Keywords
Domain vocabulary
Ontology alignment
Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative
Semantic Web
How to Cite
Funding data
-
Universidade do Minho
Grant numbers IViSSEM – POCI-01-0145-FEDER-28284
Abstract
Introduction: In the context of the Semantic Web, interoperability among heterogeneous ontologies is a challenge due to several factors, among which semantic ambiguity and redundancy stand out. In order to overcome such challenges, systems and algorithms are adopted. In this study, it is understood that controlled vocabularies are a particular form of ontologies. Objective: to obtain a vocabulary resulting from the alignment and merging of the vocabularies Scientific Domains and Scientific Areas of FCT, EuroSciVoc and UNESCO nomenclature for fields of Science&Technology, in the domain of Computer Science, to be used within the IViSSEM project. Methodology: literature review on systems/algorithms for ontology alignment, using the PRISMA methodology; alignment of the three vocabularies; and vocabulary validation through Delphi study. Results: we proceeded to analyse the 25 ontology alignment systems and variants that participated in at least one track of the competition between 2018-2019. Of these systems were selected Agreement Maker Light and LogMap to perform the alignment of the three vocabularies, making a cut for the area of Computer Science. Conclusion: The vocabulary obtained from the Agreement Maker Light presented a better performance. At the end, a vocabulary with 98 terms was obtained in the Computer Science domain to be adopted by the IViSSEM project. The resulting alignment between the vocabulary used at national level by FCT (Portugal) with one used by the European Union (EuroSciVoc) and another one from the domain of Science&Technology (UNESCO), establishing fruitful relationships for other universities and projects, as well as for FCT itself.
References
AKSNES, D. W.; SIVERTSEN, G. A criteria-based assessment of the coverage of scopus and web of science. Journal of Data and Information Science, v. 4, n. 1, p. 1–21, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2478/JDIS-2019-0001. Acesso em: 15 ago. 2021.
ALGERGAWY, A. Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative 2018. In: 13th INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON ONTOLOGY MATCHING CO-LOCATED WITH THE, 13th, 17th ISWC (OM 2018). Oct 2018, Monterey, United States, 2018. Proceedings of the [...]. Monterey, 2018. p. 76–116. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper0.pdf. Acesso em: 15 ago. 2021.
ALGERGAWY, A. Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative 2019. p. 46–85, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper0.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
BAÑOS-MORENO, M.J. Propuesta de modelado de una ontología de dominio para la representación de acciones en política-economía. 2017. 348 f. Tese (Doutorado em Documentación) – Facultad de Comunicación y Documentación, 2018. Disponível em: http://hdl.handle.net/10201/56661. Acesso em: 12 nov. 2021.
BAPTISTA, S. G.; CUNHA, M. B. Estudo de usuários: visão global dos métodos de coleta de dados. Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação, v. 12, n. 2, p. 168-184, 2007. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-99362007000200011. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2021.
BARRIOS, M. et al. Consensus in the delphi method: What makes a decision change? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 163, n. C, 2021. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2020.120484. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2021.
BERNERS-LEE, T.; HENDLER, J.; LASSILA, O. The Semantic Web A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American, v. 284, n. 5, p. 1–5, 2001. Disponível em: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-semantic-web/. Acesso em: 10 set. 2021.
CHANG, F. FCAMap-KG results for OAEI 2019. p. 138–145, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper8.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
CHEATHAM, M.; HITZLER, P. String similarity metrics for ontology alignment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: 8219 LNCS(PART 2), p . 294–309, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41338-4_19. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
CHEN, G. FCAMapX results for OAEI 2018, p. 160–166, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper7.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
DALMORO, M.; VIEIRA, K. M. Dilemas na construção de escalas Tipo Likert: o número de itens e a disposição influenciam nos resultados? Revista Gestão Organizacional, v. 6, n. 3, p. 161-174, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.22277/RGO.V6I3.1386. Acesso em: 15 ago. 2021.
DELBECQ, A. L. et al. Group techniques for program planning: 59 a guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, v. 12, n. 4, p. 581-581, 1986. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1177/002188637601200414. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2021.
DESTRO, J. M. EVOCROS: results for OAEI 2018, p. 152–159, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper6.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
DESTRO, J. M. EVOCROS: Results for OAEI 2019, p. 131–137, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper7.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
DJEDDI, W. E. XMap: results for OAEI 2018, p. 210–215, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper15.pdf . Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
DSI. lod:linked_open_data [DSI Wiki]. Disponível em: http://wiki.dsi.uminho.pt/doku.php?id=lod:linked_open_data#linked_open_data. Acesso em: 30 out. 2021. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
ENCYCLOPEDIA. CORDIS: European Commission. FP7-NMP - Specific Programme “Cooperation”: Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and New Production Technologies. 2014. Disponível em: https://cordis.europa.eu/en. Acesso em: 15 ago. 2021.
EUZENAT, J.; SHVAIKO, P. Ontology matching: Second edition. In: ______. Ontology matching. 2. ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38721-0. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
FARIA, D. Results of AML participation in OAEI 2018, p. 125–131. 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper2.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
FARIA, D. AML and AMLC Results for OAEI 2019, p. 101–106. 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper3.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
FARIA, D. et al. The AgreementMakerLight ontology matching system. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8185 LNCS, p. 527–541, 2013. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41030-7_38. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
FINK, A. et al. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. American Journal of Public Health, v. 74, n. 9, p. 979-983, 1984. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.74.9.979 . Acesso em: 10 nov. 2021.
FUNDAÇÃO PARA A CIÊNCIA E A TECNOLOGIA. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia. Disponível em: https://www.fct.pt/. Acesso em 30 mar. 2021.
GHERBI, S. ONTMAT1: results for OAEI 2019, p. 164–168. 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper12.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
GRACIA, J.; MENA, E. Semantic heterogeneity issues on the web. IEEE Internet Computing, v. 16, n. 5, p. 60–67, 2012. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2012.116. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
GUARINO, N.; OBERLE, D.; STAAB, S. Handbook on ontologies. Geneve: Springer, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3. Acesso em: 5 fev. 2021.
GUIMARÃES, J. P. P. Vocabulário de domínio para o projeto IViSSEM. 2022. 208 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Tecnologia e Sistemas de Informação) – Escola de Engenharia, Universidade do Minho, Guimarães, Portugal, 2022.
HERTLING, S. DOME results for OAEI 2019, p. 123–130. 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper6.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
HERTLING, S. DOME results for OAEI 2018, p. 144–151. 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper5.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
IVISSEM . Information Visualization & Social Scholarly Metric. (n.d.). Disponível em: http://www.ivissem.net/. Acesso em: 5 Sept. 2021.
JACOB, E. K. Ontologies and the Semantic Web. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 29, n. 4, p. 19–22, 2005. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/bult.283. Acesso em: 5 fev. 2021.
JIMÉNEZ-RUIZ, E. LogMap: family participation in the OAEI 2018, p. 187–191, 2018. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper11.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
JIMÉNEZ-RUIZ, E. LogMap: family participation in the OAEI 2019, p. 160–163. 2019. Disponível em: Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper11.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
JIMÉNEZ-RUIZ, E.; CUENCA GRAU, B. LogMap: logic-based and scalable ontology matching. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: 7031 LNCS(PART 1), p. 273–288, 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25073-6_18. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
KACHROUDI, M. KEPLER at OAEI 2018, p. 173–178. 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper9.pdf. Acesso em: 20 fev. 2021.
KALIBATIENE, D.; VASILECAS, O. Survey on ontology languages. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 90 LNBIP, p. 124–141, 2011. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24511-4_10. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
LAADHAR, A. OAEI 2018 results of POMap++, p. 192–196. 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper12.pdf. Acesso em: 11 set. 2021.
LAADHAR, A. POMap++ Results for OAEI 2019: Fully Automated Machine Learning Approach for Ontology Matching. p. 169–174, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper13.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
LINSTONE, H. A.; TUROFF, M.; HELMER, O. (ed.). The Delphi method. [S.l.]: Murray Turoff and Harold A. Linstone, 2002. Disponível em: https://bit.ly/3RLQ6kF. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
LÜTKE, A. AnyGraphMatcher Submission to the OAEI: knowledge graph challenge 2019. CEUR, v. 2536, p. 86–93, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper1.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
MANIRAJ, V.; SIVAKUMAR, R. Ontology Languages: a review. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering, v. 2, n. 6, p. 1793-8201, 2010. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.7763/IJCTE.2010.V2.257. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
MENDES, A. Science classification, visibility of the different scientific domains and impact on scientific development. Revista de Enfermagem Referência, v. 4, n. 10, p. 143-152,2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.12707/RIV16049. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
MOHAMMADI, M. SANOM results for OAEI 2018, p. 205–209. 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper14.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
MOHAMMADI, M. SANOM results for OAEI 2019, p. 175–180, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper14.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
Moher, D. et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, v. 6, n. 7, 2009. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
MONGEON, P.; PAUL-HUS, A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, v. 106, n. 1, p. 213–228, 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-015-1765-5. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
MURRY JR., J. W.; HAMMONS, J. O. Delphi: A versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research. The Review of Higher Education, v. 18, n. 4, p. 423-436, 1995. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1353/RHE.1995.0008. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2021.
OKOLI, C.; PAWLOWSKI, S. D. The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, v. 42, n. 1, p. 15-29, 2004. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IM.2003.11.002. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2021.
PASTOR-SÁNCHEZ, J.A. et al. Publicación como Linked Open Data de la nomenclatura internacional de Ciencia y Tecnología y del Tesauro UNESCO. In: CONGRESSO ISKO ESPANHA E PORTUGAL, 1., 7-9 November 2013. Anais do [...]. Porto: ISKO, 2013. Disponível em: http://eprints.rclis.org/24272/. Acesso em: ago. 2021.
PORTISCH, J. ALOD2Vec matcher, p. 132–137, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper3.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
PORTISCH, J. Wiktionary Matcher, p. 181–188, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper15.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
PORTUGAL. Ministério da Educação e Ciência. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia. Domínios científicos e áreas científicas. [Lisboa]: [FCT], 2012. Disponível em: https://www.fct.pt/apoios/projectos/concursos/2012/docs/Dominios_e_Areas_Cientificas_C2012.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
PUBLICATIONS OFFICE OF THE EU. European Science Vocabulary (EuroSciVoc). v.1.3 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2021. Disponível em: http://publications.europa.eu/resource/dataset/euroscivoc. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
RODRIGUEZ, M. C. Three options are optimal for multiple-choice items: a meta-analysis of 80 years of research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, v. 24, n. 2, p. 3–13, 2005. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1745-3992.2005.00006.X. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
ROUSSILLE, P. Holontology: results of the 2018 OAEI evaluation campaign, p. 167–172, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper8.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
SILVA, J. ALIN results for OAEI 2018, p. 117–124, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper1.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
SILVA, J. ALIN results for OAEI 2019, p. 94–100, 2019. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper2.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
SKOS Play! - Thesaurus & taxonomies. (n.d.). Disponível em: Disponível em: https://skos-play.sparna.fr/play/. Acesso em 7 Nov. 2021.
SKOS. Simple Knowledge Organization System. UNESCO nomenclature for fields of science and technology. Skos.Um.Es. 2015. Disponível em: https://skos.um.es/unesco6/. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
STEWART, D. et al. A modified Delphi study to determine the level of consensus across the European Union on the structures, processes and desired outcomes of the management of polypharmacy in older people. PLOS One, v. 12, n. 11, 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0188348. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
STUDER, R.; BENJAMINS, V. R.; FENSEL, D. Knowledge engineering: principles and methods. Data and Knowledge Engineering, v. 25, n. 1–2, p. 161–197, 1998. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-023X(97)00056-6. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
TANG, Y. Lily results for OAEI 2018, p. 179–186, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper10.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
THIÉBLIN, É. CANARD complex matching system: results of the 2018 OAEI evaluation campaign, p. 138–143, 2018. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2288/oaei18_paper4.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
THIÉBLIN, É. CANARD Complex Matching System: results of the 2019 OAEI Evaluation Campaign, p. 114–122, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper5.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
WANG, X. FTRLIM results for OAEI 2019, p. 146–152, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper9.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
ZHOU, L. AROA results for 2019 OAEI, p. 107–113, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2536/oaei19_paper4.pdf. Acesso em: 18 set. 2021.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 João Pedro Pereira Guimarães, Morgana Carneiro de Andrade, Ana Alice Baptista
Downloads
