The PROMPT suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping

By Natasha Noy, Mark A. Musen. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., 2003

859 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/90b24213d5ae7e263ba2de921e3555a830e3f5e8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Information Systems

In Molecular Biology

Citations in the corpus

The Protégé Project: A Look Back and a Look Forward (2015, methodology): “, 2013), methods for ontology alignment (Noy and Musen, 2003; Ghazvinian et al., 2009), ontology evaluation through crowdsourcing (Mortensen et al.”
Ontology change: classification and survey (2008, methodology): “The results of comparison tools can be greatly improved if combined with an explicit description of (some of) the changes that the ontology went through, e.g., using the CHAO ontology (Noy et al. 2006) which was developed as an add-on for PROMPTDIFF.”
GMO: A Graph Matching for Ontologies (2005, background): “Anchor-PROMPT (included in PROMPT [12]) can produce new concept mapping by analyzing similar paths between a set of anchor matches, which are identified earlier (manually or automatically).”
A Framework for Ontology Evolution in Collaborative Environments (2006, methodology): “The PROMPT plugin for ontology management provides comparisons of two versions of an ontology and facilities to examine a list of users who performed changes and to accept and reject changes [9].”
Semantic Matching: Algorithms and Implementation (2007, background): “…the major matching problems and their articulation in terms of the more generic problem of matching graphs, (ii) the identification of semantic matching as a new approach for performing generic matching and (iii) a proposal for implementing semantic matching by testing propositional satisfiability.”
QOM - Quick Ontology Mapping (2004, methodology): “Some mechanisms here are, to use thresholds for similarity mappings [2], to perform relaxation labelling [3], or to combine structural and similarity criteria.”
Ten Challenges for Ontology Matching (2008, background): “Most of these efforts have been dedicated to designtime matcher interaction [13, 66].”
Semantic integration: a survey of ontology-based approaches (2004, methodology): “Another algorithm in the toolset– ANCHORPROMPT [20]—treats an ontology as a graph with classes as nodes and slots as links.”
Modular Reuse of Ontologies: Theory and Practice (2008, methodology): “An example of such a procedure is the algorithm implemented in the Prompt-Factor tool (Noy & Musen, 2003).”
Ontology Matching (2007, methodology): “In particular it features Prompt (Noy and Musen 2003), an environment that provides some matching methods and alignment visualisation.”
Ontology matching: A literature review (2015, background): “…of the processing frameworks category, which in their majority were focused mainly on defining and developing alignment frameworks such as (Noy & Musen, 2003), where the process does not finish with the alignment but other actions are also available for the user, like manipulating the…”
Web ontology segmentation: analysis, classification and use (2006, background): “This approach relies on property ranges being specified in the ontology, which is often not the case and on a graphical user interface to “prompt” [20] the user.”
Ontology Matching: State of the Art and Future Challenges (2013, background): “Other systems have been designed for offering a variety of matching methods and a library of mappings [82], [133], [155].”