Towards valid and reusable reference alignments — ten basic quality checks for ontology alignments and their application to three different reference data sets

Table 2 Results of applying the ten basic quality checks to the Anatomy, Lod and Bridge data sets.

Check	Description	ANATOMY	LOD	BRIDGE
Check 1	Correct input given?	No (other versions)	No (only URLs)	No (only URLs)
Check 2a)	Missing classes	0	143 (47)	12
Check 2b)	URI-label pair changes	121	Not applicable	Not applicable
Check 3	Standard format?	Yes	No	Yes
Check 4	URIs?	Yes	No (local names)	Yes
Check 5	Explicit relation types?	Yes	Yes	No (untyped)
Check 6	Multiple targets	39	10	Unknown
Check 7	New ⊆ inferred from ≡	10,415	540	Unknown
Check 8	Label identity but no ≡	13	37	Unknown
Check 9	Label inclusion but no ⊆	3,127	57	Unknown
Check 10	Trivial correspondences	916 (60%)	158 (7%)	Unknown

Results of applying the ten basic quality checks to the ANATOMY, LOD and BRIDGE data sets. The symbols ≡ and ⊆ stand for equivalentClass and subClassOf-based correspondences, respectively.

ISSN: 2041-1480