2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.is.2008.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Theories of meaning in schema matching: An exploratory study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It could be particularly productive to work in conjunction with other projects that explore local government domains the in the context of semantic web technologies 6 . This review highlights the scope for further work in this area.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It could be particularly productive to work in conjunction with other projects that explore local government domains the in the context of semantic web technologies 6 . This review highlights the scope for further work in this area.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recent studies confirm such findings. For example, research completed in 2009 reveals how domain experts and knowledge engineers present a range of interpretations of the same data [6].…”
Section: Ontologies Epistemological Adequacy and Systems Interoperabmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the existing approaches for addressing those semantic associations, we can cite ontology mapping [28], schema matching [29], [30] and [31] and schema morphism [32]. These approaches typically compute similarities by relating entities via semantic relationships, with, sometimes, a qualitative measure.…”
Section: Semantic Relationships Identification Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To achieve this, the expert can take profits from existing approaches (schema matching ( (Evermann, 2009), (Rahm and Bernstein, 2001)) and morphism (Goguen and Burstall, 1984), ontology mapping ( (Kalfoglou and Schorlemmer, 2003), (Choi, Song and Han, 2006)). The goal of this paper is not to develop such an approach.…”
Section: Semantic Relationshipmentioning
confidence: 99%