This paper showcases AdaptLIL, a real-time adaptive link-indented list ontology mapping visualization that uses eye gaze as the primary input source. Through a multimodal combination of real-time systems, deep learning, and web development applications, this system uniquely curtails graphical overlays (adaptations) to pairwise mappings of link-indented list ontology visualizations for individual users based solely on their eye gaze.

Research on semantic web services promises greater interoperability among software agents and web services by enabling content-based automated service discovery and interaction and by utilizing. Although this is to be based on use of shared ontologies published on the semantic web, services produced and described by different developers may well use different, perhaps partly overlapping, sets of ontologies. Interoperability will depend on ontology mappings and architectures supporting the associated translation processes. The question we ask is, does the traditional approach of introducing mediator agents to translate messages between requestors and services work in such an open environment? This article reviews some of the processing assumptions that were made in the development of the semantic web service modeling ontology OWLS and argues that, as a practical matter, the translation function cannot always be isolated in mediators.

Ontology mapping plays an important role in interoperability over ontologies. Many researchers have proposed algorithms and tools for (semi-)automatically mapping one concept to another concept. Among them, WordNet is widely used as the domain knowledge support in the mapping process. To our knowledge, however, most of them only use synonym, hypernym and hyponym relations in WordNet and the actual meanings provided in natural English(as gloss) are often ignored. In this paper, we treat the concepts(c) as English words (w) and propose an ontology mapping technique where we use the meanings of the words as given in Wordnet (in English) for semantic mapping by constructing their parse trees first and simplifying them for computing similarity measures. Our experimental results show that our method performs better in Recall and F1-Measure than many techniques reported in the literature.

Although this is to be based on use of shared ontologies published on the semantic web, services produced and described by different developers may well use different, perhaps partly overlapping, sets of ontologies. Interoperability will depend on ontology mappings and architectures supporting the associated translation processes. This article reviews some of the processing assumptions that were made in the development of the semantic web service modeling ontology OWL-S and argues that, as a practical matter, the translation function cannot always be isolated in mediators. The translation for service discovery, service process model interpretation, task negotiation, service invocation, and response interpretation may then be distributed to various places in the architecture so that translation can be done in the specific goal-oriented informational contexts of the agents performing these processes.

Research on semantic web services promises greater interoperability among software agents and web services by enabling content-based automated service discovery and interaction and by utilizing . Although this is to be based on use of shared ontologies published on the semantic web, services produced and described by different developers may well use different, perhaps partly overlapping, sets of ontologies. Interoperability will depend on ontology mappings and architectures supporting the associated translation processes. The question we ask is, does the traditional approach of introducing mediator agents to translate messages between requestors and services work in such an open environment? This article reviews some of the processing assumptions that were made in the development of the semantic web service modeling ontology OWL-S and argues that, as a practical matter, the translation function cannot always be isolated in mediators. Ontology mappings need to be published on the semantic web just as ontologies themselves are. The translation for service discovery, service process model interpretation, task negotiation, service invocation, and response interpretation may then be distributed to various places in the architecture so that translation can be done in the specific goal-oriented informational contexts of the agents performing these processes. We present arguments for assigning translation responsibility to particular agents in the cases of service invocation, response translation, and matchmaking.