Finding correct semantic correspondences between heterogeneous ontologies is one of the most challenging problems in the area of semantic web technologies. As manually constructing such mappings is not feasible in realistic scenarios, a number of automatic matching tools have been developed that propose mappings based on general heuristics. As these heuristics often produce incorrect results, a manual revision is inevitable in order to guarantee the quality of generated mappings. Experiences with benchmarking matching systems revealed that the manual revision of mappings is still a very difficult problem because it has to take the semantics of the ontologies as well as interactions between mappings into account. In this article, we propose methods for supporting human experts in the task of revising automatically created mappings. In particular, we present non-standard reasoning methods for detecting and propagating implications of expert decisions on the correctness of a mapping.
Dieser Eintrag ist Teil der Universitätsbibliographie.
Search Authors in
