Semantic Disambiguation in Folksonomy: A Case Study

  • Pierre Andrews
  • Juan Pane
  • Ilya Zaihrayeu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6699)


Social annotation systems such as, Flickr and others have gained tremendous popularity among Web 2.0 users. One of the factors of success was the simplicity of the underlying model, which consists of a resource (e.g., a web page), a tag (e.g., a text string), and a user who annotates the resource with the tag. However, due to the syntactic nature of the underlying model, these systems have been criticised for not being able to take into account the explicit semantics implicitly encoded by the users in each tag. In this article we: a) provide a formalisation of an annotation model in which tags are based on concepts instead of being free text strings; b) describe how an existing annotation system can be converted to the proposed model; c) report on the results of such a conversion on the example of a dataset; and d) show how the quality of search can be improved by the semantic in the converted dataset.


Description Logic Control Vocabulary Query Term Word Sense Disambiguation Tripartite Graph 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Garcia-Silva, A., Corcho, O., Alani, H., Gomez-Perez, A.: Review of the state of the art: Discovering and associating semantics to tags in folksonomies. The Knowledge Engineering Review (2010) (to be published)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wal, T.V.: Folksonomy: Coinage and definition,
  3. 3.
    Mika, P.: Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In: Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the WWW, vol. 5, pp. 5–15 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Golder, S., Huberman, B.A.: The structure of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science 32(2), 198–208 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Körner, C., Strohmaier, M.: A call for social tagging datasets. SIGWEB Newsl 2:1–2:6 (January 2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller, G.: WordNet: An electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wetzker, R., Zimmermann, C., Bauckhage, C.: Analyzing Social Bookmarking Systems: A Cookbook. In: Proceedings of the ECAI 2008 Mining Social Data Workshop, pp. 26–30. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zaihrayeu, I., Sun, L., Giunchiglia, F., Pan, W., Ju, Q., Chi, M., Huang, X.: From web directories to ontologies: Natural language processing challenges. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.-S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.-I., Nixon, L.J.B., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 623–636. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dutta, B., Giunchiglia, F.: Semantics are actually used. In: International Conference on Semantic Web and Digital Libraries, Trento, Italy, pp. 62–78 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Artstein, R., Poesio, M.: Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics. Journal of Computational Linguistics 34(4) (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Echarte, F., Astrain, J., Cordoba, A., Villadangos, J.: Self-adaptation of ontologies to folksonomies in semantic web. Proc. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Tech. 33, 335–341 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giunchiglia, F., Kharkevich, U., Zaihrayeu, I.: Concept search. In: Aroyo, L., Traverso, P., Ciravegna, F., Cimiano, P., Heath, T., Hyvönen, E., Mizoguchi, R., Oren, E., Sabou, M., Simperl, E. (eds.) ESWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5554, pp. 429–444. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Library of Congress, (last accessed on February 11, 2011)
  15. 15.
    Ranganathan, S.R.: Colon Classification, 7th edn. Asia Pub. House (1987)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Braun, S., Schmidt, A., Walter, A., Nagypal, G., Zacharias, V.: Ontology maturing: a collaborative web 2.0 approach to ontology engineering. In: Proceedings of (CKC 2007) at, WWW 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schmitz, P.: Inducing ontology from flickr tags. In: Proc. of the Collaborative Web Tagging Workshop, WWW 2006 (May 2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Golder, S.A., Huberman, B.A.: Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. J. Inf. Sci. 32, 198–208 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marlow, C., Naaman, M., Boyd, D., Davis, M.: Ht06, tagging paper, taxonomy, flickr, academic article, to read. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, HYPERTEXT 2006, pp. 31–40. ACM, NY (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Körner, C., Benz, D., Hotho, A., Strohmaier, M., Gerd, S.: Stop thinking, start tagging: tag semantics emerge from collaborative verbosity. In: Proceedings of WWW 2010, pp. 521–530. ACM, NY (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kolbitsch, J.: WordFlickr: a solution to the vocabulary problem in social tagging systems. In: Proceedings of I-MEDIA (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mathes, A.: Folksonomies - cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata. Technical report, Graduate School of Library and Information Science. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (December 2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gazan, R.: Social annotations in digital library collections. D-Lib 14(11/12) (December 2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ronzano, F., Marchetti, A., Tesconi, M.: Tagpedia: a semantic reference to describe and search for web resources. In: SWKM 2008: Intl. Workshop on Social Web and Knowledge Management @ WWW (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Quintarelli, M., Resmini, A., Rosati, L.: Facetag: Integrating bottom-up and top-down classification in a social tagging system. In: IASummit, Las Vegas (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yang, C., Hung, J.C.: Word sense determination using wordnet and sense co-occurrence. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, vol. 1, pp. 779–784. IEEE, USA (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Agirre, E., Rigau, G.: A proposal for word sense disambiguation using conceptual distance. In: The First International Conference on Recent Advances in NLP, Tzigov Chark, Bulgaria (September 1995)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Autayeu, A., Giunchiglia, F., Andrews, P.: Lightweight parsing of classifications into lightweight ontologies. In: Lalmas, M., Jose, J., Rauber, A., Sebastiani, F., Frommholz, I. (eds.) ECDL 2010. LNCS, vol. 6273, pp. 327–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Angeletou, S., Sabou, M., Motta, E.: Semantically enriching folksonomies with flor. In: Proc of the 5th ESWC. workshop: Collective Intelligence & the Semantic Web (2008)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wu, Z., Palmer, M.: Verb semantics and lexical selection. In: Proc. of the 32nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 133–138 (1994)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Garca-Silva, A., Szomszor, M., Alani, H., Corcho, O.: Preliminary results in tag disambiguation using dbpedia. In: Proc. of the First International Workshop on Collective Knowledge Capturing and Representation (KCAP), USA (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Andrews
    • 1
  • Juan Pane
    • 1
  • Ilya Zaihrayeu
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria e Scienza Dell’InformazioneUniversitá degli studi di TrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations