Advancements in Meaning Negotiation for Enhanced Semantic Collaboration in Information Systems

Dalila D. Graba (1), Souad Elhannani (2)
(1) LabRi-SBA Lab., Ecole Superieure en Informatique, Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria, Algeria,
(2) LabRi-SBA Lab., Ecole Superieure en Informatique, Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria, Algeria

Abstract

Pragmatic Web emerges from Semantic Web to empower human-computer collaboration. The majority of methods rely on knowledge exchange and reuse through ontologies and rules, leading to the development of interactive systems through distributed multiagent systems over the web. Meaning negotiation becomes crucial for agents to reach a consensus on the meaning of concepts within a domain. Various approaches have been suggested to enhance the pragmatics of the web through meaning negotiation. In this scope, Aldo de Moor’s pragmatic web model integrates contextual and domain ontologies in a case study. The model explores the potential of ontology merging to enhance the meaning of negotiation. Ontology merging streamlines communication by reducing negotiation steps, and fostering more efficient collaboration across diverse domains. This paper explores the potential of Aldo de Moor's pragmatic web model to improve the meaning negotiation process in multiple domains. To assess the efficacy of merging ontologies in meaning negotiation, the authors designed 123 scenarios applicable to 30 different domain ontologies. These scenarios encompassed various contextual situations, simulating real-world interactions between agents. The effectiveness of our approach is demonstrated in this paper through an example in the e-recruitment domain. The result demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in negotiation steps when using the merged ontology compared to traditional methods. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test revealed an 87% reduction (p-value < 0.05), highlighting the effectiveness of the approach.

Full text article

Generated from XML file

References

Keskes, N., & Rahmoun, A. (2017). Meaning negotiation based on merged individual context ontology and part of semantic web ontology. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 11(3), 352-368

De Moor, A. (2005, July). Patterns for the pragmatic web. In International conference on conceptual structures (pp. 1-18). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Mustapha, S. S. (2010). CoP sensing framework on web-based environment. Web-based Support Systems, 333-357.

Warglien, M., & Gärdenfors, P. (2015). Meaning negotiation. Applications of conceptual spaces: The case for geometric knowledge representation, 79-94. Springer, Cham, 2015. p. 79-94.

Van Diggelen, J., Beun, R. J., Dignum, F., Van Eijk, R. M., & Meyer, J. J. (2007). Ontology negotiation: Goals, requirements and implementation. International Journal of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, 1(1), 63-90.

Burato, E., Cristani, M., & Vigano, L. (2011). Meaning negotiation as inference. arXiv preprint arXiv:1101.4356.

Myrendal, J. (2019). Negotiating meanings online: Disagreements about word meaning in discussion forum communication. Discourse studies, 21(3), 317-339.

Maarif, A. S. (2020). The strategy of meaning negotiation in pragmatic class. Jurnal Wahana Pendidikan, 7(2), 223-228.

Jones, R. H. (2020). The rise of the pragmatic web: Implications for rethinking meaning and interaction. Historicising the digital: English language practices in new and old media, 17-37.

Zhu, J., Teng, L., Lu, H., Shi, J., & Li, B. (2021). Ontology negotiation: Knowledge interchange between distributed ontologies through agent negotiation. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 33(15), e5406.

Schenker, T. (2021). The effects of group set-up on participation and learning in discussion forums. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(5-6), 685-706.

Lindh-Knuutila, T., Honkela, T., & Lagus, K. (2006, September). Simulating meaning negotiation using observational language games. In International Workshop on Emergence and Evolution of Linguistic Communication (pp. 168-179). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Robin, C. R., & Uma, G. V. (2010). A novel algorithm for fully automated ontology merging using hybrid strategy. European Journal of Scientific Research, 47(1), 74-81.

Vidyarthi, A., Sharma, A., Sharma, H., & Soni, A. (2014, September). Domain specific ontology merging using semantics. In 2014 5th International Conference-Confluence The Next Generation Information Technology Summit (Confluence) (pp. 957-961). IEEE.

Maree, M., & Belkhatir, M. (2015). Addressing semantic heterogeneity through multiple knowledge base assisted merging of domain-specific ontologies. Knowledge-Based Systems, 73, 199-211.

Fu, G. (2016). FCA based ontology development for data integration. Information processing & management, 52(5), 765-782.

Makwana, A., & Ganatra, A. (2018). A Better Approach to Ontology Integration using Clustering Through Global Similarity Measure. J. Comput. Sci., 14(6), 854-867.

Negi, S., & Malik, S. K. (2018). An Algorithm for Merging Two Ontologies: A Case Study. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, vol. 13, no 12, p. 10327-10338.

Guo, X., Berrill, A., Kulkarni, A., Belezko, K., & Luo, M. (2022). Merging ontologies algebraically. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.08715.

Ocker, F., Vogel-Heuser, B., & Paredis, C. J. (2022). A framework for merging ontologies in the context of smart factories. Computers in Industry, 135, 103571.

Chen, M., Wu, C., Yang, Z., Liu, S., Chen, Z., & He, X. (2022). A multi-strategy approach for the merging of multiple taxonomies. Journal of Information Science, 48(3), 283-303.

Singh, M. P. The pragmatic web. IEEE Internet Computing, 2002, vol. 6, no 03, p. 4-5.

Schoop, M., Moor, A. D., & Dietz, J. L. (2006). The pragmatic web: a manifesto. Communications of the ACM, 49(5), 75-76.

Authors

Dalila D. Graba
[email protected] (Primary Contact)
Souad Elhannani
Dalila, G., & Elhannani, S. (2024). Advancements in Meaning Negotiation for Enhanced Semantic Collaboration in Information Systems. Resourceedings, 4(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.21625/resourceedings.v4i1.1067

Article Details

Received 2024-02-05
Accepted 2024-03-28
Published 2024-03-31