| Abstract |
Evaluation of ontology alignments is in practice done in two ways: (1)
assessing individual correspondences and (2) comparing the alignment to a
reference alignment. However, this type of evaluation does not guarantee
that an application which uses the alignment will perform well. In this
paper, we contribute to the current ontology alignment evaluation practices
by proposing two alternative evaluation methods that take into account some
characteristics of a usage scenario without doing a full-fledged end-to-end
evaluation. We compare different evaluation approaches in three case
studies, focussing on methodological issues. Each case study considers an
alignment between a different pair of ontologies, ranging from rich and
well-structured to small and poorly structured. This enables us to conclude
on the use of different evaluation approaches in different settings. |