=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1766/om2016_preface
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1766/om2016_preface.pdf
|volume=Vol-1766
}}
==None==
<pdf width="1500px">https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1766/om2016_preface.pdf</pdf>
<pre>
                         Ontology Matching
                                    OM-2016


                Proceedings of the ISWC Workshop


Introduction
Ontology matching1 is a key interoperability enabler for the semantic web, as well as a
useful tactic in some classical data integration tasks dealing with the semantic hetero-
geneity problem. It takes ontologies as input and determines as output an alignment,
that is, a set of correspondences between the semantically related entities of those on-
tologies. These correspondences can be used for various tasks, such as ontology merg-
ing, data translation, query answering or navigation on the web of data. Thus, matching
ontologies enables the knowledge and data expressed in the matched ontologies to in-
teroperate.

   The workshop has three goals:
   • To bring together leaders from academia, industry and user institutions to assess
     how academic advances are addressing real-world requirements. The workshop
     strives to improve academic awareness of industrial and final user needs, and
     therefore, direct research towards those needs. Simultaneously, the workshop
     serves to inform industry and user representatives about existing research efforts
     that may meet their requirements. The workshop also investigated how the on-
     tology matching technology is going to evolve.
   • To conduct an extensive and rigorous evaluation of ontology matching and in-
     stance matching (link discovery) approaches through the OAEI (Ontology Align-
     ment Evaluation Initiative) 2016 campaign2 . Besides real-world specific match-
     ing tasks, involving e.g., large biomedical ontologies, OAEI 2016 introduced the
     process model matching track as well as a desease-phenotype track supported
     by the Pistoia Alliance Ontologies Mapping project within a specific matching
     scenario. Therefore, the ontology matching evaluation initiative itself provided
     a solid ground for discussion of how well the current approaches are meeting
     business needs.
   • To examine new uses, similarities and differences from database schema match-
     ing, which has received decades of attention but is just beginning to transition to
     mainstream tools.

    The program committee selected 6 submissions for oral presentation and 9 submis-
sions for poster presentation. 21 matching systems participated in this year’s OAEI
campaign. Further information about the Ontology Matching workshop can be found
at: http://om2016.ontologymatching.org/.
  1 http://www.ontologymatching.org/
  2 http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/2016


                                           i
Acknowledgments. We thank all members of the program committee, authors and
local organizers for their efforts. We appreciate support from the Trentino as a Lab3
initiative of the European Network of the Living Labs4 at Informatica Trentina5 , the
EU SEALS (Semantic Evaluation at Large Scale)6 project and the Pistoia Alliance
Ontologies Mapping project7 .


Pavel Shvaiko
Jérôme Euzenat
Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz
Michelle Cheatham
Oktie Hassanzadeh
Ryutaro Ichise

December 2016


  3 http://www.taslab.eu
  4 http://www.openlivinglabs.eu
  5 http://www.infotn.it
  6 http://www.development.seals-project.eu/
  7 http://www.pistoiaalliance.org/ontologies-mapping-plans-participate-oaei-2016/


                                         ii
                             Organization


Organizing Committee
Pavel Shvaiko, Informatica Trentina SpA, Italy
Jérôme Euzenat, INRIA & University Grenoble Alpes, France
Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, University of Oxford, UK
Michelle Cheatham, Wright State University, USA
Oktie Hassanzadeh, IBM Research, USA
Ryutaro Ichise, National Institute of Informatics, Japan


Program Committee
Alsayed Algergawy, Jena University, Germany
Zohra Bellahsene, LRIMM, France
Olivier Bodenreider, National Library of Medicine, USA
Marco Combetto, Informatica Trentina, Italy
Valerie Cross, Miami University, USA
Isabel Cruz, The University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
Warith Eddine Djeddi, LIPAH & LABGED, Tunisia
Jérôme David, University Grenoble Alpes & INRIA, France
Gayo Diallo, University of Bordeaux, France
Zlatan Dragisic, Linköpings Universitet, Sweden
Alfio Ferrara, University of Milan, Italy
Fausto Giunchiglia, University of Trento, Italy
Wei Hu, Nanjing University, China
Valentina Ivanova, Linköpings Universitet, Sweden
Antoine Isaac, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam & Europeana, Netherlands
Daniel Faria, Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Portugal
Patrick Lambrix, Linköpings Universitet, Sweden
Juanzi Li, Tsinghua University, China
Vincenzo Maltese, University of Trento, Italy
Fiona McNeill, University of Edinburgh, UK
Christian Meilicke, University of Mannheim, Germany
Andriy Nikolov, Open University, UK
Axel Ngonga, University of Leipzig, Germany
Leo Obrst, The MITRE Corporation, USA
Heiko Paulheim, University of Mannheim, Germany
Catia Pesquita, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Dominique Ritze, University of Mannheim, Germany
Umberto Straccia, ISTI-C.N.R., Italy
Ondřej Zamazal, Prague University of Economics, Czech Republic
Valentina Tamma, University of Liverpool, UK

                                       iii
Cássia Trojahn, IRIT, France
Ludger van Elst, DFKI, Germany
Songmao Zhang, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China


                                     iv
                                          Table of Contents


Technical Papers

Towards best practices for crowdsourcing ontology alignment benchmarks
Reihaneh Amini, Michelle Cheatham, Pawel Grzebala, Helena B. McCurdy . . . . . . . . 1

Analysing top-level and domain ontology alignments from matching systems
Daniela Schmidt, Cássia Trojahn, Renata Vieira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Ontology alignment evaluation in the context of multi-agent interactions
Paula Chocron, Marco Schorlemmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Tableau extensions for reasoning with link keys
Maroua Gmati, Manuel Atencia, Jérôme Euzenat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Rewriting SELECT SPARQL queries from 1:n complex correspondences
Élodie Thiéblin, Fabien Amarger, Ollivier Haemmerlé,
Nathalie Hernandez, Cássia Trojahn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Identifying and validating ontology mappings by formal concept analysis
Mengyi Zhao, Songmao Zhang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61


                                                            v
OAEI Papers

Results of the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative 2016
Manel Achichi, Michelle Cheatham, Zlatan Dragisic, Jérôme Euzenat,
Daniel Faria, Alfio Ferrara, Giorgos Flouris, Irini Fundulaki, Ian Harrow,
Valentina Ivanova, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Elena Kuss, Patrick Lambrix,
Henrik Leopold, Huanyu Li, Christian Meilicke, Stefano Montanelli, Catia Pesquita,
Tzanina Saveta, Pavel Shvaiko, Andrea Splendiani, Heiner Stuckenschmidt,
Konstantin Todorov, Cássia Trojahn, Ondřej Zamazal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

ALIN results for OAEI 2016
Jomar da Silva, Fernanda Baião, Kate Revoredo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

OAEI 2016 results of AML
Daniel Faria, Catia Pesquita, Booma S. Balasubramani,
Catarina Martins, João Cardoso, Hugo Curado,
Francisco Couto, Isabel Cruz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

CroLOM: cross-lingual ontology matching system results for OAEI 2016
Abderrahmane Khiat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

CroMatcher results for OAEI 2016
Marko Gulić, Boris Vrdoljak, Marko Banek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

DisMatch results for OAEI 2016
Maciej Rybiński, Marı́a del Mar Roldán-Garcı́a,
José Garcı́a-Nieto, José F. Aldana-Montes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

DKP-AOM: results for OAEI 2016
Muhammad Fahad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

FCA-Map results for OAEI 2016
Mengyi Zhao, Songmao Zhang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

Lily Results for OAEI 2016
Peng Wang, Wenyu Wang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

LogMap family participation in the OAEI 2016
Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Valerie Cross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

LPHOM results for OAEI 2016
Imen Megdiche, Olivier Teste, Cássia Trojahn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

LYAM++ results for OAEI 2016
Abdel Nasser Tigrine, Zohra Bellahsene, Konstantin Todorov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

Integrating phenotype ontologies with PhenomeNET
Miguel Angel Rodrı́guez Garcı́a, Georgios V. Gkoutos,
Paul N. Schofield, Robert Hoehndorf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201


                                                                vi
RiMOM Results for OAEI 2016
Yan Zhang, Hailong Jin, Liangming Pan, Juanzi Li . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

SimCat Results for OAEI 2016
Abderrahmane Khiat, Elhabib Abdelillah Ouhiba,
Mohammed Amine Belfedhal, Chihab Eddine Zoua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

XMap: results for OAEI 2016
Warith Eddine Djeddi, Mohamed Tarek Khadir,
Sadok Ben Yahia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222


                                                                  vii
Posters

Introducing the disease and phenotype OAEI track
Ian Harrow, Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz, Andrea Splendiani,
Martin Romacker, Stefan Negru, Peter Woollard, Scott Markel,
Yasmin Alam-Faruque, Martin Koch, Erfan Younesi, James Malone . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227

Annotating web tables through ontology matching
Vasilis Efthymiou, Oktie Hassanzadeh, Mohammad Sadoghi,
Mariano Rodriguez-Muro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

Ontology matching evaluation: a statistical perspective
Majid Mohammadi, Wout Hofman, Yao-hua Tan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

Instance matching benchmark for spatial data: a challenge proposal to OAEI
Irini Fundulaki, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga-Ngomo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Lion’s Den: feeding the LinkLion
Mohamed Ahmed Sherif, Mofeed M. Hassan,
Tommaso Soru, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo, Jens Lehmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235

Matching Instances in GeoLink
Michelle Cheatham, Reihaneh Amini, Chandan Patel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

Toward better debugging support on extended SPARQL queries
with on-the-fly ontology mapping generation
Takuya Adachi, Naoki Fukuta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239

Quality checking and matching linked dictionary data
Kun Ji, Shanshan Wang, Lauri Carlson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

Exploiting ontology matching to support reuse
in PURO-started ontology development
Marek Dudáš, Ondřej Zamazal, Vojtěch Svátek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243


                                                            viii

</pre>