Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of semantic similarity approaches

From: Developing a similarity searching module for patient safety event reporting system using semantic similarity measures

Measures for terms

Approach

Techniques

Algorithms

Pros & Cons

Edge-based

Distance; Common path

[16, 35,36,37]

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

[18, 28, 38,39,40,41]

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

[16, 18, 19, 39, 43]

 

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

[15, 44,45,46,47,48,49,50]

Vector-based

[51, 52]

  1. aMICA = the most informative common ancestor
  2. bDCA = the disjoint common ancestor