correct semantic correspondences between ontologies is one of the most challenging problems in the area of semantic web technologies. Experiences with benchmarking matching systems revealed that even the manual revision of automatically generated mappings is a very difficult problem because it has to take the semantics of the ontologies as well as interactions between correspondences into account. In this paper, we propose methods for supporting human experts in the task of revising automatically created mappings. In particular, we present non-standard reasoning methods for detecting and propagating implications of expert decisions on the correctness of a mapping. We show that the use of these reasoning methods significantly reduces the effort of mapping revision in terms of the number of decisions that have to be made by the expert.
Supporting Manual Mapping Revision using Logical Reasoning
Tamilin, Andrei
2008
Abstract
Finding correct semantic correspondences between ontologies is one of the most challenging problems in the area of semantic web technologies. Experiences with benchmarking matching systems revealed that even the manual revision of automatically generated mappings is a very difficult problem because it has to take the semantics of the ontologies as well as interactions between correspondences into account. In this paper, we propose methods for supporting human experts in the task of revising automatically created mappings. In particular, we present non-standard reasoning methods for detecting and propagating implications of expert decisions on the correctness of a mapping. We show that the use of these reasoning methods significantly reduces the effort of mapping revision in terms of the number of decisions that have to be made by the expert.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
