網際網路的盛行，使得世界各地的人們隨時都能存取大量資訊，然而一般獲取資訊的方法均以特定關鍵字為基礎，忽略其相關的意涵與潛在的脈絡關係，使資訊的探索只侷限於特定字義的範圍。所以遂有辭書(Ontology)的產生，其目的在建立一個正規、共享、具重用性的知識表現架構，藉知識個體間的語意關聯，強化知識主體的完整性與溝通性。
隨著辭書的推廣，在各個領域皆有多個不同的辭書在運作。接著在資源分享的理念下，如何將這些相同領域或是有領域互相涵蓋的辭書做一個完全的整合，一個節省人力與整合所耗的資源之自動化對映機制便順勢提出。基於現有推出的自動化對映機制可能會有找出最為適合相對應的概念而有遺漏的情況發生，因此本論文提出了利用辭書現有的資訊去增強現有的機制，找出一對多的結果。

The advance of internet technology makes people from all over the world possible in depositing and withdrawing information anytime and anywhere. However most of the methods used in pulling information are not semantic aware, but are keyword-based that confines the information retrieved to only syntactic relevance to the keywords. The meaning of the keywords and their implications on the intentions of users are neglected. So ontology kicks in. Its original purpose is to build a knowledge sharing framework, but when used in information retrieval, it is used to establish the relationships between concepts represented by the entered keywords, thus, to infer a user’s intention and to expand the keywords with other concepts in the hierarchy for retrieving more inter-related documents.
With vigorous development of ontologies, different ontologies may be operational in a specific domain where one ontology may cover some knowledge that another does not, and vise verse. From the knowledge sharing point of view, to totally integrate those ontologies within the same domain is vital for developing applications. For such tedious works, an automatic ontology mapping mechanism will save a lot of manpower. But most of the existing mapping mechanisms can only perform one-to-one mappings, i.e. only find out whether or not one concept in an ontology is equivalent, or most similar, to a concept in the other ontology without considering the mapping of one concept to maybe a sub-tree of another hierarchy, the one-to-many mappings. This study proposes a methodology to strengthen an existing mechanism to find out one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-one mappings between two ontologies of a specific domain. Experiments have shown promising results.

[1] T.R. Gruber. “A translation approach to portable ontolog specications,”Knowledge Acquisition,vol.5,issue 2,pp.199-220.1993.
[2] N.F.Noy and D.L.Mcguinness, ”Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology,” Stanford Knowledge System Laboratory Technical Report KSL-01-05 and Stanford Medical Informatics Technical Report SMI-2001-0880,Mar.2001.
[3] T. Berner-Lee, J.Hendler, and O.Lassila. The Semantic Web. Scientific Ammerican, 279, 2001.
[4] Marc Ehrig and York Sure. Ontology mapping - an integrated approach. In Christoph Bussler, John Davis, Dieter Fensel, and Rudi Studer, editors, Proceedings of the 1st ESWS, volume 3053 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 76–91, Heraklion, Greece, MAY 2004. Springer Verlag.
[5] A. Doan, P. Domingos, and A. Halevy. Learning to match the schemas of data sources: A multistrategy approach. VLDB Journal, 50:279–301, 2003.
[6] C.Y.Kong, C.L.Wang, and F.C.M.Lau., “Ontology Mapping in Pervasive Computing Environment,” International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing .
[7] M. Ehrig and S. Staab. QOM – Quick Ontology Mapping. In Proc. of the third ISWC. Japan. 2004.
[8] Natalya F. Noy and Mark A. Musen. The PROMPT suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(6):983–1024, 2003.
[9] Jie Tang, Bang-Yong Liang and Juan-Zi Li.” Toward Detecting Mapping Strategies for Ontology Interoperability ,” The 14th Int'l Conf. on World Wide Web (WWW2005). Makuhari Messe, Chiba, Japan. Tuesday May 10, 2005.
[10] Xiaomeng Su. A text categorization perspective for ontology mapping. Technical report, Department of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway, 2002.
[11] R. Karp, V.Chaudhri, and J.Thomere, “XOL: An XML-based Ontology Exchange Language,”Technical Report, Aug. 1999.
[12] O.Lassila and R.Swick, ”Resource Description Framework(RDF) Model and Syntax Specification,”World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation, Feb. 1999; available at http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/.
[13] D.Brickley and R.Guha, “Resource Description Framework(RDF) Schema Specification,”W3C Candidate Recommendation, Mar. 2000; available at http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-RDF-schema-20000327.
[14] Dieter Fensel 、Framk van Harmelen、Ian Horrocks、Deborah L. McGuinness、PeterF. Patel-Schneider，”OIL：An Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web”，IEEE Intelligent System，vol. 16，no. 2，pp.38-45，March/April 2001.
[15] Horrocks 、D.Fensel 、J.broekstra 、S. Decker 、M.Erdmann 、C. Grble 、F.vn Harmelen ， ”The Ontology Inference Layer OIL” ， Aug 2000 ，http://www.ontoknowledge.org.
[16] P. Pantel, D. Lin. Discovering Word Senses from Text. In Proceedings of ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining 2002:613-619.
[17] A. Doan, J. Madhavan, P. Domingos, and A. Halevy. Learning to map between ontologies on the semantic web. In Proceedings of the World-Wide Web Conference (WWW-2002), pages 662–673. ACM Press, 2002.
[18] Rong Pan,Zhongli Ding,Yang Yu and Yun Peng 2005. A Bayesian Network Approach to Ontology Mapping. ISWC 2005 - 4th International Semantic Web Conference
[19] http://ai-nlp.info.uniroma2.it/xeoml/
[20] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/
[21] http://www.ontologos.org/OML/OML%200.3.htm.
[22] http://www.atl.external.lmco.com/projects/ontology/papers/I3CON-Results.pdf.
[23] 石旭原, ”以SCORM為知識本體應用基模之網路學習系統實作案研究,” 逢甲大學資訊工程學研究所, 2001.
[24] 黎炯良, ”辭書間之自動化對映機制,” 成功大學工程科學研究所, 2005.