Ontology matching for dynamic publication in semantic portals

Abstract

Semantic portals are characterized for storing and structuring content according to specific domain ontologies. This content is represented through ontological languages, which enable not only adding semantic value to information treatment, but also inferring new knowledge from it. Publication in a semantic portal is typically done by instantiating its ontology, and this is often performed manually or through the use of specific forms. However, in order to keep portals constantly up-to-date, it is necessary to provide means for a more dynamic publication, integrating the portal content with information retrieved from different ontology-based sites on the same or on complementary domains. Reusing information from different ontologies requires specific and efficient mechanisms to align them, taking into account syntactical and semantical conflicts. This paper proposes an extension of the Crosi Mapping System, a matching mechanism which calculates similarities between ontologies. Some of its original algorithms have been enriched with additional functionality. This extension, named e-CMS, has been evaluated using the OAEI ontology alignment benchmark, and results show an increase of 69% in alignment precision when compared to the CMS original version. In order to illustrate its use, the e-CMS strategy was applied to SiGePoS, a System for Generating Semantic Portals. The semantic module, one of the system components, implements the alignment mechanism between ontologies, which is performed by the e-CMS.

Organizing Institutions

“…This paper extends a previous work [Lachtim et al 2009a], by proposing a strategy to collect contents from sites and/or traditional portals with some semantic potentiality within a specific domain, in order to instantiate an existing domain ontology that supports a semantic portal in this same domain. Actually, this strategy aims to facilitate the population and update procedures of semantic portals.…”

“…This work extends the architecture proposed by Lachtim et al (2009a). The latter aimed at creating a semantic portal, integrating and instantiating a domain ontology that supported a SP with contents extracted from Web semantic pages within the same domain.…”

“…The literature points out to some works that use semantic Web technologies to exploit this topic, although in different contexts. Lachtim et al (2009aLachtim et al ( , 2009b created an educational semantic portal, which is populated and integrated with contents extracted from Web semantic pages within the same domain. In [Suominen et al2009] metadata and documents are obtained from contents published in Content Management Systems or from those manually annotated by the metadata editor SAHA [Kurki and Hyvönen 2010].…”

“…Our tests have been performed over twenty specific sites on the educational domain, corresponding to some Brazilian universities. This number of sites was defined based on [Lachtim et al 2009a] and [Navarro 2001]. Both works describe similar experiments concerning manual navigation, whose evaluation process is hard and tiresome, since it can generate a large number of instances.…”

Semantic portals from sociothecnical perspective of the actor-network theory

“…According to Guedes and Strauhs (2016), the structure of the semantic portals is composed of technologies aimed at: a) data storage: traditional open standard technologies such as operating system, database; network security (ELMASRI;NAVATHE, 2011;MASNER et al, 2019) and Web server, network security (NIELSEN, 2000;ROSENFELD;MORVILLE;ARANGO, 2015) and inference mechanisms (BERNERS-LEE; HENDLER; LASSILA, 2001;AZANI, 2009;STALLINGS, 2015); b) information management: tools and information retrieval system, content management; (MANIEGA-LEGARDA; PÉREZ-SALMERÓN, GUERRERO-TORRES, 2008), information processing and publishing (BELLANDI, et a.l, 2012;LACHTIM;MOURA;CAVALCANTI, 2009;MARUTHA;NGULUBE, 2018); and c) ontology management: tools that support ontology engineering tasks.…”