(Semantic) Similarity-Blog

Why ballpoint pens and pencils are similar?

Hybrid Approaches to Similarity?

I have added a new category called ‘Hybrid Approaches to Similarity‘ to the literature section; however I am not satisfied doing so. Some authors explicitly state that their approaches are hybrid, but in my opinion this is the case for most recent theories. For instance MDSM [37] is an extended version of Tversky’s ratio model [4] and therefore a classical feature-based approach. Nevertheless in equation 2 and 3 a network model (based on the distance to the least upper bound) is chosen to determine the weighting α and therefore asymmetry. Should this be called hybrid?
    As a start I put some papers into this section that clearly combine several approaches. A good example may be Schwering’s hybrid model [51].

[37] Rodríguez, A. M. and M.J. Egenhofer, Comparing Geospatial Entity Classes: An Asymmetric and Context-Dependent Similarity Measure. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 2004. 18(3): p. 229-256

[4] Tversky, A. (1977) Features of Similarity. Psychological Review. 84(4): p.327-352.

[51] Schwering, A. (2005). Hybrid model for semantic similarity measurement. 4th International Conference on Ontologies, DataBases, and Applications of Semantics (ODBASE05). Agia Napa, Cyprus. Springer.

No comments yet. Be the first.

Leave a reply