Abstract
Agents may use different ontologies for representing knowledge and take advantage of alignments between ontologies in order to communicate. Such alignments may be provided by dedicated algorithms, but their accuracy is far from satisfying. We already explored operators allowing agents to repair such alignments while using them for communicating. The question remained of the capability of agents to craft alignments from scratch in the same way. Here we explore the use of expanding repair operators for that purpose. When starting from empty alignments, agents fails to create them as they have nothing to repair. Hence, we introduce the capability for agents to risk adding new correspondences when no existing one is useful. We compare and discuss the results provided by this modality and show that, due to this generative capability, agents reach better results than without it in terms of the accuracy of their alignments. When starting with empty alignments, alignments reach the same quality level as when starting with random alignments, thus providing a reliable way for agents to build alignment from scratch through communication.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Contrary to classical precision and recall, it is not possible to deduce them from the numbers given hereafter.
- 2.
References
Aberer, K., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Hauswirth, M.: Start making sense: the Chatty Web approach for global semantic agreements. J. Web Semant. 1(1), 89–114 (2003)
Anslow, M., Rovatsos, M.: Aligning experientially grounded ontologies using language games. In: Croitoru, M., Marquis, P., Rudolph, S., Stapleton, G. (eds.) GKR 2015. LNCS, vol. 9501, pp. 15–31. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28702-7_2
Atencia, M., Schorlemmer, M.: An interaction-based approach to semantic alignment. J. Web Semant. 13(1), 131–147 (2012)
Chocron, P., Schorlemmer, M.: Attuning ontology alignments to semantically heterogeneous multi-agent interactions. In: Proceedings of the 22nd European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), The Hague, Netherlands, pp. 871–879 (2016)
Chocron, P., Schorlemmer, M.: Vocabulary alignment in openly specified interactions. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS), Saõ Paolo, Brazil, pp. 1064–1072 (2017)
Euzenat, J.: Semantic precision and recall for ontology alignment evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 348–353 (2007)
Euzenat, J.: First experiments in cultural alignment repair (Extended Version). In: Presutti, V., Blomqvist, E., Troncy, R., Sack, H., Papadakis, I., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8798, pp. 115–130. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11955-7_10
Euzenat, J.: Interaction-based ontology alignment repair with expansion and relaxation. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Melbourne, VIC, Australia, pp. 185–191 (2017)
Jiménez-Ruiz, E., Meilicke, C., Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I.: Evaluating mapping repair systems with large biomedical ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 26th Description logics workshop, Ulm, Germany, pp. 246–257 (2013)
Jiménez-Ruiz, E., Payne, T., Solimando, A., Tamma, V.: Limiting logical violations in ontology alignnment through negotiation. In: Proceedings of the 15th Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), Cape Town, South Africa, pp. 217–226 (2016)
Meilicke, C.: Alignment incoherence in ontology matching. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Mannhein (2011)
Meilicke, C., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Incoherence as a basis for measuring the quality of ontology mappings. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ISWC International Workshop on Ontology Matching, pp. 1–12 (2008)
Payne, T., Tamma, V.: Negotiating over ontological correspondences with asymmetric and incomplete knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 517–524 (2014)
Santos, E., Faria, D., Pesquita, C., Couto, F.: Ontology alignment repair through modularization and confidence-based heuristics. PLoS ONE 10(12), 1–19 (2015)
Steels, L.: The origins of ontologies and communication conventions in multi-agent systems. Auton. Agent. Multi Agent Syst. 1(2), 169–194 (1998)
Steels, L. (ed.): Experiments in Cultural Language Evolution. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (2012)
Trojahn, C., Euzenat, J., Tamma, V., Payne, T.: Argumentation for reconciling agent ontologies. In: Elai, A., Kona, M., Orgun, M. (eds.) Semantic Agent Systems, vol. 344, pp. 89–111. Springer, New-York (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-18308-9_5
van Diggelen, J., Beun, R.-J., Dignum, F., van Eijk, R., Meyer, J.-J.: Ontology negotiation in heterogeneous multi-agent systems: the ANEMONE system. Appl. Ontol. 2(3–4), 267–303 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Euzenat, J. (2017). Crafting Ontology Alignments from Scratch Through Agent Communication. In: An, B., Bazzan, A., Leite, J., Villata, S., van der Torre, L. (eds) PRIMA 2017: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10621. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69131-2_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69131-2_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69130-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69131-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)