Ontology Negotiation: How Agents Can Really Get to Know Each Other

Bailin, Sidney C.; Truszkowski, Walt

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45173-0_24

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, agents might have different perspectives on the acceptability or not of a candidate mapping correspondence depending on the particular context. Finally, we can mention Bailin and Truszkowski (2002) which present an ontology negotiation protocol which enables agents to exchange parts of their ontology, by a process of successive interpretations, clarifications and explanations.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating web service and semantic dialogue model for user models interoperability on the web

Cena

2010

J Intell Inf Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays there is a great number of Web information systems that build a model of the user and adapt their services according to the needs and preferences maintained by the user model (UM). One of the most challenging issues of this scenario is the possibility to enable different systems to cooperate in order to exchange the available information about a user. Our aim is to create rich (and scalable) communication protocols and infrastructures to enable consumers and providers of UM data to interact. Our solution for dealing with such an issue is to exploit Web standards for interoperability (i.e. Semantic Web and Web Services) for implementing simple atomic communication, and a dialogue model for implementing enhanced communication capabilities. In particular, two systems can start a semantics-enhanced Dialogue Game as a form of negotiation to clarify the meaning of the requested concepts when a shared knowledge model does not exist, and to approximate the response when the exact one is not available. We propose a distributed semantic conversation framework based on the Sesame semantic environment for the exchange of user model knowledge on the Web. Systems have to expose their user model data as a Web Service, and to exploit a public dialogue knowledge base to start the dialogue. The main advantage of the approach is to allow systems to deal with difficult situations by starting an appropriate dialogue game instead of stopping the communication as in the traditional "all-or-nothing" Web Service approach. On the basis of a preliminary evaluation, the approach has shown an improvement of the adaptation results provided by the systems we tested.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating web service and semantic dialogue model for user models interoperability on the web

Cena

2010

J Intell Inf Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bailin and Truszkowski [2] present an ontology negotiation protocol that enabled agents to exchange parts of their ontology, by a process of successive interpretations, clarifications, and explanations. The result was that each agent would converge on a single, shared ontology.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deciding Agent Orientation on Ontology Mappings

Doran

Payne

Tamma

et al. 2010

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Effective communication in open environments relies on the ability of agents to reach a mutual understanding of the exchanged message by reconciling the vocabulary (ontology) used. Various approaches have considered how mutually acceptable mappings between corresponding concepts in the agents' own ontologies may be determined dynamically through argumentation-based negotiation (such as Meaning-based Argumentation, MbA). In this paper we present a novel approach to the dynamic determination of mutually acceptable mappings, that allows agents to express a private acceptability threshold over the types of mappings they prefer. We empirically compare this approach with the Meaning-based Argumentation and demonstrate that the proposed approach produces larger agreed alignments thus better enabling agent communication. Furthermore, we compare and evaluate the fitness for purpose of the generated alignments, and we empirically demonstrate that the proposed approach has comparable performance to the MbA approach.

show abstract

“…Beun et al [5] present a computational framework for the detection of ontological discrepancies in multiagent systems by using feedback utterances. Bailin and Truszkowski [2] present an ontology negotiation protocol that enables agents to exchange parts of their ontology, by a process of successive interpretations, clarifications, and explanations. The end result of this process is that each agent will converge on a single, shared ontology, whereas, in our context, agents keep their own ontologies.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation over ontology correspondences in MAS

Laera

Blacoe

Tamma

et al. 2007

Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to support semantic interoperation in open environments, where agents can dynamically join or leave and no prior assumption can be made on the ontologies to align, the different agents involved need to agree on the semantics of the terms used during the interoperation. Reaching this agreement can only come through some sort of negotiation process. Indeed, agents will differ in the domain ontologies they commit to; and their perception of the world, and hence the choice of vocabulary used to represent concepts. We propose an approach for supporting the creation and exchange of different arguments, that support or reject possible correspondences. Each agent can decide, according to its preferences, whether to accept or refuse a candidate correspondence. The proposed framework considers arguments and propositions that are specific to the matching task and are based on the ontology semantics. This argumentation framework relies on a formal argument manipulation schema and on an encoding of the agents' preferences between particular kinds of arguments.

show abstract

Ontology Negotiation: How Agents Can Really Get to Know Each Other

Cited by 15 publications

References 4 publications

Integrating web service and semantic dialogue model for user models interoperability on the web

Integrating web service and semantic dialogue model for user models interoperability on the web

Deciding Agent Orientation on Ontology Mappings

Argumentation over ontology correspondences in MAS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About