Bibliography on Infra-Seals (2017-06-06)
Manel Achichi, Michelle Cheatham, Zlatan Dragisic, Jérôme Euzenat, Daniel Faria, Alfio Ferrara, Giorgos Flouris, Irini Fundulaki, Ian Harrow, Valentina Ivanova, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Elena Kuss, Patrick Lambrix, Henrik Leopold, Huanyu Li, Christian Meilicke, Stefano Montanelli, Catia Pesquita, Tzanina Saveta, Pavel Shvaiko, Andrea Splendiani, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Konstantin Todorov, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Ondřej Zamazal, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2016, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Michelle Cheatham, Oktie Hassanzadeh, Ryutaro Ichise (eds), Proc. 11th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Kobe (JP), pp73-129, 2016
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between semantically related entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. These test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple thesauri to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation, or consensus. OAEI 2016 offered 9 tracks with 22 test cases, and was attended by 21 participants. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2016 campaign.
Michelle Cheatham, Zlatan Dragisic, Jérôme Euzenat, Daniel Faria, Alfio Ferrara, Giorgos Flouris, Irini Fundulaki, Roger Granada, Valentina Ivanova, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Patrick Lambrix, Stefano Montanelli, Catia Pesquita, Tzanina Saveta, Pavel Shvaiko, Alessandro Solimando, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Ondřej Zamazal, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2015, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Michelle Cheatham, Oktie Hassanzadeh (eds), Proc. 10th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Bethlehem (PA US), pp60-115, 2016
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between semantically related entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. These test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple thesauri to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation and consensus. OAEI 2015 offered 8 tracks with 15 test cases followed by 22 participants. Since 2011, the campaign has been using a new evaluation modality which provides more automation to the evaluation. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2015 campaign.
Zlatan Dragisic, Kai Eckert, Jérôme Euzenat, Daniel Faria, Alfio Ferrara, Roger Granada, Valentina Ivanova, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Andreas Oskar Kempf, Patrick Lambrix, Stefano Montanelli, Heiko Paulheim, Dominique Ritze, Pavel Shvaiko, Alessandro Solimando, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Ondřej Zamazal, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2014, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Ming Mao, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Juanzi Li, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo (eds), Proc. 9th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Riva del Garda (IT), pp61-104, 2014
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between semantically related entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. These test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple thesauri to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation and consensus. OAEI 2014 offered 7 tracks with 9 test cases followed by 14 participants. Since 2010, the campaign has been using a new evaluation modality which provides more automation to the evaluation. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2014 campaign.
Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Zlatan Dragisic, Kai Eckert, Jérôme Euzenat, Alfio Ferrara, Roger Granada, Valentina Ivanova, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Andreas Oskar Kempf, Patrick Lambrix, Andriy Nikolov, Heiko Paulheim, Dominique Ritze, François Scharffe, Pavel Shvaiko, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Ondřej Zamazal, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2013, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Kavitha Srinivas, Ming Mao, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz (eds), Proc. 8th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Sydney (NSW AU), pp61-100, 2013
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between semantically related entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. These test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple thesauri to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation and consensus. OAEI 2013 offered 6 tracks with 8 test cases followed by 23 participants. Since 2010, the campaign has been using a new evaluation modality which provides more automation to the evaluation. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2013 campaign.
Jérôme Euzenat, Maria Rosoiu, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Ontology matching benchmarks: generation, stability, and discriminability, Journal of web semantics 21:30-48, 2013
The OAEI Benchmark test set has been used for many years as a main reference to evaluate and compare ontology matching systems. However, this test set has barely varied since 2004 and has become a relatively easy task for matchers. In this paper, we present the design of a flexible test generator based on an extensible set of alterators which may be used programmatically for generating different test sets from different seed ontologies and different alteration modalities. It has been used for reproducing Benchmark both with the original seed ontology and with other ontologies. This highlights the remarkable stability of results over different generations and the preservation of difficulty across seed ontologies, as well as a systematic bias towards the initial Benchmark test set and the inability of such tests to identify an overall winning matcher. These were exactly the properties for which Benchmark had been designed. Furthermore, the generator has been used for providing new test sets aiming at increasing the difficulty and discriminability of Benchmark. Although difficulty may be easily increased with the generator, attempts to increase discriminability proved unfruitful. However, efforts towards this goal raise questions about the very nature of discriminability.
Ontology matching, Matching evaluation, Test generation, Semantic web
José Luis Aguirre, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Kai Eckert, Jérôme Euzenat, Alfio Ferrara, Willem Robert van Hage, Laura Hollink, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Christian Meilicke, Andriy Nikolov, Dominique Ritze, François Scharffe, Pavel Shvaiko, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Benjamin Zapilko, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2012, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Anastasios Kementsietsidis, Ming Mao, Natalya Noy, Heiner Stuckenschmidt (eds), Proc. 7th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Boston (MA US), pp73-115, 2012
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between semantically related entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. These test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple thesauri to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation, consensus. OAEI 2012 offered 7 tracks with 9 test cases followed by 21 participants. Since 2010, the campaign has been using a new evaluation modality which provides more automation to the evaluation. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2012 campaign.
José Luis Aguirre, Christian Meilicke, Jérôme Euzenat, Iterative implementation of services for the automatic evaluation of matching tools (v2), Deliverable 12.5v2, SEALS, 34p., 2012
This deliverable reports on the current status of the service implementation for the automatic evaluation of matching tools, and on the final status of those services. These services have been used in the third SEALS evaluation of matching systems, held in Spring 2012 in coordination with the OAEI 2011.5 campaign. We worked mainly on the tasks of modifying the WP12 BPEL work-flow to introduce new features introduced in the RES 1.2 version; testing the modified work-flows on a local installation and on the SEALS Platform; writing transformations of result data to be compliant with the new SEALS ontologies specifications; and finally, extending the SEALS client for ontology matching evaluation for better supporting the automation of WP12 evaluation campaigns and to advance in the integration with SEALS repositories. We report the results obtained while accomplishing these tasks.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks, efficiency measure
Christian Meilicke, Raúl García Castro, Frederico Freitas, Willem Robert van Hage, Elena Montiel-Ponsoda, Ryan Ribeiro de Azevedo, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Vojtech Svátek, Andrei Tamilin, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Shenghui Wang, MultiFarm: A benchmark for multilingual ontology matching, Journal of web semantics 15(3):62-68, 2012
In this paper we present the MultiFarm dataset, which has been designed as a benchmark for multilingual ontology matching. The MultiFarm dataset is composed of a set of ontologies translated in different languages and the corresponding alignments between these ontologies. It is based on the OntoFarm dataset, which has been used successfully for several years in the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI). By translating the ontologies of the OntoFarm dataset into eight different languages -Chinese, Czech, Dutch, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish- we created a comprehensive set of realistic test cases. Based on these test cases, it is possible to evaluate and compare the performance of matching approaches with a special focus on multilingualism.
Ontology matching, Benchmarking, Multilingualism, Data integration
Christian Meilicke, José Luis Aguirre, Jérôme Euzenat, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Ian Horrocks, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Results of the second evaluation of matching tools, Deliverable 12.6, SEALS, 30p., 2012
This deliverable reports on the results of the second SEALS evaluation campaign (for WP12 it is the third evaluation campaign), which has been carried out in coordination with the OAEI 2011.5 campaign. Opposed to OAEI 2010 and 2011 the full set of OAEI tracks has been executed with the help of SEALS technology. 19 systems have participated and five data sets have been used. Two of these data sets are new and have not been used in previous OAEI campaigns. In this deliverable we report on the data sets used in the campaign, the execution of the campaign, and we present and discuss the evaluation results.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks
Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Anastasios Kementsietsidis, Ming Mao, Natalya Noy, Heiner Stuckenschmidt (eds), Proc. 7th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Boston (MA US), 253p., 2012
Jérôme Euzenat, Christian Meilicke, Pavel Shvaiko, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative: six years of experience, Journal on data semantics XV(6720):158-192, 2011
In the area of semantic technologies, benchmarking and systematic evaluation is not yet as established as in other areas of computer science, e.g., information retrieval. In spite of successful attempts, more effort and experience are required in order to achieve such a level of maturity. In this paper, we report results and lessons learned from the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI), a benchmarking initiative for ontology matching. The goal of this work is twofold: on the one hand, we document the state of the art in evaluating ontology matching methods and provide potential participants of the initiative with a better understanding of the design and the underlying principles of the OAEI campaigns. On the other hand, we report experiences gained in this particular area of semantic technologies to potential developers of benchmarking for other kinds of systems. For this purpose, we describe the evaluation design used in the OAEI campaigns in terms of datasets, evaluation criteria and workflows, provide a global view on the results of the campaigns carried out from 2005 to 2010 and discuss upcoming trends, both specific to ontology matching and generally relevant for the evaluation of semantic technologies. Finally, we argue that there is a need for a further automation of benchmarking to shorten the feedback cycle for tool developers.
Evaluation, Experimentation, Benchmarking, Ontology matching, Ontology alignment, Schema matching, Semantic technologies
Jérôme Euzenat, Alfio Ferrara, Willem Robert van Hague, Laura Hollink, Christian Meilicke, Andriy Nikolov, François Scharffe, Pavel Shvaiko, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2011, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Isabel Cruz, Jérôme Euzenat, Tom Heath, Ming Mao, Christoph Quix (eds), Proc. 6th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Bonn (DE), pp85-110, 2011
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. Test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple directories to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation, consensus. OAEI-2011 builds over previous campaigns by having 4 tracks with 6 test cases followed by 18 participants. Since 2010, the campaign introduces a new evaluation modality in association with the SEALS project. A subset of OAEI test cases is included in this new modality which provides more automation to the evaluation and more direct feedback to the participants. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2011 campaign.
Christian Meilicke, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Maria Roşoiu, Evaluation design and collection of test data for matching tools (v2), Deliverable 12.4, SEALS, 26p., 2011
Based on the results of the first evaluation campaign (T12.3), and taking into account the technical progress of the SEALS platform, we deliver an updated and extended evaluation and test data design for our second evaluation campaign. This campaign is planned to take place in the context of the OAEI at the ISWC 2011.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks, efficiency measure
Lyndon Nixon, Raúl García Castro, Stuart Wrigley, Mikalai Yatskevich, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Liliana Cabral, The state of semantic technology today: overview of the first SEALS evaluation campaigns, in: Proc. 7th ACM international conference on semantic systems (I-semantics), Graz (AT), pp134-141, 2011
This paper describes the first five SEALS Evaluation Campaigns over the semantic technologies covered by the SEALS project (ontology engineering tools, ontology reasoning tools, ontology matching tools, semantic search tools, and semantic web service tools). It presents the evaluations and test data used in these campaigns and the tools that participated in them along with a comparative analysis of their results. It also presents some lessons learnt after the execution of the evaluation campaigns and draws some final conclusions.
evaluations, benchmarking, metrics, semantic technology
Maria Roşoiu, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Jérôme Euzenat, Ontology matching benchmarks: generation and evaluation, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Isabel Cruz, Jérôme Euzenat, Tom Heath, Ming Mao, Christoph Quix (eds), Proc. 6th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Bonn (DE), pp73-84, 2011
The OAEI Benchmark data set has been used as a main reference to evaluate and compare matching systems. It requires matching an ontology with systematically modified versions of itself. However, it has two main drawbacks: it has not varied since 2004 and it has become a relatively easy task for matchers. In this paper, we present the design of a modular test generator that overcomes these drawbacks. Using this generator, we have reproduced Benchmark both with the original seed ontology and with other ontologies. Evaluating different matchers on these generated tests, we have observed that (a) the difficulties encountered by a matcher at a test are preserved across the seed ontology, (b) contrary to our expectations, we found no systematic positive bias towards the original data set which has been available for developers to test their systems, and (c) the generated data sets have consistent results across matchers and across seed ontologies. However, the discriminant power of the generated tests is still too low and more tests would be necessary to draw definitive conclusions.
Ontology matching, Matching evaluation, Test generation, Semantic web
Pavel Shvaiko, Isabel Cruz, Jérôme Euzenat, Tom Heath, Ming Mao, Christoph Quix (eds), Proc. 6th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Bonn (DE), 264p., 2011
Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Christian Meilicke, Jérôme Euzenat, Iterative implementation of services for the automatic evaluation of matching tools, Deliverable 12.5, SEALS, 21p., 2011
The implementation of the automatic services for evaluating matching tools follows an iterative model. The aim is to provide a way for continuously analysing and improving these services. In this deliverable, we report the first iteration of this process, i.e., current implementation status of the services. In this first iteration, we have extended our previous implementation in order to migrate our own services to the SEALS components, which have been finished since the end of the first evaluation campaign.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks, efficiency measure
Stuart Wrigley, Raúl García Castro, Liliana Cabral, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Christian Meilicke, Lyndon Nixon, Mikalai Yatskevich, Design of the second evaluation campaign, Deliverable 3.5, SEALS, 40p., 2011
This deliverable is concerned with the implementation of the second evaluation campaign based upon the methodology and design recommendations made in SEALS Deliverable D3.1. This deliverable covers the initial preparation of the second SEALS Evaluation Campaign and describes the tasks that have been performed during the Initiation and Involvement phases. Furthermore, the deliverable describes the steps to be taken over the next few months and the actors who are responsible for those steps.
evaluation campaign, methodology, design, guidelines, timeline
Jérôme Euzenat, Alfio Ferrara, Christian Meilicke, Andriy Nikolov, Juan Pane, François Scharffe, Pavel Shvaiko, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Vojtech Svátek, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2010, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Fausto Giunchiglia, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Ming Mao, Isabel Cruz (eds), Proc. 5th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Shanghai (CN), pp85-117, 2010
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between entities of two ontologies. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. Test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from simple directories to expressive OWL ontologies) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation, consensus. OAEI-2010 builds over previous campaigns by having 4 tracks with 6 test cases followed by 15 participants. This year, the OAEI campaign introduces a new evaluation modality in association with the SEALS project. A subset of OAEI test cases is included in this new modality which provides more automation to the evaluation and more direct feedback to the participants. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2010 campaign.
Jérôme Euzenat, Christian Meilicke, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, A web-based evaluation service for ontology matching, in: Proc. 9th demonstration track on international semantic web conference (ISWC), Shanghai (CN), pp93-96, 2010
Evaluation of semantic web technologies at large scale, including ontology matching, is an important topic of semantic web research. This paper presents a web-based evaluation service for automatically executing the evaluation of ontology matching systems. This service is based on the use of a web service interface wrapping the functionality of a matching tool to be evaluated and allows developers to launch evaluations of their tool at any time on their own. Furthermore, the service can be used to visualise and manipulate the evaluation results. The approach allows the execution of the tool on the machine of the tool developer without the need for a runtime environment.
Christian Meilicke, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Jérôme Euzenat, Services for the automatic evaluation of matching tools, Deliverable 12.2, SEALS, 35p., 2010
In this deliverable we describe a SEALS evaluation service for ontology matching that is based on the use of a web service interface to be implemented by the tool vendor. Following this approach we can offer an evaluation service before many components of the SEALS platform have been finished. We describe both the system architecture of the evaluation service from a general point of view as well as the specific components and their relation to the modules of the SEALS platform.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks
Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Fausto Giunchiglia, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Ming Mao, Isabel Cruz (eds), Proc. 5th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Shanghai (CN), 255p., 2010
Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Paulo Quaresma, Renata Vieira, An API for multilingual ontology matching, in: Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Jan Odjik, Stelios Piperidis, Mike Rosner, Daniel Tapias (eds), Proc. 7th conference on Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), Valletta (MT), pp3830-3835, 2010
Ontology matching consists of generating a set of correspondences between the entities of two ontologies. This process is seen as a solution to data heterogeneity in ontology-based applications, enabling the interoperability between them. However, existing matching systems are designed by assuming that the entities of both source and target ontologies are written in the same languages ( English, for instance). Multi-lingual ontology matching is an open research issue. This paper describes an API for multi-lingual matching that implements two strategies, direct translation-based and indirect. The first strategy considers direct matching between two ontologies (i.e., without intermediary ontologies), with the help of external resources, i.e., translations. The indirect alignment strategy, proposed by (Jung et al., 2009), is based on composition of alignments. We evaluate these strategies using simple string similarity based matchers and three ontologies written in English, French, and Portuguese, an extension of the OAEI benchmark test 206.
ontology matching, multilingual matching, resources
Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Christian Meilicke, Jérôme Euzenat, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Automating OAEI Campaigns (First Report), in: Asunción Gómez Pérez, Fabio Ciravegna, Frank van Harmelen, Jeff Heflin (eds), Proc. 1st ISWC international workshop on evaluation of semantic technologies (iWEST), Shanghai (CN), 2010
This paper reports the first effort into integrating OAEI and SEALS evaluation campaigns. The SEALS project aims at providing standardized resources (software components, data sets, etc.) for automatically executing evaluations of typical semantic web tools, including ontology matching tools. A first version of the software infrastructure is based on the use of a web service interface wrapping the functionality of a matching tool to be evaluated. In this setting, the evaluation results can visualized and manipulated immediately in a direct feedback cycle. We describe how parts of the OAEI 2010 evaluation campaign have been integrated into this software infrastructure. In particular, we discuss technical and organizational aspects related to the use of the new technology for both participants and organizers of the OAEI.
ontology matching, evaluation workflows, evaluation criteria, automating evaluation
Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Christian Meilicke, Jérôme Euzenat, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Results of the first evaluation of matching tools, Deliverable 12.3, SEALS, 36p., November 2010
This deliverable reports the results of the first SEALS evaluation campaign, which has been carried out in coordination with the OAEI 2010 campaign. A subset of the OAEI tracks has been included in a new modality, the SEALS modality. From the participant's point of view, the main innovation is the use of a web-based interface for launching evaluations. 13 systems, out of 15 for all tracks, have participated in some of the three SEALS tracks. We report the preliminary results of these systems for each SEALS track and discuss the main lesson learned from to the use of the new technology for both participants and organizers of the OAEI.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks
Stuart Wrigley, Raúl García Castro, Liliana Cabral, Dorothee Reinhard, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Stephan Grimm, Mikalai Yatskevich, Design of the first evaluation campaign, Deliverable 3.2, SEALS, 40p., 2010
This deliverable is concerned with the implementation of the evaluation campaign based upon the methodology and design recommendations made in SEALS Deliverable D3.1. This deliverable covers the initial preparation of the first SEALS Evaluation Campaign and describes the tasks that have been performed during the Initiation and Involvement phases. Furthermore, the deliverable describes the steps to be taken over the next few months and the actors who are responsible for those steps.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks
Jérôme David, AROMA results for OAEI 2009, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Fausto Giunchiglia, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Natalya Noy, Arnon Rosenthal (eds), Proc. 4th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Chantilly (VA US), pp147-152, 2009
This paper presents the results obtained by AROMA for its second participation to OAEI. AROMA is an hybrid, extensional and asymmetric ontology alignment method that makes use of the association paradigm and a statistical interestingness measure, the implication intensity. AROMA performs a post-processing step that includes a terminological matcher. This year we modify this matcher in order to improve the recall obtained on real-case ontology, i.e. anatomy and 3xx tests.
Jérôme Euzenat, Alfio Ferrara, Laura Hollink, Antoine Isaac, Cliff Joslyn, Véronique Malaisé, Christian Meilicke, Andriy Nikolov, Juan Pane, Marta Sabou, François Scharffe, Pavel Shvaiko, Vassilis Spiliopoulos, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Ondřej Sváb-Zamazal, Vojtech Svátek, Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, George Vouros, Shenghui Wang, Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2009, in: Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Fausto Giunchiglia, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Natalya Noy, Arnon Rosenthal (eds), Proc. 4th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Chantilly (VA US), pp73-126, 2009
Ontology matching consists of finding correspondences between ontology entities. OAEI campaigns aim at comparing ontology matching systems on precisely defined test cases. Test cases can use ontologies of different nature (from expressive OWL ontologies to simple directories) and use different modalities, e.g., blind evaluation, open evaluation, consensus. OAEI-2009 builds over previous campaigns by having 5 tracks with 11 test cases followed by 16 participants. This paper is an overall presentation of the OAEI 2009 campaign.
Pavel Shvaiko, Jérôme Euzenat, Fausto Giunchiglia, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Natalya Noy, Arnon Rosenthal (eds), Proc. 4th ISWC workshop on ontology matching (OM), Chantilly (VA US), 271p., 2009
Cássia Trojahn dos Santos, Jérôme Euzenat, Christian Meilicke, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, Evaluation design and collection of test data for matching tools, Deliverable 12.1, SEALS, 68p., November 2009
This deliverable presents a systematic procedure for evaluating ontology matching systems and algorithms, in the context of SEALS project. It describes the criteria and metrics on which the evaluations will be carried out and the characteristics of the test data to be used, as well as the evaluation target, which includes the systems generating the alignments for evaluation.
ontology matching, ontology alignment, evaluation, benchmarks, efficiency measure