International Journal of Advance Foundation and Research in Computer (IJAFRC)

Volume 1, Issue 7, July !1"# I$$% &"' ( "')&

"& * + !1", IJAFRC All Ri,hts Reserved ---#i.afrc#or,
/iterature $urvey on 0ntolo,y 1atchin, 2echni3ues#
Satish Kumar*, Vikram Singh, Balwinder Saini.
National Insititute of Technology, Kurukshetra, India.
er.satishkumar1!"gmail.com*, #iks"nitkkr.ac.in , me$saini"gmail.com

A 4 $ 2 R A C 2
5ords, sentences, para,raphs and documents is an important component in the data minin,
application area such as information retrieval, te6t summari7ation etc# And findin, the similarity
value 8et-een these components is an important action# %o- a day, there are various matchin,
techni3ues are present -hich are very helpful for findin, the similarity 8et-een the ontolo,y# In
this survey paper discusses the e6istin, -or9s on similarity (0n te6t, -ords etc#) usin, element(
level techni3ues and structure level techni3ues#
Inde6 2erms: $imilarity, $trin,(predicated similarity, ;lement(/evel techni3ues, $tructure(/evel
techni3ues, $trin, and ;dit distance

I# I%2R0<=C2I0%
%omogeneous attri&ute measures 'lays conse(uential role in te)t cognate area and a''lication in tasks
such as ontology matching, information retrie#al, (uery answering etc *1+ *,+. -easuring the kindred
attri&ute &etween the words, te)t, documents is the 'rimary stage in ontology matching. .ntology
matching is a 'aramount o'eration traditional a''lication e.g., .ntology e#olution, .ntology integration,
data integration and data warehouses *,+. In te)t similarity words can &e similar in two ways le)ically
and semantically. If the se(uence of character is similar then they are le)ically similar and if the two
words are o''osite of each other ha#ing similar meaning then they are semantically similar */+. These
ty'es of similarities measures through the element0le#el techni(ues &etween two ontologies. 1lement 2
3e#el techni(ues discuses the String0'redicated techni(ues, 3anguage0'redicated techni(ues and
4onstraint0Based techni(ues etc. .n the other hand Structure03e#el techni(ues are used to measure the
similarity &ased on the structure. Structure03e#el techni(ues discuss the 5ra'h0'redicated techni(ue,
Ta)onomy0'redicated techni(ue and 4onstraint0'redicated techni(ue.

II# 1AC>I%? @R0C;$$
The ontology matching 'rocess is utili6ed to measures the homogeneous attri&ute &etween the two
ontologies *+. The matching 'rocess determines an alignment 78, for two ontologies .1 and .,. There are
some other 'arameters of the matching 'rocess.

9i: The utili6ation of an in'ut alignment 7
9ii: -atching 'arameter like weights, threshold
9iii: 1)ternal resources utili6ed &y the matching 'rocess like erudition0&ase and domain0categorical area.

<efinition 1 9-atching 'rocess: The matching 'rocess as shown in figure 1 considered as function f
which emanates from the ontologies to match .1 and .,, an in'ut alignment 7, a set of 'arameters ' and
a set of oracles and resources r, &ack to an alignment 78 &etween these ontologies*1, +.

78 ; f 9.1, .,, 7, ', r:

International Journal of Advance Foundation and Research in Computer (IJAFRC)
Volume 1, Issue 7, July !1"# I$$% &"' ( "')&

"" * + !1", IJAFRC All Ri,hts Reserved ---#i.afrc#or,


Fi,ure 1# 2he 1atchin, @rocess

III# 2A@;$ 0F 0%20/0?A 1A2C>I%? 2;C>%IB=;$
There are two ty'es of otology matching techni(ues discusses. <irst one is 1lement0le#el techni(ue and
another one is Structure0le#el techni(ues *+.


Fi,ure # 2ypes of 0ntolo,y 1atchin, 2echni3ues

A# ;lement(/evel techni3ue
1lement03e#el matching techni(ues measure the homogeneous attri&ute of ontology and their instances
in isolation from their relation with the other attri&ute and their instances *+. 1lement03e#el matching
techni(ues discuss the String0'redicated, 3anguage0'redicated and constraint0'redicated methods.
1# $trin,(predicated techni3ue
7 string0'redicated techni(ue is utili6ed to match the designations and name descri'tion of ontology
entities. This techni(ue takes string as an in'ut and considers the strings as a se(uence of letter in an
al'ha&et *+. In this techni(ue #arious distance measures methods are utili6ed for finding the distance
&etween strings such as 1dit0distance, %amming0distance etc. String0'redicated method considers the
structure of the string 9as a se(uence of letters: *=+. There are many ways to find the homogeneous
attri&ute &etween the string> on the way the string is #iewed as? as an e)act se(uence of letters, an
erroneous se(uence of letters, a set of letters, and a set of words. In this 'a'er most fre(uently methods
are discussed.
# $trin, parity

String 'arity defines the homogeneous attri&ute &etween the strings. If the strings are identical the string
'arity returns 1 and if the strings are not identical then it returns @.
International Journal of Advance Foundation and Research in Computer (IJAFRC)
Volume 1, Issue 7, July !1"# I$$% &"' ( "')&

") * + !1", IJAFRC All Ri,hts Reserved ---#i.afrc#or,

S ; set of strings
s, t ; are the strings
s ; length of the string s
t ; length of the string t
s[ ] i for i *1, s + latter at 'osition i of s.

<efinition 9String Aarity: String 'arity is similarity ? S S *@ 1+ such that ), y S, 9), ): ; 1 and
if ) B y, 9), y: ; @.

This method does not e)'lain the how the strings are dissimilar. 7nother way is also used for com'arison
two strings that is %amming distance which shows and counts the num&er of 'ositions where the strings
are dissimilar.

<efinition & 9%amming Cistance: The %amming distance *, D+ is dissimilarity ? S * S *@ 1+ such that

( )
[ ] [ ]
( )
( )
( ) t s
t s i t i s
t s
t s
i
, max
,
, min
1
+
=

=

;dit <istance

1dit distance */+ *+ method is utili6ed for finding the homogeneous attri&ute &etween the strings. In 1dit
distance method a''ly the o'erations 9insertion, deletion, re'lacement of a character: to the o&Eect from
the num&er of o&Eects to o&tain the other one. 1dit distance method is the minimum num&er of
o'erations a''lied.

<efinition " 91dit distance: 7 set of o'eration 9.'? S S:, and a cost function w? .' F 9F e)'ressing
the real num&ers:. There are num&er of o'erations a''lied on the strings that transform the first string
into the second one 9and #ice #ersa:, edit distance dissimilarity ? S * S *@ 1+ where is the cost of
o'erations that are less a''lied for transform s to t.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

= =
1
min
1 ... : ,
i
wOpi t s Op Opn t Opi t s


String0'redicated techni(ue is su&sidiary to (uantify the similar attri&ute &etween the strings if we
utili6e the #ery similar string to re'resent the same conce'ts *+. If we utili6ed the synonyms with
dissimilar structure then this techni(ue may &e gi#en the low kindred attri&ute. The result of this
techni(ue is more su&sidiary if we utili6ed the similar strings.
&# /an,ua,e(predicated techni3ue
3anguage0'redicated techni(ue *+ *$+ is also used to find the similarity &etween the words. This
techni(ue takes names as words e.g. 1nglish. 3anguage0'redicated techni(ue considered the intrinsic
techni(ues. 3anguage0'redicated techni(ues utili6ed the #arious methods which considered strings as
se(uence of characters. This method takes string as an in'ut and fragmented that string in words and
International Journal of Advance Foundation and Research in Computer (IJAFRC)
Volume 1, Issue 7, July !1"# I$$% &"' ( "')&

"C * + !1", IJAFRC All Ri,hts Reserved ---#i.afrc#or,
these words may &e identified se(uence of words. 3anguage0'redicated method is 'redicated u'on the
Natural 3anguage Arocessing. Natural 3anguage Arocessing techni(ues are acclimated to find the
conse(uential words or terms from the te)t 9Te)t is com'osed of strings: and finds the kindred attri&ute
&etween the ontology entities and their relation.
"# Constraint(predicated techni3ue
4onstraint0'redicated techni(ue *+ *$+ is utili6ed the internal structure of the ontology entities rather
than com'aring the designations or terms. This techni(ue com'ares the internal structure of the
ontology entities. 3atter this is called as relational structure &ecause in this we withal com'aring the
ontology entities with the other entities which is related *$+. The ontology entities without reference to
other ontology entities are the internal structure and the set of relation that an ontology entity has with
other is the relational structure. The internal structure is utili6ed in the data&ase schema matching and
relational structure is utili6ed in matching formal ontology and semantic network.
4# $tructure(level techni3ue
4ontrary to 1lement0le#el techni(ues, Structure le#el techni(ue *+ *G+ measures the homogeneous
attri&ute of ontology and their instances to com'are their relation with other entities or their instances.
1# ?raph(predicated techni3ue
In the 5ra'h0'redicated techni(ue measures the homogeneous attri&ute &etween the 'air of nodes, from
the two ontologies 'redicated on their 'ositions in the gra'h. 5ra'h0'redicated takes the two ontologies
as la&elled gra'hs in'ut *,+. In this techni(ue if two nodes are similar then their neigh&ours is
additionally somehow homogeneous. In this techni(ue gra'h are considered from the ontology and
nodes are la&elled &y the relation name 9-athematically gra'h of multi'le relations of the ontologies:. 7
're#alent homomor'hic su&gra'h of &oth gra'hs is finding the homogeneous attri&ute &etween the
nodes of gra'h.

<efinition ) 94ommon homomor'hic directed gra'h: Two directed gra'h 5 ; HV, 1I and 58 ; HV8, 18I a
common homomor'hic directed su&gra'h of 5 and 5J is a gra'h HVK, 1KI, such that there e)ists a 'air of
homomor'hism f ; L VK and g? L8 VK with L V and L8 V8, such that

0 w V8, u V> f9u: ; w and # V8> g9#: ; w>
0 Hu. #I 1w*w, Hf 9u:, f 9#:I 1K>
0 Hu8, #8I 18w8*w8, Hg9u8:, g9#8:I 1K.

The homogeneous attri&ute &etween the two entities from the ontology can 'redicate on their relation
with other entities in the ontology. There are sundry kind of relations are considered *+

r com'aring the entities in the direct relation r>
r
0
4om'aring the entities in the transiti#e reduction of relation>
rM com'aring the entities in the transiti#e closure of relation r.

# 2a6onomy(predicated techni3ue
Ta)onomy0'redicated techni(ue *+ is withal utili6ed the gra'h0'redicated a''roach &ut in this
techni(ue only the s'eciali6ation relation are considered. This ty'e of techni(ue is utili6ed as a
com'arison resource for matching classes. The 'erce'tion after the ta)onomy techni(ue is that
International Journal of Advance Foundation and Research in Computer (IJAFRC)
Volume 1, Issue 7, July !1"# I$$% &"' ( "')&

"7 * + !1", IJAFRC All Ri,hts Reserved ---#i.afrc#or,
s'eciali6ation connect term that are already homogeneous 9as a su'er set or su&set of each other:,
therefore their neigh&our are additionally somehow homogeneous.
&# Instance(predicated techni3ue
Instance0'redicated techni(ue *+ is utili6ed for the com'arison of sets of instances of classes. .n the
su&structure of the com'arison it is decided that classes are match or not. This techni(ue is relies on the
set0theoretic reasoning and statistical techni(ues *$+. Ta)onomy0'redicated techni(ue is withal utili6ed
the gra'h0'redicated a''roach &ut in this techni(ue we find the similar attri&ute &etween the instances.
This techni(ue is #ery su&sidiary for integrating the instances and (uantifying the homogeneous
attri&ute &etween them.
IV# C0%C/=$I0%
7t the end of this sur#ey 'a'er, we conclude that matching &etween the entities 'lays an im'ortant role
in ontology matching. In this 'a'er #arious ontology matching techni(ues or a''roaches are discussed
like 1lement03e#el techni(ue, Structure03e#el techni(ue. In these techni(ues further discussed the
#arious techni(ues. In first section discussed the some introduction 'art, in second section some &asics of
matching and in third section different kind of ontology matching techni(ues.

V# R;F;R;%C;$

*1+ 3i %uang, 5uo)iong %u, Ninghe Oang, PFe#iew of .ntology -a''ingQ, ,nd International
4onference on 4onsumer 1lectronics, 4ommunications and Networks 9414Net:, Oichang, '.' =/$0
=@,,10,/ 7'ril ,@1,.
*,+ Aa#el Sh#aiko and Rerome 1u6enat, P.ntology matching? state of the art and future challengesQ
I111 Transactions on Knowledge and Cata 1ngineering, Vol. No. ,= , Issue? 1 , '.' 1=G01$D, ,@1/.
*/+ Bin Oe, %ongyu 4hai, Lei'ing %e, Niaoting Lang, 5uangwei Song, PSemantic similarity calculation
method in ontology ma''ingQ, ,nd International 4onference on 4loud 4om'uting and Intelligent
Systems 944IS:, %ang6hou, Vol No. /, '.' 1,=!01,D,, ,@1,.
*+ R. 1u6enat and A. Sh#aiko, P.ntology matchingQ, S'ringer, ,@1/.
*=+ 7 Fodrfgue6, - 1genhofer, PCetermining Semantic Similarity 7mong 1ntity 4lasses from Ciferent
.ntologiesQ, I111 Transactions on Knowledge and Cata 1ngineering, Vol. No.1= 9,:, ,0=D,
,@@/.
*D+ 3i 4hun0miao, Sun Eing0&o, PThe Fesearch of .ntology -na''ing -ethod Based on 4om'uting
Similarity P. Science S Technology Information, Vol. No.1, '.' ==,0==, ,@1@.
*$+ Oang The., PSemantic similarity match of ontology conce't &ased on heuristic rulesQ. 4om'uter
7''lications, Vol. No. 1,, Cec. ,@@$.
*G+ Riang %ui'ing, P Information Fetrie#al and the Semantic Le&Q, I111 International 4onference on
1ducational and Information Technology 9I41IT:, 4hong(ing, 4hina, Vol No. /, '.' D10D/, ,@1@.