Measures for terms | ||||
Approach | Techniques | Algorithms | Pros & Cons | |
Edge-based | Distance; Common path | Pros: intuitive, easy to perform. Cons: edge-based approaches assume all the nodes and edges are uniformly distributed and treat them who are in the same depth equally, which is not applicable for real data. | ||
Node-based | MICAa; DCAb | Pros: node-based approaches measure the terms independent of their depth in the ontology. Cons: the common used term would make more contribution when calculating the similarity. | ||
Measures for sets of terms | ||||
Approach | Techniques | Algorithms | Pros & Cons | |
Pairwise | All pairs | [42] | Pros: the contributions from every pair of terms are concerned. Cons: over-reliance on the quality of data; time-consuming | |
Best Pairs | Â | |||
Group-wise | Set-based | Not common | Pros: group-wise approaches compare term combinations from a macro view instead of relying on integrating similarity between individual terms; time-saving. Cons: excessive choices could be a trouble. | |
Graph-based | ||||
Vector-based |