A Resourceful Framework Using Combined Agent Ontology Mapping for Semantic Web

Authors

  • M. Saravanan Assistant Professor, Annai College of Arts and Science, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District, Tamil Nadu, India
  • N. Vanjulavalli Assistant Professor, Annai College of Arts and Science, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District, Tamil Nadu, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51983/arss-2015.4.2.2769

Keywords:

Ontology, Mapping, Semantics, Ontology agent

Abstract

The combined agent ontology mappings assure that more and more people will start using ontology. The expectations are also high when one thinks about the potential use of these applications. Ontology mapping plays a vital role in achieving heterogeneous data integration on the Semantic Web. This enables a large number of ontology present on the web need to be aligned before one can make use of them. But this ontology can differ in representation, quality, and size that pose different challenges to ontology mapping. The main purpose of implementing this multi agent ontology mapping framework was that operate effectively in the Semantic Web
environment. The aim is to build a framework that solves the difficulty of evaluating ontologies with a large number of concepts. Here a number of domain experts are necessary to evaluate similar concepts in different ontologies. The experts combine their knowledge and experience to create a solution rather than relying on a single person perspective. In this the classes are represented as RDF individuals where the individual properties are defined as OWL data properties. Here both ontologies are valid separately, and no logical reasoned would find inconsistency in them individually. It is easy to see that, once we compare the two ontologies, a considerable amount of uncertainty arises over the classes and its properties and in a way they can be compared. This uncertainty can be contributed to the fact that, owing to the different representations, certain elements will be missing for the comparison.

References

Alexiev, V., Breu, M., Bruijn, J. d., Fensel, D., Lara, R., & Lausen, H. (2005). Information Integration with Ontologies: Experiences from an Industrial Showcase. John Wiley & Sons.

Bayardo, Jr., R. J., Bohrer, W., Brice, R., Cichocki, A., Fowler, J., Helal, A., Kashyap, V., Ksiezyk, T., Martin, G., Nodine, M., Rashid, M., Rusinkiewicz, M., Shea, R., Unnikrishnan, C., Unruh, A., & Woelk, D. (1997). InfoSleuth: Agent-based Semantic Integration of Information in Open and Dynamic Environments. In Proceedings ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD '97 (pp. 195-206). ACM.

Bouzeghoub, A., & Elbyed, A. (2006). Ontology mapping for web-based educational systems interoperability. IBIS, 1(1), 73-84.

Su, X., & Gulla, J. A. (2004). Semantic enrichment for ontology mapping. Natural Language Processing and Information Systems Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3136/2004, 21-44. DOI:10.1007/978-3-540-27779-8_19[4]

Joachims, T. (2002). Optimizing search engines using click-through data. In Proc. The 8th ACM SIGKDD Intl Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 133-142). ACM Press.

Chua, S., Neo, S. Y., Goh, H. K., et al. (2005). Trecvid 2005 by nus pris. NIST TRECVID. http://www.mingzhao.org/Publications/ZM_2005_TRECV

Corinna, C., Mehryar, M., & Ashish, R. (2007). Magnitude-Preserving Ranking Algorithms. In Proc. The 24th International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 169-176).

David, C., & Tong, Z. (2006). Subset Ranking Using Regression. COLT 006, LNAI 4005, 605-619.

Rong, A., & Hauptmann, D. (2006). Efficient margin-based rank learning algorithms for information retrieval. CIVR, 113-122.

Cynthia, R. (2006). Ranking with a P-Norm Push. COLT 2006, LNAI 4005, 589-604.

Downloads

Published

04-10-2015

How to Cite

Saravanan, M., & Vanjulavalli, N. (2015). A Resourceful Framework Using Combined Agent Ontology Mapping for Semantic Web. Asian Review of Social Sciences, 4(2), 27–30. https://doi.org/10.51983/arss-2015.4.2.2769