Arguing over ontology alignments
Arguing over ontology alignments
In open and dynamic environments, agents will usually differ in the domain ontologies they commit to and their perception of the world. The availability of Alignment Services that are able to provide correspondences between two ontologies is only a partial solution to achieving interoperability between agents, because any given candidate set of alignments is only suitable in certain contexts. For a given context, different agents might have different and inconsistent perspectives that reflect their differing interests and preferences on the acceptability of candidate mappings, each of which may be rationally acceptable. In this paper we introduce an argumentation-based negotiation framework over the terminology they use in order to communicate. This argumentation framework relies on a formal argument manipulation schema and on an encoding of the agents preferences between particular kinds of arguments. The former does not vary between agents, whereas the latter depends on the interests of each agent. Thus, this approach distinguishes clearly between the alignment rationales valid for all agents and those specific to a particular agent.
Laera, Loredana
5f0a7e11-14b2-400d-a7cb-5799d5bcb2ba
Tamma, Valentina
5b302cae-5ff6-4f29-afa7-6d9dc2f73329
Euzenat, Jerome
190f22ea-8a3a-4e5e-9445-542d973accf2
Bench-Capon, Trevor
5c8db25b-1268-477f-9083-c4ab8f014667
Payne, Terry R.
0bb13d45-2735-45a3-b72c-472fddbd0bb4
2006
Laera, Loredana
5f0a7e11-14b2-400d-a7cb-5799d5bcb2ba
Tamma, Valentina
5b302cae-5ff6-4f29-afa7-6d9dc2f73329
Euzenat, Jerome
190f22ea-8a3a-4e5e-9445-542d973accf2
Bench-Capon, Trevor
5c8db25b-1268-477f-9083-c4ab8f014667
Payne, Terry R.
0bb13d45-2735-45a3-b72c-472fddbd0bb4
Laera, Loredana, Tamma, Valentina, Euzenat, Jerome, Bench-Capon, Trevor and Payne, Terry R.
(2006)
Arguing over ontology alignments.
International Workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2006), Athens, GA.
Record type:
Conference or Workshop Item
(Paper)
Abstract
In open and dynamic environments, agents will usually differ in the domain ontologies they commit to and their perception of the world. The availability of Alignment Services that are able to provide correspondences between two ontologies is only a partial solution to achieving interoperability between agents, because any given candidate set of alignments is only suitable in certain contexts. For a given context, different agents might have different and inconsistent perspectives that reflect their differing interests and preferences on the acceptability of candidate mappings, each of which may be rationally acceptable. In this paper we introduce an argumentation-based negotiation framework over the terminology they use in order to communicate. This argumentation framework relies on a formal argument manipulation schema and on an encoding of the agents preferences between particular kinds of arguments. The former does not vary between agents, whereas the latter depends on the interests of each agent. Thus, this approach distinguishes clearly between the alignment rationales valid for all agents and those specific to a particular agent.
Text
Laera-et-al.pdf
- Other
More information
Published date: 2006
Additional Information:
Event Dates: November 5 2006
Venue - Dates:
International Workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2006), Athens, GA, 2006-11-05
Organisations:
Electronics & Computer Science
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 262995
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/262995
PURE UUID: bf93c48f-0f6e-44bd-a65b-c110b4b52077
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 20 Sep 2006
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 07:23
Export record
Contributors
Author:
Loredana Laera
Author:
Valentina Tamma
Author:
Jerome Euzenat
Author:
Trevor Bench-Capon
Author:
Terry R. Payne
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics