Advertisement

Reconciling Implicit and Evolving Ontologies for Semantic Interoperability

  • Kendall Lister
  • Maia Hristozova
  • Leon Sterling
Conference paper
Part of the Whitestein Series in Software Agent Technologies book series (WSSAT)

Abstract

This paper addresses current approaches to the goal of semantic interoperability on the web and presents new research directions. We critically discuss the existing approaches, including RDF, SHOE, PROMPT and Chimaera, and identify the most effective elements of each. In our opinion, the ability of these primarily closed solutions to succeed on a global web scale is limited. In general, a unilateral solution to the problem on a global level seems unlikely in the foreseeable future. We review and contrast our own research experiments AReXS and CASA and suggest that as yet unad-dressed issues should be considered, such as reconciling implicit ontologies and evolving ntologies and task-oriented analysis. We also consider the role of semantic interoperation in multi-agent systems and describe strategies for achieving this via the ROADMAP methodology, with emphasis on building and assuring knowledge models.

Keywords

Ontology translation/mapping Ontology maintenance/evolution Data standardisation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Decker, S., Erdman, M., Fensel, D., Studer, R. Ontobroker: Ontology-based Access to Distributed and Semi-Structured Information. R. Meersman et al. (eds), Semantic Issues in Multimedia Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Fellbaum, C. (ed.) WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge, America, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Gao, X., Sterling, L. A Methodology for Building Information Agents. In Y. Yang, M. Li, A. Ellis (eds), Web Technologies and Applications, pp 43–52, International Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Gao, X., Sterling, L. Semi-structured Data Extraction from Heterogeneous Sources. In D. Schwartz, M. Divitini, T. Bratjevik (eds), Internet-based Knowledge Management and Organizational Memories, pp 83–102, Idea Group Publishing, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Gennari, J., Musen, M. A., Fergerson, R. W., Grosso, W. E., Crubézy, M., Eriksson, H., Noy, N. F., Tu, S. W. The Evolution of Protégé: An Environment for Knowledge-Based Systems Development. Stanford University, Technical Report SMI-2002-0943, 2002.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Heflin, J., Hendler, J. Semantic Interoperability on the Web. In Proceedings of Extreme Markup Languages 2000, Graphic Communications Association, Alexandria, America, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Heflin, J., Hendler, J. Dynamic Ontologies on the Web. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park, America, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Hendler, J., McGuinness, D. L. The DARPA Agent Markup Language. In IEEE Intelligent Systems, Vol. 15, No. 6, November/December, pp 67–73, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Ikeda, Y., Itoh, F., and Ueda, T. Example-based Frame Mapping for Heterogeneous Information Agents. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, Paris, France, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Hristozova, M. EXPLODE: Extreme Programming for Lightweight Ontology Development. Master of Engineering thesis, Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, The University of Melbourne, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hristozova, M., Sterling, L. An eXtreme Method for Developing Lightweight Ontologies. In S. Cranefield, T. Finin, S. Willmott (eds), Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontologies in Agent Systems, First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, CEUR Workshop Series, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Juan, T., Pearce, P., Sterling, L. ROADMAP: Extending the Gaia Methodology for Complex Open Systems. In Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Bologna, Italy, 2002.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Juan, T., Sterling, L. The ROADMAP Meta-model for Intelligent Adaptive Multi-Agent Systems in Open Environments. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Agent Oriented Software Engineering, Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2935, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Klein, M. Supporting evolving ontologies on the Internet. In Proceedings of the EDBT 2002 PhD Workshop, Prague, Czech Republic, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lister, K., Sterling, L. Agents in a Multi-Cultural World: Towards Ontological Reconciliation. In M. Stumptner, D. Corbett, M. Brooks (eds), Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Proceedings of the Fourteenth Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2256, pp 321–332, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lister, K., Sterling, L. Tasks as Context for Intelligent Agents. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, Halifax, Canada, 2003.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Lister, K., Sterling, L. Reconciling Ontological Differences for Intelligent Agents. In P. Bouquet (ed), Meaning Negotiation, AAAI Technical Report WS-02-09, Eighteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Edmonton, Canada, 2002.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    McGuinness, D., Fikes, R., Rice, J., Wilder, S. An Environment for Merging and Testing Large Ontologies. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Breckenridge, America, 2000.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    McGuinness, D. L., Fikes, R., Hendler, J., Stein, L. A. DAML+OIL: An Ontology Language for the Semantic Web. In IEEE Intelligent Systems, Vol. 17, No. 5, September/October, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Noy, F., Musen, N. An Algorithm for Merging and Aligning Ontologies: Automation and Tool Support. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontology Management at the Sixteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Orlando, America, 1999.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Sato, S. CTM: An example-based translation aid system. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Nantes, France, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Steels, L. Self-Organising Vocabularies. C. Langton, T. Shimohara (eds), Artificial Life V: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems, Nara, Japan, 1996.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Sterling, L. A Knowledge-Biased Approach to Information Agents. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Information Integration and Web-based Applications and Services, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Sterling, L. On Finding Needles in WWW Haystacks. In Sattar, A. (ed.), Advanced Topics in AI, Proceedings of the Tenth Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1342, pp 25–36, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3c.org. World Wide Web Consortium web site, 2004Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Web Ontology Language (OWL). www.w3c.org/2004/OWL. World Wide Web Consortium web site, 2004Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N. R., Kinny, D. The Gaia Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analysis and Design. In Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 3(3):285–312, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kendall Lister
    • 1
  • Maia Hristozova
    • 1
  • Leon Sterling
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Software EngineeringThe University of MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations