This is the second of a two-part paper to review ontology research and development, in particular, ontology mapping and evolving. Ontology is defined as a formal explicit specification of a shared conceptualization. Ontology itself is not a static model so that it must have the potential to capture changes of meanings and relations. As such, mapping and evolving ontologies is part of an essential task of ontology learning and development. Ontology mapping is concerned with reusing existing ontologies, expanding and combining them by some means and enabling a larger pool of information and knowledge in different domains to be integrated to support new communication and use. Ontology evolving, likewise, is concerned with maintaining existing ontologies and extending them as appropriate when new information or knowledge is acquired. It is apparent from the reviews that current research into semi-automatic or automatic ontology research in all the three aspects of generation, mapping and evolving have so far achieved limited success.
Expert human input is essential in almost all cases. Achievements have been made largely in the form of tools and aids to assist the human expert. Many research challenges remain in this field and many of such challenges need to be overcome if the next generation of the Semantic Web is to be realized.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
[1] T.R. Gruber , A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , Knowledge Acquisition5 (1993) 199-220 .
2.
[2] D. Fensel , Understanding is based on consensus. In: Semantic Web Panel, WWW10, Hong Kong (May 2001).
3.
[3] Y. Ding and S. Foo , Ontology research and development: Part 1 - a review of ontology generation , Journal of Information Science28(2) (2002) 123-136 .
4.
[4] H. SofiaPinto, A.Gomez-Perez and J.P. Martins , Some issues on ontology integration . In: Proceedings of IJCAI-99 Workshop on Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods: Lessons Learned and Future Trends, in conjunction with the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, August, Stockholm, Sweden (1999).
5.
[5] N.F. Noy and M.A. Musen , SMART: Automated support for ontology merging and alignment. SMI Report Number: SMI-1999-0813 (1999).
6.
[6] C.C.K. Chang and H. Garcia-Molina , Conjunctive constraint mapping for data translation . In: Third ACM Conference on Digital Libraries, Pittsburgh, USA (1998).
7.
[7] S. Chawathe , H. Garcia-Molina , J. Hammer , K. Ireland , Y. Papakonstantinou , J. Ullman and J. Widom , The TSIMMIS project: Integration of heterogeneous information sources . In: IPSJ Conference, Tokyo, Japan (1994).
8.
[8] R.V. Guha, Contexts: a Formalization and Some Applications. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University (1991).
9.
[9] P.C. Weinstein and P. Birmingham , Creating ontological metadata for digital library content and services , International Journal on Digital Libraries2(1) (1998) 19-36 .
10.
[10] E. Mena , A. Illarramendi , V. Kashyap and A.P. Sheth , OBSERVER: an approach for query processing in global information systems based on interoperation across preexisting ontologies . In: Proceedings of the First IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’96), Brussels, Belgium (19-21 June 1996).
11.
[11] P.R.S. Visser and Z. Cui , On accepting heterogeneous ontologies in distributed architectures . In: Proceedings of the ECAI98 Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods. Brighton, UK (1998).
12.
[12] P.R.S. Visser and V.A.M. Tamma , An experience with ontology clustering for information integration . In: Proceedings of the IJCAI-99 Workshop on Intelligent Information Integration in conjunction with the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stockholm, Sweden (31 July 1999).
13.
[13] J. Fowler , M. Nodine , B. Perry and B. Bargmeyer , Agent-based semantic interoperability in Infosleuth , Sigmod Record28 (1999).
14.
[14] G. Wiederhold , An algebra for ontology composition . In: Proceedings of 1994 Monterey Workshop on formal Methods, US Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA, USA (1994), pp. 56-61 .
15.
[15] J. McCarthy , Notes on formalizing context . In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI (1993).
16.
[16] J. Jannink , P. Srinivasan , D. Verheijen and G. Wieder-hold , Encapsulation and Composition of Ontologies . In: Proceedings of AAAI Workshop on Information Integration, AAAI Summer Conference, Madison, WI, USA (July 1998).
17.
[17] P. Mitra , G. Wiederhold and M. Kersten , A graph-oriented model for articulation of ontology interdependencies . In: Proceedings of Conference on Extending Database Technology (EDBT 2000), Konstanz, Germany (March 2000).
18.
[18] P. Mitra , G. Wiederhold and J. Jannink , Semi-automatic Integration of knowledge Sources . In: Proceedings of Fusion 99, Sunnyvale, CA, USA (July 1999).
19.
[19] G. Stumme , R. Studer and Y. Sure , Towards an order-theoretical foundation for maintaining and merging ontologies . In: Proceedings of Referenzmodellierung 2000, Siegen, Germany (12-13 October 2000).
20.
[20] B. Ganter and R. Wille , Formal Concept Analysis: Mathematical Foundations ( Springer, Berlin , 1999).
21.
[21] A.B. Williams and C. Tsatsoulis , An instance-based approach for identifying candidate ontology relations within a multi-agent system . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
22.
[22] V.A.M. Tamma and T.J.M. Bench-Capon , Supporting different inheritance mechanisms in ontology representations . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
23.
[23] M. Uschold , Creating, integrating and maintaining local and global ontologies . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
24.
[24] H. Chalupsky , OntoMorph: a translation system for symbolic knowledge . In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2000), Breckenridge, Colorado, USA (April 2000).
25.
[25] D.C. Smith , Plisp Users Manual ( Apple Computer , 1990).
26.
[26] P.R.S. Visser , D.M. Jones , M. Beer , T.J.M. Bench-Capon , B. Diaz and M.J.R. Shave , Resolving ontological heterogeneity in the KRAFT Project . In: DEXA-99, 10th International Conference and Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Florence, Italy (August 1999).
27.
[27] W. Kim and J. Seo , Classifying schematic and data heterogeneity in multidatabases systems , IEEE Computer24(2) (1991) 12-18 .
28.
[28] M.W. Bright , A.R. Hurson and S. Pakzad , Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases , ACM Transactions on Database Systems19(2) (1994) 212-253 .
29.
[29] S. Castano and V. De Antonelli , Semantic dictionary design for database interoperability . In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE97) (IEEE Computer Society, Birmingham, 1997).
30.
[30] L. Palopoli , L. Pontieri , G. Terracina and D. Ursino , Intensional and extensional integration and abstraction of heterogeneous databases , Data and Knowledge Engineering35 (2000) 201-237 .
31.
[31] C. Batini , M. Lenzerini and S.B. Navathe , A comparative analysis of methodologies for schema integration , Computing Surveys18(4) (1986) 323-364 .
32.
[32] A. Sheth and J. Larson , Federated database systems for managing distributed, heterogeneous and autonomous databases , ACM Computing Surveys22(3) (1990).
33.
[33] A. Sheth and V. Kashyap , So for (schematically), yet so near (semantically) . In: Proceedings of IFIP DS-5 Semantics of Interoperable Database Systems (Chapman and Hall, Lorne, Australia,1992).
34.
[34] M. Bordie , The promise of distributed computing and the challenges of legacy information systems . In: Proceedings of IFIP DS-5 Semantics of Interoperable Databases Systems (Chapman and Hall, Lorne, Australia, 1992).
35.
[35] G. Wiederhold , Interoperation, mediation, and ontologies . In: Proceedings International Symposium on Fifth Generation Computer Systems (FGCS), Workshop on Heterogeneous Cooperative Knowledge-Bases, Vol. W3 (ICOT, Tokyo, Japan, December 1994), pp. 33-48 .
36.
[36] U. Srinivasan , A.H.H. Ngu and T. Gedeon , Managing heterogeneous information systems through discovery and retrieval of generic concepts , Journal of the American Society for Information Science51(8) (2000) 707-723 .
37.
[37] E. Hovy , Combining and standardizing large-scale: practical ontologies for machine learning and other uses . In: Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Granada, Spain (May 1998).
38.
[38] D.L. McGuinness , R. Fikes , J. Rice and S. Wilder , An environment for merging and testing large ontologies . In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2000), Colorado, USA (April 2000).
39.
[39] N.F. Noy and M.A. Musen , PROMPT: algorithm and tool for automated ontology merging and alignment . In: Proceedings of 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI2000), Austin, TX (July/August 2000).
40.
[40] W.S. Li , Knowledge gathering and matching in heterogeneous databases . In: AAAI Spring Symposium on Information Gathering from Distributed, Heterogeneous Environment (Palo Alto, CA, 2000).
41.
[41] A.E. Campbell and S.C. Shapiro , Ontologic mediation: an overview . In: IJCAI95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, Montreal, Canada (1995).
42.
[42] V. Kashyap and A. Sheth , Semantic and schematic similarities between database objects: A context-based approach , International Journal on Very Large Databases5(4) (1996) 276-304 .
43.
[43] F. Lehmann and A.G. Gohn , The EGG/YOLK reliability hierarchy: semantic data integration using sorts with prototypes . In: Third International ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM-94) (ACM Press, New York, 1994).
44.
[44] P.C. Weinstein and P. Birmingham , Comparing concepts in differentiated ontologies . In: Proceedings of the Twelfth Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management (KAW99), Banff, Alberta, Canada (October 1999).
45.
[45] P. Borst and H. Akkermans , An ontology approach to product disassembly . In: EKAW97. Sant Feliu de Guixols, Spain (October 1997).
46.
[46] M. Gruninger and M.S. Fox , Methodology for the design and evaluation of ontologies . In: IJCAI95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing. Montreal, Canada (19-20 August 1995).
47.
[47] M. Fernandez-Lopez , A. Gomez-Perez and N. Juristo , METHODOLOGY: from ontological art towards ontological engineering . In: AAAI-97 Spring Symposium on Ontological Engineering, Stanford University, CA, USA (24-26 March 1997).
48.
[48] A. Faatz , T. Kamps and R. Steinmetz , Background knowledge, indexing and matching interdependencies of document management and ontology maintenance . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
49.
[49] C. Roux , D. Proux , F. Rechenmann and L. Julliard , An ontology enrichment method for a pragmatic information extraction system gathering data on genetic interactions . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
50.
[50] A. Todirascu , F. Beuvron , D. Galea and F. Rousselot , Using description logics for ontology extraction . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
51.
[51] E. Agirre , O. Ansa , E. Hovy and D. Martinez , Enriching very large ontologies using the WWW . In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Ontology Learning (OL-2000) in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), Berlin, Germany (August 2000).
52.
[52] N. Guarino , C. Masolo and G. Vetere , OntoSeek: content-based access to the Web . IEEE Intelligent Systems (May/June 1999) 70-80 .
53.
[53] M. Uschold and M. Gruninger , Ontologies: principles, methods, and applications , Knowledge Engineering Review11(2) (1996) 93-155 .
54.
[54] A.J. Duineveld , R. Stoter , M.R. Weiden , B. Kenepa and V.R. Benjamins , WonderTools? A comparative study of ontological engineering tools . KAW 99: Twelfth Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management, Alberta, Canada (October, 1999).
55.
[55] J. Jannink and G. Wiederhold , Ontology maintenance with an algebraic methodology: a case study . In: Proceedings of AAAI workshop on Ontology Management (July, 1999).
