similarityof XML-Schema elements: A structural and information content approach

Computer Journal

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 240-254

  Formica, Anna ^a  

^a CNR   (Italy)

Author keywords

Information content; Semantic Web; Similarity reasoning; Type hierarchies; XML Schemas

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; SEMANTICS;

INFORMATION CONTENT; MAXIMUM WEIGHTED MATCHING; SIMILARITY REASONING;

XML;

EID: 44849089622     PISSN: 00104620     EISSN: 14602067     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/comjnl/bxm051     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema.
2. Berners-Lee, T. et al. (2001) The Semantic Web. Scientific American.
3. Ding, Y., Fensel, D., Klein, M. and Omelayenko, B. (2002) The semantic web: Yet another hip? Data Knowl. Eng., 41, 205-227.
4. Rodriguez, A. and Egenhofer, M. (2004) Comparing geospatial entity classes: An asymmetric and context-dependent similarity measure. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., (IJGIS), 18, 229-256.
5. Lin, D. (1998) An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity. Proc. Int. Conf. Machine Learning (ICML), Madison, WI, USA, July 24-27, pp. 296-304. Morgan Kaufmann.
6. Bianchini, D., De Antonellis, V. and Melchiori, M. (2005) Capability matching and similarity reasoning in service discovery. In Missikoff M. and De Nicola, A. (eds) Proc. Open Interop Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Ontologies for Interoperability (EMOI-INTEROP), Porto, Portugal, June 13-14, pp. 285-296. CEUR-WS.org.
7. Su, H., Kuno, H. and Rundensteiner, E.A. (2001) Automating the transformation of XML documents. Proc. 3rd Int. Workshop on Web Information and Data Management (WIDM), Atlanta, GA, November 9, pp. 68-75. ACM.
8. Yi, S., Huang, B. and Chan, W.T. (2005) XML application schema matching using similarity measure and relaxation labeling. Inf. Sci., 169, 27-46.
9. Stroulia, E. and Wang, Y. (2005) Structural and semantic matching for assessing web-service similarity. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst., 14 407-438.
10. Lee, J.H., Kim, M.H. and Lee, Y.J. (1993) Information retrieval based on conceptual distance in IS-A hierarchies. J. Doc., 49, 188-207.
11. Rada, L., Mili, H., Bicknell, E. and Bletter, M. (1989) Development and application of a metric on semantic nets. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 19, 17-30.
12. Resnik, P. (1995) Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity in a taxonomy. Proc. Int. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Montréal, Canada, August 20-25, pp. 448-453. Morgan Kaufmann.
13. Resnik, P. (1999) Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR), 11, 95-130.
14. Jiang, J.J. and Conrath, D.W. (1997) Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. Comput. Res. Repository (CoRR), cmp-lg/9709008.
15. Galil, Z. (1986) Efficient algorithms for finding maximum matching in graphs. ACM Comput. Surv., 18, 23-38.
16. Formica, A. and Missikoff, M. (2002) Concept similarity in SymOntos: An enterprise ontology management tool. Comput. J., 45, 583-594.
17. Castano, S., De Antonellis, V., Fugini, M.G. and Pernici, B. (1998) Conceptual schema analysis: Techniques and applications. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 23, 286-332.
18. Maarek, Y.S., Berry, D.M. and Kaiser, G.E. (1991) An information retrieval approach for automatically constructing software libraries. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 17, 800-813.
19. Collins, A. and Loftus, E. (1975) A spreading activiation theory on semantic processing. Psychol. Rev., 82, 407-428.
20. Bright, M., Hurson, A. and Pakzad, S. (1994) Automated resolution of semantic heterogeneity in multidatabases. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 19, 212-253.
21. Wu, Z. and Palmer, M. (1994) Verb semantics and lexical selection. Proc. 32nd Annual Meeting of the Associations for Computational Linguistics, Las Cruces, New Mexico, June 27-30, pp. 133-138.
22. Spanoudakis, G. and Constantopoulos, P. (1994) Similarity for analogical software reuse: A computational model. Proc. Eleventh European Conf. Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, August 8-12, pp. 18-22. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
23. Bisson, G. (1992) Learning in FOL with a similarity measure. Proc. 10th Nat. Conf. Artificial Intelligence, San Jose, CA, July 12-16, pp. 82-87. The AAAI Press/The MIT Press, CA.
24. Formica, A. (2005) Similarity of XML-Schema elements supported by domain ontologies. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. (IJSEKE), 15, 117-130.
25. Missikoff, M. and Wang, X.F. (2001) A group decision system for collaborative ontology building. Proc. Int. Conf. Group Decision and Negociation, La Rochelle, France, June 4-7, pp. 153-160.
26. WordNet 2.1. (2005). A lexical database for the english language. http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn.
27. Ziegler, P., Kiefer, C., Sturm, C., Dittrich, K.R. and Bernstein, A. (2006) Detecting similarities in ontologies with the SOQA-SimPack Toolkit. Proc. Int. Conf. Extending Database Technology (EDBT), Munich, Germany, March 26-31, 2006, pp. 59-76.
28. Bex, G.J., Neven, F. and Bussche, J. (2004) DTDs versus XML Schema: A practical study. In Amer-Yahia, S. and Gravano, L. (eds), Proc. Int. Workshop on the Web and Databases (WebDB), Maison de la Chimie, Paris, France, June 17-18, pp. 79-84.
29. Lee, D. and Chu, W.W. (2000) Comparative analysis of six XML Schema languages. SIGMOD Rec., 29, 76-87.
30. Mani, M., Lee, D. and Muntz, R.R. (2001) Semantic data modeling using XML Schemas. In Kunii, H.S., Jajodia, S. and Sølvberg, A. (eds), Int. Conf. Conceptual Modeling (ER), Yokohama, Japan, November 27-30, pp. 149-163. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), Vol. 2224, Springer.
31. Formica, A. (2004) Legality of XML-Schema type hierarchies. Comput. J., 47, 591-601.
32. Wang, Y., DeWitt, D.J. and Cai, J. (2003) X-Diff: An effective change detection algorithm for XML documents. Dayal, U., Ramamritham, K. and Vijayaraman, T.M. (eds) Proc. 19th Int. Conf. Data Engineering (ICDE Bangalore, India, March 5-8, pp. 519-530. IEEE Computer Society.
33. Beeri, C. (1990) A formal approach to object-oriented databases. Data Knowl. Eng., 5, 353-382.
34. Costello, R. (2002) XML Schema Tutorial. http://www.w3.org/XML/ Schema.
35. Ait-Kaci, H. and Nasr, R. (1986) LOGIN: A logic programming language with built-in inheritance. J. Log. Program. (JLP), 3, 185-215.
36. Beeri, C., Formica, A. and Missikoff, M. (1999) Inheritance hierarchy design in object-oriented databases. Data Knowl. Eng., 30, 191-216.
37. Borgida, A., Mylopoulos, J. and Wong, H.K.T. (1984) Generalization/ Specialization as a Basis for Software Specification. In Brodie, M.L. Mylopoulos, J. and Schmidt, J.W. (eds), On Conceptual Modelling: Perspectives from Artificial Intelligence, Databases and Programming Languages, pp. 87-117. Springer-Verlag.
38. Cardelli, L. (1988) A semantics of multiple inheritance. Info. Comp. 76, 138-164. (Preliminary version in Lecture Note in Computer Science, Vol. 173, Springer-Verlag, 1984)
39. Francis, W.N. and Kucera, H. (1982) Frequency Analysis of English Usage. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
40. Fellbaum, C. (1998) A semantic network of english: The mother of all WordNets. Comput. Humanit., 32, 209-220.
41. Ross, S. (1976) A First Course in Probability. Macmillan.
42. Formica, A. (2003) Satisfiability of object-oriented database constraints with bag and set attributes. Inf. Syst., 28, 213-224.
43. Miller, G.A. and Charles, W.G. (1991) Contextual correlates of semantic similarity. Lang. Cogn. Process., 6, 1-28.