Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Exploiting Majority Acceptable Arguments for Ontology Matching

Cassia Trojahn, Paulo Quaresma, Renata Vieira


Ontology matching consists of generating an alignment (set of correspondences) from a pair of ontologies. This process has been seen as a mainstream solution to the semantic heterogeneity problem in ontology-based systems. A wide diversity of matching solutions has been proposed, which exploit different features within an ontology. Matching systems usually differ in their results and an important issue is to combine different matching results and deal with potential conflicts that arise from the different views. Our approach exploits argumentation theory as a way for dealing with that issue. Here, arguments are as positions that support or reject correspondences and argumentation frameworks support the creation and exchange of arguments, followed by the reasoning on their acceptability. First, matchers generate their correspondences and represent them as arguments. Next, they share their arguments and interpret them on the basis of argumentation frameworks and individual preferences. As a result, each matcher has a subset of acceptable arguments, from the set of arguments initially shared. The subset of globally acceptable arguments (consensus) is computed from the individual. In this paper, we exploit the notion of majority, where arguments being acceptable by the majority of matchers are considered as a consensus on the initial alignments. We evaluate our proposal on a standard set of alignments. Considering the correspondences represented as arguments acceptable for the majority of individual subsets, both precision and recall are improved, specially when compared with the subsets acceptable for every matcher or for some matchers.


ontology matching, argumentation frameworks, evaluation.

Full Text:


Disclaimer/Regarding indexing issue:

We have provided the online access of all issues and papers to the indexing agencies (as given on journal web site). It’s depend on indexing agencies when, how and what manner they can index or not. Hence, we like to inform that on the basis of earlier indexing, we can’t predict the today or future indexing policy of third party (i.e. indexing agencies) as they have right to discontinue any journal at any time without prior information to the journal. So, please neither sends any question nor expects any answer from us on the behalf of third party i.e. indexing agencies.Hence, we will not issue any certificate or letter for indexing issue. Our role is just to provide the online access to them. So we do properly this and one can visit indexing agencies website to get the authentic information. Also: DOI is paid service which provided by a third party. We never mentioned that we go for this for our any journal. However, journal have no objection if author go directly for this paid DOI service.