Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring semantic similarity between land-cover classes for spatial analysis: an ontology hierarchy exploration approach

  • S.I. : ICACNI 2015
  • Published:
Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Resolving semantic heterogeneity is one of the major research challenges involved in many fields of study, such as, natural language processing, search engine development, document clustering, geospatial information retrieval, knowledge discovery, etc. When semantic heterogeneity is often considered as an obstacle for realizing full interoperability among diverse datasets, proper quantification of semantic similarity is another challenge to measure the extent of association between two qualitative concepts. The proposed work addresses this issue for any geospatial application where spatial land-cover distribution is crucial to model. Most of the these applications such as: prediction, change detection, land-cover classification, etc. often require to examine the land-cover distribution of the terrain. This paper presents an ontology-based approach to measure semantic similarity between spatial land-cover classes. As land-cover distribution is a qualitative information of a terrain, it is challenging to measure their extent of similarity among each other pragmatically. Here, an ontology is considered as the concept hierarchy of different land-cover classes which is built using domain experts’ knowledge. This work can be considered as the spatial extension of our earlier work presented in [1]. The similarity metric proposed in [1] is utilized here for spatial concepts. A case study with real land-cover ontology is presented to quantify the semantic similarity between every pair of land-covers with semantic hierarchy based similarity measurement (SHSM) scheme [1]. This work may facilitate quantification of semantic knowledge of the terrain for other spatial analyses as well.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bhattacharjee S, Ghosh SK (2015) Measurement of semantic similarity: a concept hierarchy based approach. In: Proceedings of 3rd international conference on advanced computing, networking and informatics. Springer, New Delhi, pp 407–416

  2. Markines B, Cattuto C, Menczer F, Benz D, Hotho A, Stumme G (2009) Evaluating similarity measures for emergent semantics of social tagging. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide Web, ACM, pp 641–650

  3. Markines B, Menczer F (2009) A scalable, collaborative similarity measure for social annotation systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM conference on hypertext and hypermedia, ACM, pp 347–348

  4. Ganesan P, Garcia-Molina H, Widom J (2003) Exploiting hierarchical domain structure to compute similarity. ACM Trans Info Syst TOIS 21(1):64–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Paul M, Ghosh SK (2012) A framework for semantic interoperability for distributed geospatial repositories. Comput Info 27(1):73–92

    Google Scholar 

  6. Miller GA (1995) WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun ACM 38(11):39–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jannink JF (2001) A word nexus for systematic interoperation of semantically heterogeneous data sources. PhD thesis, Stanford university

  8. Krumhansl CL (1978) Concerning the applicability of geometric models to similarity data: the interrelationship between similarity and spatial density

  9. Hahn U, Chater N, Richardson LB (2003) Similarity as transformation. Cognition 87(1):1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Resnik P (1995) Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity in a taxonomy. arXiv:cmp-lg/9511007 (preprint)

  11. Cilibrasi RL, Vitanyi PM (2007) The Google similarity distance. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 19(3):370–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bhattacharjee S, Dwivedi A, Prasad RR, Ghosh SK (2012) Ontology based spatial clustering framework for implicit knowledge discovery. In: India Conference (INDICON), 2012 Annual IEEE, IEEE, pp 561–566

  13. Bhattacharjee S, Prasad RR, Dwivedi A, Dasgupta A, Ghosh SK (2012) Ontology based framework for semantic resolution of geospatial query. In: 2012 12th international conference onintelligent systems design and applications (ISDA), IEEE, pp 437–442

  14. Mendiratta N, Kumar RS, Rao KS (2008) Standards for bio-geo database. Technical report 1, natural resources data management system (NRDMS) Division, New Delhi, India

  15. Cimiano P, Handschuh S, Staab S (2004) Towards the self-annotating web. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM, pp 462–471

  16. P Mika (2005) Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. In: The Semantic Web–ISWC. Springer, pp 522–536

  17. Matsuo Y, Mori J, Hamasaki M, Nishimura T, Takeda H, Hasida K, Ishizuka M (2007) Polyphonet: an advanced social network extraction system from the web. Web semantics: science, services and agents on the World Wide Web 5(4):262–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mori J, Ishizuka M, Matsuo Y (2007) Extracting keyphrases to represent relations in social networks from Web. IJCAI 7:2820–2827

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bhattacharjee S, Mitra P, Ghosh SK (2014) Spatial interpolation to predict missing attributes in GIS using semantic kriging. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 52(8):4771–4780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Patil S, Bhattacharjee S, Ghosh SK (2014) A spatial web crawler for discovering geo-servers and semantic referencing with spatial features. In: Distributed Computing and Internet Technology. Springer International Publishing, pp 68–78

  21. Bhattacharjee S, Ghosh SK (2015) Spatio-temporal change modeling of LULC: a semantic kriging approach. ISPRS Ann Photogram Remote Sens Spatial Info Sci 1:177–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lin D (1998) Automatic retrieval and clustering of similar words (1998) In: Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and 17th international conference on computational linguistics-volume 2, association for computational linguistics, pp 768–774

  23. Jiang JJ, Conrath DW (1997) Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. arXiv:cmp-lg/9709008 (preprint)

  24. Lin D (1998) An information-theoretic definition of similarity. ICML 98:296–304

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rada R, Mili H, Bicknell E, Blettner M (1989) Development and application of a metric on semantic nets. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 19(1):17–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Li Y, Bandar ZA, McLean D (2003) An approach for measuring semantic similarity between words using multiple information sources. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 15(4):871–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Li M, Chen X, Li X, Ma B, Vitányi PM (2004) The similarity metric. IEEE Trans Info Theory 50(12):3250–3264

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Rodríguez MA, Egenhofer MJ, Rugg RD (1999) Assessing semantic similarities among geospatial feature class definitions. In: Interoperating Geographic Information Systems. Springer, pp 189–202

  29. Rodriguez M, Egenhofer M (2003) Determining semantic similarity among entity classes from different ontologies. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 15(2):442–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schwering A (2008) Approaches to semantic similarity measurement for geo-spatial data: a survey. Trans GIS 12(1):5–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Li W, Raskin R, Goodchild MF (2012) Semantic similarity measurement based on knowledge mining: an artificial neural net approach. Int J Geogr Info Sci 26(8):1415–1435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Al-Bakri M, Fairbairn D (2012) Assessing similarity matching for possible integration of feature classifications of geospatial data from official and informal sources. Int J Geogr Info Sci 26(8):1437–1456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bhattacharjee S, Ghosh SK (2015) Performance evaluation of semantic kriging: a Euclidean vector analysis approach. Geosci Remote Sens Lett IEEE 12(6):1185–1189

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, West Bengal, 721302, India

    Shrutilipi Bhattacharjee & Soumya K. Ghosh

Authors
  1. Shrutilipi Bhattacharjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Soumya K. Ghosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shrutilipi Bhattacharjee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhattacharjee, S., Ghosh, S.K. Measuring semantic similarity between land-cover classes for spatial analysis: an ontology hierarchy exploration approach. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 12, 193–200 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-016-0276-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-016-0276-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation