Re: Complex ontological alignment

Nicola,


What correspondences do you want to express exactly?

 From your first example, I understand that you want to express that the 
property:

  ex:hasauthor

from the first ontology corresponds to the property chain:

  :hasbeencreated o :carried_out o :is_identified_by o rdfs:label

in the second ontology.

 From your second example, I understand that you want that the class of 
ex:Architect in the first ontology correspond to the class of people 
that are classified as http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300024987 .

I wrote these correspondences in an alignment file at:
https://www.emse.fr/~zimmermann/edoal-example.xml

The alignment format from Inria's alignment API is meant to represent 
correspondences in a way independent from how the correspondence may be 
used. There are different ways of interpreting and using a 
correspondence in an alignment:

  1. as an ontological axiom
  2. as data transformations
  3. as schema constraints
  4. as "bridge rules" between descriptions of different contexts

Additionally, ontology alignment correspondences may have a "measure" 
assigned to them that can be interpreted as a degree of confidence, or 
as a fuzzy value, or as a probability, or something else. They also have 
additional metadata that makes it clear that they are relating something 
from an ontology to something from another ontology. In comparison, a 
logical axiom, even if it uses URIs from different namespaces, does not 
make this clear.

So, depending on your use case, you may want to use Holger's suggestion 
(SHACL) or Paul's (RIF + SPARQL), or something else, but you may also 
postpone the decision for later (or leave it to someone else) and just 
write an EDOAL alignment like I did. The alignment file can also serve 
other purposes, such as alignment evaluation, composition, and enrichment.


Best,
--AZ



Le 26/11/2019 à 17:55, Nicola Carboni a écrit :
> Dear all,
> 
> I am searching for a way to create complex ontological alignments.
> I would like to state that two patterns of type 1-to-n are equivalent.
> 
> The typical use case I have in mind is the declaration of equivalence 
> between a flat statement and a property chain, as in the two patterns below:
> 
> |@prefix:<http://example.org/>.@prefixex:<http://ontology.org/example>.ex:bookex:hasauthor"John".:book:hasbeencreated:creation_event.:creation_event:carried_out:person.:person:is_identified_by:appellation.:appellationrdfs:label"John".|
> 
> another important type of equivalence, but slightly different, which I 
> would like to declare is the one between these two patterns:
> 
> |@prefix:<http://example.org/>.@prefixex:<http://ontology.org/example>.ex:Architectrdfs:label"John".:Person:classifiedAs<http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300024987>;rdfs:label"John".<http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300024987>agvp:Concept;rdfs:label"architects"@en.|
> 
> The first one declare an instance of the class Artist according to an 
> ontology(x), the second classify as artist, using a controlled 
> vocabulary term, an instance of a person declared using the ontology (y).
> 
> Do you know how can I express such alignments?
> 
> I heard about EDOAL, but sincerely I did not fully grasped how to 
> actually use it.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Nicola
> 
> —
> Nicola Carboni
> Research Fellow
> University of Zurich
> Post Box 23
> Ramistrasse 71 8006 Zurich
> Switzerland
> 

-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
Institut Henri Fayol
École des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
CS 62362
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://www.emse.fr/~zimmermann/
Member of team Connected Intelligence, Laboratoire Hubert Curien

Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2019 09:55:50 UTC