Transcript 3C_Li

Enable Semantic Interoperability for
Decision Support and Risk Management
Presented by Dr. David Li
Key Contributors: Dr. Ruixin Yang and Dr. John Qu
Values for Semantic Interoperability


Improves Heterogeneous Data and Information
Management for Decision Support, e.g. Fire
Risk Management, etc.
Improves Interoperability and Information
Exchange





What the data/information are intended to mean
How they are intended to be used
Solve “stovepipe” system integration problem
Support common operational picture
Support Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)
George Mason Wildfire Risk Assessment Framework
(Semantic Interoperability Is A Key)
Semantic Interoperability Spectrum
Modal Logic
strong semantics
First Order Logic
Logical Theory
Is Disjoint Subclass of
Description Logic
with transitivity
DAML+OIL, OWL
property
UML
Conceptual Model
RDF/S
XTM
Extended ER
Thesaurus
ER
Relational
Model, XML
weak semantics
Semantic Interoperability
Has Narrower Meaning Than
DB Schema, XML Schema
Taxonomy
Is Subclass of
Structural Interoperability
Is Sub-Classification of
Syntactic Interoperability
Semantic Interoperability Spectrum






A taxonomy is a way of classifying or categorizing a set of things—specifically, a
classification in the form of a hierarchy. A hierarchy is simply a treelike structure. Like a
tree, it has a root and branches. Each branching point is called a node. In a taxonomy, the
semantics of the relationship between a parent and a child node is relatively underspecified
or ill defined. In some cases, the relationship is the subclass of relation; in others, it is the
part of relation. In still others, it is simply undefined.
A thesaurus is a controlled vocabulary arranged in a known order and structured so that
equivalence, homographic, hierarchical, and associative relationships among terms are
displayed clearly and identified by standardized relationship indicators. The primary
purposes of a thesaurus are to facilitate retrieval of documents and to achieve consistency
in the indexing of written or otherwise recorded documents and other items. These
relationships can be categorized four ways: Equivalence, Homographic, Hierarchical,
Associative.
Database models: the relational language (R), the Entity-Relational language and model
(ER), and the Extended Entity-Relational model (EER).
Object-Oriented models, Unified Modeling Language (UML).
An ontology defines the common words and concepts (meanings) used to describe and
represent an area of knowledge, and so standardizes the meanings. Ontology include
computer usable definitions of basic concepts in the domain and the relationships among
them. They encode knowledge in a domain and also knowledge that spans domains.
Logical Theories are built on axioms (a range of primitive to complex statements asserted
to be true) and inference rules (rules that, given premises/assumptions, provide valid
conclusions), which together are used to prove theorems about the domain represented by
the ontology-as-logical-theory. The whole set of axioms, inference rules, and theorems
together constitute the logical theory.
Semantic Technology Stack/Tree
Agents, Brokers, Policies
Intelligent Domain Services, Applications
Use, Intent
Pragmatic Web
Trust
Security/Identity
Reasoning/Proof
Inference Engine
Higher Semantics
OWL
Semantics
RDF/RDF Schema
Structure
XML Schema
Syntax: Data
XML
Grid & Semantic Grid Services
OMB Federal Enterprise Architecture
(FEA) & Data Reference Model (DRM)

FEA DRM Framework:
 Business Context
(Categorization of
Data)
 Data Element/Entity
Model (Structure of
Data)
 Information Exchange
Model (Exchange of
Data)
Semantic Interoperability to Support
Service-Oriented Architecture
A Key Enabling Technology for
Semantic Interoperability: OWL-S


OWL-S has three main components: the service profile
for advertising and discovering services; the process
model, which gives a detailed description of a service’s
operation; and the grounding, which provides details on
how to interoperate with a service
With OWL-S markup of services, the knowledge
necessary for service discovery could be specified as
computer interpretable semantic markup, and a service
broker or registry as well as ontology enhanced search
engine could be used to locate the services matching with
the service request. In addition, a service provider could
proactively advertise itself in OWL-S with a service
broker or a service registry so that requesters can find the
services it provides.
An OWL-S Markup Example for
Semantic Interoperability
Questions?