[topicmapmail] Merging of Distributed Topic Maps based on the Subject Identity Measure (SIM) Approach
Dipl.-Wirtsch.-Inf. Lutz Maicher [Universität Leipzi g]
maicher@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:50:22 +0200
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01EF_01C48F72.39A98070
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
back from summer holiday my colleague and I finished our paper "Merging =
of Distributed Topic Maps based on the Subject Identity Measure (SIM) =
Approach" (see http://www.lutzmaicher.de/PUBLIKATIONEN/%5Bmaic04b%5D.pdf =
or http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~maicher/forschung2.html) for =
LIT 2004.
We adress with this paper the question how distributed topic maps can be =
merged if the subjects of their topics aren't described by a centralised =
vocabulary (PSIs). We developed a (lightweighted) approach wich yields =
for our example set very good results.
For further research we need general feedback from the community. Do we =
need such methods? Where shortcomings of our approach are seen? etc.
In addition we are searching answers to the following three questions:
1. Which other methods (for example from schema matching) will be =
fruitful to use in the field of automatic topic map merging?
2. Which topic map metrics exist? We need objective criteria for topic =
maps to evaluate the quality of different methods (correlation between =
such metrics and the yielded quality).
3. Where we can find other example sets? We need additional topic maps =
for evaluation purposes.
We are highly interested in your comments,
greatings from gray Leipzig
Lutz Maicher
_________________________________________________________________________=
________
Dipl.-Wirtsch.-Inf. Lutz Maicher=20
Graduiertenkolleg Wissensrepr=E4sentation | Universit=E4t Leipzig
Abteilung Automatische Sprachverarbeitung | Institut f=FCr Informatik | =
Augustusplatz 10-11 | 04109 Leipzig
fon 0341 97 32 303 | mail maicher@informatik.uni-leipzig.de
http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~maicher/
------=_NextPart_000_01EF_01C48F72.39A98070
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dear all,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>back from summer holiday my colleague =
and I=20
finished our paper "Merging of Distributed Topic Maps based on the =
Subject=20
Identity Measure (SIM) Approach" (see <A=20
href=3D"http://www.lutzmaicher.de/PUBLIKATIONEN/%5Bmaic04b%5D.pdf">http:/=
/www.lutzmaicher.de/PUBLIKATIONEN/%5Bmaic04b%5D.pdf</A> or=20
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~maicher/forschung2.html">ht=
tp://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~maicher/forschung2.html</A>)=20
for LIT 2004.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We adress with this paper the question =
how=20
distributed topic maps can be merged if the subjects of their topics =
aren't=20
described by a centralised vocabulary (PSIs). We developed a=20
(lightweighted) approach wich yields for our example set very =
good=20
results.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For further research we =
need general feedback=20
from the community. Do we need such methods? Where shortcomings of our =
approach=20
are seen? etc.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In addition we are =
searching answers to the=20
following three questions:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1. Which other methods (for example =
from schema=20
matching) will be fruitful to use in the field of automatic topic map=20
merging?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2. Which topic map metrics exist? We =
need objective=20
criteria for topic maps to evaluate the quality of different =
methods=20
(correlation between such metrics and the yielded quality).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>3. Where we can find other example =
sets? We=20
need additional topic maps for evaluation purposes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We are highly interested in your=20
comments,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>greatings from gray =
Leipzig</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Lutz Maicher</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>________________________________________________________________=
_________________<BR>Dipl.-Wirtsch.-Inf.=20
Lutz Maicher <BR>Graduiertenkolleg Wissensrepr=E4sentation | =
Universit=E4t=20
Leipzig<BR>Abteilung Automatische Sprachverarbeitung | Institut f=FCr =
Informatik |=20
Augustusplatz 10-11 | 04109 Leipzig</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>fon 0341 97 32 303 | mail <A=20
href=3D"mailto:maicher@informatik.uni-leipzig.de">maicher@informatik.uni-=
leipzig.de</A><BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~maicher/">http://www.inform=
atik.uni-leipzig.de/~maicher/</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_01EF_01C48F72.39A98070--