IN41C-1716
Application of Alignment Methodologies to Spatial Ontologies in the Hydro Domain

Thursday, 17 December 2015
Poster Hall (Moscone South)
Joshua E Lieberman, Harvard University, Center for Geographic Analysis, Cambridge, MA, United States
Abstract:
Ontologies are playing an increasing role in facilitating mediation and translation between datasets representing diverse schemas, vocabularies, or knowledge communities. This role is relatively straightforward when there is one ontology comprising all relevant common concepts that can be mapped to entities in each dataset. Frequently, one common ontology has not been agreed to. Either each dataset is represented by a distinct ontology, or there are multiple candidates for commonality. Either the one most appropriate (expressive, relevant, correct) ontology must be chosen, or else concepts and relationships matched across multiple ontologies through an alignment process so that they may be used in concert to carry out mediation or other semantic operations. A resulting alignment can be effective to the extent that entities in in the ontologies represent differing terminology for comparable conceptual knowledge. In cases such as spatial ontologies, though, ontological entities may also represent disparate conceptualizations of space according to the discernment methods and application domains on which they are based. One ontology’s wetland concept may overlap in space with another ontology’s recharge zone or wildlife range or water feature.
In order to evaluate alignment with respect to spatial ontologies, alignment has been applied to a series of ontologies pertaining to surface water that are used variously in hydrography (characterization of water features), hydrology (study of water cycling), and water quality (nutrient and contaminant transport) application domains. There is frequently a need to mediate between datasets in each domain in order to develop broader understanding of surface water systems, so there is a practical as well theoretical value in the alignment. From a domain expertise standpoint, the ontologies under consideration clearly contain some concepts that are spatially as well as conceptually identical and then others with less clear similarities in either sense. Our study serves both to determine the limits of standard methods for aligning spatial ontologies and to suggest new methods of calculating similarity axioms that take into account semantic, spatial, and cognitive criteria relevant to fitness for relevant usage scenarios.