The Journal of Society for e-Business Studies (한국전자거래학회지)

Society for e-Business Studies (한국전자거래학회)
권호 표지

Ontology Selection Ranking Model based on Semantic Similarity Approach

의미적 유사성에 기반한 온톨로지 선택 랭킹 모델

  • 오선주 (서울대학교 경영대학) ;
  • 안중호 (서울대학교 경영전문대학원 경영대학) ;
  • 박진수 (서울대학교 경영전문대학원 경영대학)
  • Published : 2009.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Ontologies have provided supports in integrating heterogeneous and distributed information. More and more ontologies and tools have been developed in various domains. However, building ontologies requires much time and effort. Therefore, ontologies need to be shared and reused among users. Specifically, finding the desired ontology from an ontology repository will benefit users. In the past, most of the studies on retrieving and ranking ontologies have mainly focused on lexical level supports. In those cases, it is impossible to find an ontology that includes concepts that users want to use at the semantic level. Most ontology libraries and ontology search engines have not provided semantic matching capability. Retrieving an ontology that users want to use requires a new ontology selection and ranking mechanism based on semantic similarity matching. We propose an ontology selection and ranking model consisting of selection criteria and metrics which are enhanced in semantic matching capabilities. The model we propose presents two novel features different from the previous research models. First, it enhances the ontology selection and ranking method practically and effectively by enabling semantic matching of taxonomy or relational linkage between concepts. Second, it identifies what measures should be used to rank ontologies in the given context and what weight should be assigned to each selection measure.

지식 재사용 측면에서 기존의 온톨로지를 재사용할 수 있다면 많은 자원을 절약할 수 있을 것이다. 그러나 기존의 온톨로지를 활용하기 위해서는 보다 발전된 온톨로지 검색 기능이 요구된다. 현재까지 이루어진 관련 연구들에서는 주로 렉시컬 매칭기법을 사용하여 온톨로지를 검색하였다. 그러나 의미적 측면에서 문제점이 있으므로 본 연구에서는 관계의 의미적 유사성에 기반한 온톨로지 선택 랭킹 모델을 제안한다. 본 연구는 개념간 계층 구조와 관계를 온톨로지 검색에 이용함으로써 온톨로지의 선택 랭킹을 효과적이며 실질적으로 개선하였다. 또한 실험을 통해 연구 모델의 결과와 선행 연구의 결과, 온톨로지 전문가의 랭킹 결과를 비교 분석하고 연구 모델의 타당성을 검증하였다. 본 연구 결과는 온톨로지 검색 연구를 이론적으로 발전시켰을 뿐 아니라 실무적인 측면에서 실무자들이 온톨로지를 쉽게 찾아 재사용할 수 있도록 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Alani, H., and Brewster, C., Ontology Ranking based on the Analysis of Concept Structures, In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Knowledge Capture(K-CAP 05), Banff, Canada, 2005.
  2. Buitelaar, P., Eigner, T., and Declerck, T., OntoSelect：A Dynamic Ontology Library with Support for Ontology Selection, In Proceedings of the Demo Session at the International Semantic Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan, 2004.
  3. Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T., Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research, Chicago：Rand McNally, 1979.
  4. Ding, L., Finin, T., and Joshi, A., Swoogle ：A Search and Metadata Engine for Semantic Web, In Proceedings of the Thirteenth ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 2004.
  5. Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., and Lehmann, J., Modeling Ontology Evaluation and Validation, ESWC, LNCS 4011, 2006, pp. 140-154.
  6. Green, R., Beans, C., and Myaeng, S., Semantics of relationships：An Interdisciplinary perspective, Information Science and Knowledge Management, 2002, pp. 91-110, Kluwer.
  7. Jang, J. J., and Conrath, D. W., Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy, In Proceedings of International Conference on research in Computational Linguistics, Taiwan, 1998.
  8. Park, J., and Ram, S., Information Systems Interoperability：What Lies Beneath?, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, Vol. 22, No. 4, October2004, pp. 595-632. https://doi.org/10.1145/1028099.1028103
  9. Lin, D., An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 1998.
  10. Pan, Jeff Z., Tomas, E., and Sleeman, D., Ontosearch2：Searching and Querying Web Ontologies, In Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference WWW/Internet 2006.
  11. Patel, C., Supekar, K., Lee, Y., and Park, E. K., OntoKhoj：A Semantic Web Portal for Ontology Searching, Ranking and Classification, In Proceeding of the Workshop on Web Information and Data Management, ACM, 2003.
  12. Pennacchiotti, M., and Pantel, P., Ontologizing Semantic Relations, In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the ACL, July 17-18, 2006, pp. 793-800.
  13. Pennacchiotti, M., and Pantel, P., A Bootstrapping Algorithm for Automatically Harvesting Se mantic Relations, In Proceedings of Inference in Computational Semantics(ICoS-2006), Buxton, England, 2006.
  14. Rada, R., Mili, H., Bicknell, E. and Blettner, M., Development and application of a metric on semantic nets, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man,and Cybernetics, Vol. 19, 1989, pp. 17-30. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.24528
  15. Resnik P., Semantic Similarity in a Taxonomy：An Information-Based Measures and its Application to Problems of Ambiguity in Natural Language, Journal of Artificial Intelligence research, Vol. 11, 1999, pp. 95-130.
  16. Sabou, P., Lopez, V., Motta, E., and Uren, V., Ontology Selection：Ontology Evaluation on the Real Semantic Web, In Proceedings of the Evaluation of Ontologies on the Semantic Web Workshop, held in conjunction with WWW 2006.
  17. Spearman, C., The Proof and Measurement of Association between Two Things, Amer. J. Psychol., Vol. 15, 1904.
  18. Turney, P. D., Measuring Semantic Similarity by Latent Relational Analysis, In Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Joint on Artificial Intelligence( IJCAI-05), 2005, pp. 1136-1141, Edinburgh, Scotland.