EarthScienceOntolog: Panel Session-01 - Thu 2012-08-23    (3DHB)

Mini-Series Theme: An Earth Science Ontology Dialog ("EarthScienceOntolog")    (3DHC)

Session Topic: Value Proposition of Ontology and Semantic Technology for the Earth Science Community    (3DHD)

Session Co-chairs: Dr. LeoObrst (Ontolog; MITRE) and Professor KrishnaSinha (Virginia Tech) - intro slides    (3E2F)

Panelists / Briefings:    (3E2G)

Archives:    (3E2M)

Abstract:    (3E44)

Value Proposition of Ontology and Semantic Technology for the Earth Science Community - slides    (3E45)

This is the kick-off session of the Joint EarthCube-Ontolog Mini-series on "Ontology and Semantic Technology for the Earth Science Community" - a series of panel sessions dubbed: "EarthScienceOntolog" - an Earth Science Ontology Dialog.    (3E46)

This mini-series of events are co-organized/supported by members of the EarthCube community, Ontolog community, SOCoP community, IAOA community.    (3E47)

The Earth Science Ontolog mini-series is designed to explore the current status and application of multi-level ontologies towards developing a semantically enabled cyberinfrastructure for the Earth Science Community. In addition, one key mission of the mini-series is to bring together members of both communities (Earth Science and ontology/semantics) into a meaningful dialog. We anticipate that the sharing of requirements and use cases, geo-science problems and issues, ontological engineering architectures and approaches, and prospective tools, will enable collaborative understanding of the challenges and potential value in the application of ontology and semantics in Earth Science.    (3E48)

At our planning session, the organizing committee thought it very important that the Geo-Science community and the Ontology / Semantics community come together and begin to understand each other better. So at this first session of the mini-series, we will start with some geo-scientists discussing needs, use cases, etc., from their perspective, i.e., what are the problems facing the Geo-Science community, e.g., data access and discovery issues, impeding terminology differences, changing collaboration models, etc. Then some ontologists / semantic technologists could respond to those issues and offer what they see as the value proposition to Geo-Science. This kind of discussion, joined in by the session participants in the ensuing Q&A and open discussion, augmented by our in-session in chat, could lay the foundation for the remaining sessions, give us all some initial common understanding.    (3E49)

More details about this mini-series at: EarthScienceOntolog (home page for the mini-series)    (3E4A)

Briefings:    (3E4B)

Agenda:    (3E4M)

EarthScienceOntolog - Panel Session-01    (3E4N)

Proceedings:    (3E4T)

Please refer to the above    (3E4U)

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session:    (3E4V)

 see raw transcript here.    (3E4W)
 (for better clarity, the version below is a re-organized and lightly edited chat-transcript.)
 Participants are welcome to make light edits to their own contributions as they see fit.    (3E4X)
 -- begin in-session chat-transcript --    (3E4Y)
	[09:23] Welcome to the    (3EHL)
	 = EarthScienceOntolog: Panel Session-01 - Thu 2012-08-23  =    (3EHM)
	Mini-Series Theme: An Earth Science Ontology Dialog ("EarthScienceOntolog")    (3EHN)
	Session Topic: Value Proposition of Ontology and Semantic Technology for the Earth Science Community    (3EHO)
	Session Co-chairs: Dr. LeoObrst and Professor KrishnaSinha    (3EHP)
	Panel-Briefings:
	* Professor KrishnaSinha - "How Can Semantics Change Data Practices of the EarthCube Geoscience Community?"
	* Professor KrzysztofJanowicz - "The Value Proposition of Semantic Technologies and Ontologies for the Earth Sciences"
	* Dr. DaliaVaranka - "Rethinking the Meaning of Data for Integrated Science Problem Solving"
	* Professor PascalHitzler - "On the uptake of Semantic Web Technologies"
	* Mr. MikeDean - "Semantic Web for Earth Science"    (3EHQ)
	Logistics:    (3EHR)
	* Refer to details on session page at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2012_08_23    (3EHS)
	* (if you haven't already done so) please click on "settings" (top center) and morph from "anonymous" to your RealName    (3EHT)
	* Mute control: *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute    (3EHU)
	* Can't find Skype Dial pad?
	** for Windows Skype users: Can't find Skype Dial pad? ... it's under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad"
	** for Linux Skype users: please stay with (or downgrade to) Skype version 2.x for now 
	  (as a Dial pad seems to be missing on Linux-based Skype v4.x for skype-calls.)    (3EHV)
	Attendees: AmitDeokar, AnneThessen, BobSmith, BobbinTeegarden, ChuckWard, DeanaPennington, 
	DavidValentine, DeborahNichols, DeborahMcGuinness, DicksonLukose, DougFoxvog, FrankChum, 
	GaryBergCross, GenhanChen, JoanneLuciano, JoelCarbonera, JohnGraybeal, KenBaclawski, 
	KrzysztofJanowicz, LeoObrst, Mara Abel, MarcioFaerman, MarshallXMa, MikeBennett, MikeDean, 
	NaicongLi, NancyWiegand, PascalHitzler, PatriceSeyed, PatrickVirden, PavithraKenjige, PeterYim, 
	ScottHills, ScottPeckham, SiriJodhaKhalsa, ToddSchneider, TomTinsley, YannisRoussakis, YingjieHu, 
	AlexShkotin, KrishnaSinha, mark, Uma,    (3EHW)
	 == Proceedings: ==    (3EHX)
	[08:34] anonymous morphed into DicksonLukose    (3EHY)
	[08:58] anonymous morphed into MarcioFaerman    (3EHZ)
	[09:25] KrzysztofJanowicz: So far I cannot connect to the VNC server    (3EI0)
	[09:25] PascalHitzler: yep cannot connect either yet :)    (3EI1)
	[09:26] PeterYim: @Krzysztof & Pascal - don't worry, shared-screen (vnc) service is only optional    (3EI2)
	[09:33] YingjieHu: I can see the vnc, but it doesn't allow me to input the password    (3EI3)
	[09:35] KrzysztofJanowicz: same for me, you can download the slides at 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2012_08_23    (3EI4)
	[09:35] YingjieHu: OK, thank you    (3EI5)
	[09:29] anonymous4 morphed into mark    (3EI6)
	[09:30] anonymous2 morphed into GenhanChen    (3EI7)
	[09:30] anonymous3 morphed into DeborahNichols    (3EI8)
	[09:30] anonymous1 morphed into YingjieHu    (3EI9)
	[09:30] anonymous2 morphed into NaicongLi    (3EIA)
	[09:30] anonymous3 morphed into JoelCarbonera    (3EIB)
	[09:31] anonymous morphed into TomTinsley    (3EIC)
	[09:31] anonymous1 morphed into BobSmith    (3EID)
	[09:31] anonymous1 morphed into AnneThessen    (3EIE)
	[09:32] anonymous3 morphed into PatrickVirden    (3EIF)
	[09:32] anonymous2 morphed into ScottHills    (3EIG)
	[09:32] anonymous4 morphed into ChuckWard    (3EIH)
	[09:32] anonymous1 morphed into Cybershare - DeanaPennington    (3EII)
	[09:35] anonymous1 morphed into AlexShkotin    (3EIJ)
	[09:37] anonymous1 morphed into DavidValentine    (3EIK)
	[09:39] anonymous1 morphed into Uma    (3EIL)
	[09:40] anonymous1 morphed into BobbinTeegarden    (3EIM)
	[09:41] anonymous1 morphed into MaraAbel    (3EIN)
	[09:43] anonymous1 morphed into MarshallXMa    (3EIO)
	[09:43] anonymous morphed into PatriceSeyed    (3EIP)
	[09:49] anonymous morphed into YannisRoussakis    (3EIQ)
	[09:37] PeterYim: == LeoObrst started the session with the introductory slides    (3EIR)
	[09:40] ToddSchneider: Leo, what does 'multi-level' ontology mean?    (3EIS)
	[09:47] LeoObrst: "Multi-level" can mean 2 things: 1) the typical foundational, midlevel/super 
	domain, and domain levels of ontological architecture, but also 2) multiple levels of granularity 
	and contexts/perspectives in specific domains such as Earth Science.    (3EIT)
	[09:51] PeterYim: @Leo - please prompt those on the call to log into the chat-room again (we have 45 
	people on the call now)    (3EIU)
	[09:43] PeterYim: == KrishnaSinha presenting ...    (3EIV)
	[09:56] ScottHills: Regarding discovery of data: This does not just apply to that held by 
	individuals, but to that maintained in "Data Centers" as well. How many Data Centers might contain 
	data of interest, and how many of those do you know about, and know how to use (each often has a different UI)?    (3EIW)
	[10:14] KrishnaSinha: Hi Scott, The data centers are very visible and their data content is well 
	known; an ontology framework that can map the data held in different centers would be welcome    (3EIX)
	[10:15] PascalHitzler: @Krishna - what do you mean with "framework" here?    (3EIY)
	[10:18] KrishnaSinha: @Pascal- an ontology based infrastructure that points to the data content of data centers    (3EIZ)
	[10:15] AnneThessen: This is true for many data centers, but there are some, such as Dryad that 
	takes files with little to no guidance as to structure or content    (3EJ0)
	[10:16] GenhanChen: To Krishna: could you provide an example to explain the ontology framework on your slide #11?    (3EJ1)
	[10:19] ScottHills: Krishna, we may have different definitions for visibility. They may be 
	accessible (your sense of "visible?"), but I question how many people know *where* to access them. 
	For example, if I ask for the data centers that contain geochemical data, or seismic data, or well 
	cores (take your pick), how many people could offer a comprehensive list?    (3EJ2)
	[10:26] KrishnaSinha: @ Scott-- a high level ontology that can capture the data types held at 
	Centers would enable a user to find which centers hold what types of data    (3EJ3)
	[10:49] DougFoxvog: ScottHills asks above "how many people could offer a comprehensive list [of data 
	centers that contain various types of geochemical data]". This seems to me to actually be a call for 
	a knowledge base of data centers containing information about what types of data are covered in the 
	various data centers. With linked data, such a knowledge base need not be centrally located, merely 
	a vocabulary for making the statements needs to be defined, each data base could specify what types 
	of data it covers, and the linked data needs to be made widely available.    (3EJ4)
	[10:41] ScottHills: Krishna, our thinking is starting to converge. The point I was working toward: I 
	believe a good argument can be made for the need for ontologies that enable discovery of data across 
	the landscape of proliferating Data Centers. I suspect the same ontologies would help enable 
	discovery of data published by individuals. That said, I suspect the "level" of such ontologies need 
	to go beyond data type, or their utility will be very limited.    (3EJ5)
	[10:44] KrzysztofJanowicz: Scott, yes ontologies should always be 'more' than just data models    (3EJ6)
	[10:47] KrishnaSinha: @Scott--I agree, and I also think most users would be comfortable with high to medium level granularity    (3EJ7)
	[10:19] AmitDeokar: @Krishna - We notice a lot of emphasis on managing data. What are your views on 
	how important it is to manage associated computational models, share them, annotate them, and so 
	forth so that they are accessible like data, avoiding problems of reinventing the wheel?    (3EJ8)
	[10:22] KrishnaSinha: @ Amit- i support an ontology framework that organizes services that would 
	include existing models and other computational tools..its the service ontology on slide 11    (3EJ9)
	[10:41] JohnGraybeal: @Krishna: Re your endorsement of data citation: Why should this community 
	particularly endorse data citation, more than it should endorse all the data practices that benefit 
	from ontologies: description, provenance, versioning, unique identification, ...? All seem noble causes.    (3EJA)
	[10:58] LeoObrst: @Krishna: I think one very important issue you raised is the incentive for 
	individuals (and organizations) for sharing data: in the research community, what is the incentive 
	for a researcher to expose his/her data and its meaning? What supports scholarly acknowledgment of 
	the contribution?    (3EJB)
	[11:02] KrishnaSinha: @Leo--There are two ways to expose data..regular publications for which there 
	is a citation index ( often used for promotions etc) ..the critical issue is what incentives we can 
	support to have people share data that is not formally published..data citation index is one way to go    (3EJC)
	[09:57] anonymous1 morphed into SiriJodhaKhalsa    (3EJD)
	[09:58] anonymous morphed into PavithraKenjige    (3EJE)
	[09:59] anonymous1 morphed into DeborahMcGuinness    (3EJF)
	[10:02] anonymous morphed into KrishnaSinha    (3EJG)
	[10:00] PeterYim: == KrzysztofJanowicz presenting ...    (3EJH)
	[10:00] PavithraKenjige: Did he say that we have such a semantic infrastructure already available??    (3EJI)
	[10:01] ChuckWard: Have you also considered community expectations such as data archiving 
	requirements with journal articles? e.g. evolutionary biology    (3EJJ)
	[10:09] SiriJodhaKhalsa: what is the advantage of creating or using an ontology for encoding 
	provenance/quality/appropriateness-of-use information beyond creating metadata according to a 
	well-defined standards like ISO 191**?    (3EJK)
	[10:37] JohnGraybeal: To Siria Jodha (Hi!): The advantages of using ontologies for encoding any 
	content, *including* provenance/quality/appropriateness-of-use information: (1) Readers of the 
	metadata know exactly what you mean ('exactly', relatively speaking), (2) there is better 
	mapping/understanding across communities for these concepts. (While I appreciate ISO 191** provides 
	vocabularies, I often find them underdefined, incomplete, and locally inconsistent. And often ISO 
	191** doesn't provide a vocabulary, so the content is wide open.)    (3EJL)
	[10:09] PeterYim (added subsequently): @SiriJodhaKhalsa - you might want to take a look at the two 
	OntologySummit communiques - Ontology for Big Systems: 
	http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012_Communique and Making the Case for 
	Ontology: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011_Communique - where some of the 
	benefits were enumerated by the community    (3EJM)
	[10:23] LeoObrst: @Krzysztof: you cited some research concerning the last bullet on translation 
	between conceptual models on slide 5. Can you provide that reference?    (3EJN)
	[10:27] KrzysztofJanowicz: Yes Leo, for instance the work of Mark Gahegan. This paper may be a good 
	starting point and overview: A Semantic Web Map Mediation Service: Interactive Redesign and Sharing 
	of Map Legends by Mark Gahegan, Will Smart, Sina Masoud-Ansari, and Brandon Whitehead.    (3EJO)
	[10:52] PeterYim: whoever said, "Krzysztof, fully agree with your view. Understanding formal 
	semantic and reusing well fundamented ontologies. " ... please note that the space to type your 
	message is next to the "send" button (at the bottom) and not the box next to the "hand" button    (3EJP)
	[10:15] anonymous morphed into DougFoxvog    (3EJQ)
	[10:15] anonymous morphed into ScottPeckham    (3EJR)
	[10:20] PeterYim: == DaliaVaranka presenting ...    (3EJS)
	[10:29] PeterYim: == PascalHitzler presenting ...    (3EJT)
	[10:30] KrzysztofJanowicz: "Did he say that we have such a semantic infrastructure already 
	available??" --> I would argue so    (3EJU)
	[10:52] ScottHills: Pascal, would you agree that whether an ontology is high-quality depends on how 
	well it satisfies the needs for which it was engineered?    (3EJV)
	[10:55] PascalHitzler: @Scott - this looks reasonable, however I would think that more can be said 
	about the "quality" issue. In fact, there is quite a bit of work on "Evaluation of Ontologies", and 
	there is also a established workshop series about this topic.    (3EJW)
	[10:57] BobbinTeegarden: @Pascal URL for the workshop?    (3EJX)
	[11:01] PascalHitzler: The workshop series - see e.g. http://km.aifb.kit.edu/ws/eon2007/ .    (3EJY)
	[10:58] PascalHitzler: I suggest to start with DennyVrandecic's PhD thesis: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/images/b/b5/OntologyEvaluation.pdf    (3EJZ)
	[10:48] PeterYim: == MikeDean presenting ...    (3EK0)
	[10:51] anonymous morphed into MarshallXMa    (3EK1)
	[11:18] LeoObrst: @Mike: do you have a url for the LOD Framework initiative?    (3EK2)
	[11:02] PeterYim: == open discussion commences ...    (3EK3)
	[11:03] PascalHitzler: re. "Linked Data Quality", have a look e.g. at http://blog.semantic-web.at/2012/08/09/whats-wrong-with-linked-data/    (3EK4)
	[11:05] PascalHitzler: Leo / Krishna: The Semantic Web journal, for example, recently established 
	Linked Dataset Descriptions as regular paper type. The purpose of this introduction is to generate 
	academic incentive for the production of high-quality Linked Datasets.    (3EK5)
	[11:07] MarshallXMa: @Pascal: Another journal (Geoscience Data Journal) with similar ideas: 
	http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/%28ISSN%292049-6060    (3EK6)
	[11:03] MarshallXMa: @LeoObrst: Such as, a stable repository to upload and describe (with a metadata 
	form) the dataset, and easy way to assign a DOI for it.    (3EK7)
	[11:11] ToddSchneider: John, part of the needed infrastructure is the Open Ontology Repository.    (3EK8)
	[11:12] JohnGraybeal: Yes (the question was, "What has to happen on the ground for these advantages 
	to be obtained?" With particular attention to the practical realities of the practicing data 
	managers.    (3EK9)
	[11:13] JohnGraybeal: @Todd: As provider of an OOR equivalent (MMI's ORR), I want to go farther. 
	Let's assume there's a perfect repository in existence. And even, really good vocabularies from 
	communities. How do they integrate this into their developed data systems?    (3EKA)
	[11:14] ToddSchneider: John, education. It would appear that many people working in the area of 
	semantic technologies' don't know enough. Dalia addressed this.    (3EKB)
	[11:16] KrzysztofJanowicz: John, IMHO it needs a earth science specific tutorial and a set of 
	reusable building blocks    (3EKC)
	[11:14] ScottHills: Pascal, thanks for the URL. I'll look through the material (up through 2007?). 
	Any chance I'll find suggestions to answers like, what applications are best served using SKOS vs. 
	OWL DL with domain-specific properties?    (3EKD)
	[11:18] PascalHitzler: @Scott - I would guess that answers to such specific questions can probably 
	not be found easily. "Best practices" in applying semantic technologies are not (yet) written up in 
	any concise form, afaik. Note that it is only two years or so that we got textbooks which cover the 
	bare basics of the discipline. Currently, I guess the best approach to get such questions answered 
	is to consult a specialist.    (3EKE)
	[11:15] MarcioFaerman: My question referred on how to justify and support, throughout the community, 
	@KrzysztofJanowicz "Final Thought" slide - "... It seems that we hope to arrive at semantic 
	interoperability by standardization instead of investing into research on alignment and semantic 
	translation to reduced incompatibility. This may turn out to be a fundamental misconception. I 
	believe that standardization is the more difficult of both approaches..."    (3EKF)
	[11:18] MarcioFaerman: Then I followed up with the question about conciliating multi-disciplinary 
	research and knowledge discoverability through semantic translation.    (3EKG)
	[11:16] MikeBennett: Something we are finding is the distinction between one ontology for one 
	application, versus overall domain ontology (standard) which is use-case neutral. Both are vital. 
	And different.    (3EKH)
	[11:19] KrzysztofJanowicz: MikeBennett, yes -- I am not arguing against higher level ontologies. It 
	needs both.    (3EKI)
	[11:19] MikeBennett: @Krzystof agreed. Work to be done on the heuristics for extracting a relevant 
	sub-set of domain ontology for a given use case.    (3EKJ)
	[11:22] JohnGraybeal: @Mike: In addition to single ontology vs overarching ontology, there are 
	typically multiple authoritative (sic) vocabularies within each domain, and maybe one or two 
	ontologies as well. Making integrative use of that information is, for now, impossible without a lot 
	of human investment.    (3EKK)
	[11:24] MikeBennett: @John very much so. Needs to be done across industries. One chance to get it 
	right I think.    (3EKL)
	[11:25] KrzysztofJanowicz: IMHO, this makes GeoSPARQL so strong    (3EKM)
	[11:27] ScottHills: Pascal, thanks for that info (13:18). Good to know, since I haven't been able to 
	find such material to date.    (3EKN)
	[11:29] JoanneLuciano: Thanks to the organizers and presenters!    (3EKO)
	[11:29] FrankChum: W3C Oil, Gas & Chemical Business Group: http://www.w3.org/community/oilgaschem/ 
	is developing a use case to collaborate on ontologies for drilling automation. Involving multiple 
	Oil & Gas standards organizations.    (3EKP)
	[11:29] PeterYim: == Final remarks by KrishnaSinha ...    (3EKQ)
	[11:31] FrankChum: Thank you.    (3EKR)
	[11:31] PeterYim: great session!    (3EKS)
	[11:31] KrzysztofJanowicz: thanks, bye bye    (3EKT)
	[11:31] LeoObrst: Thanks, All!    (3EKU)
	[11:31] PeterYim: -- session ended: 11:31am PDT --    (3EKV)
 -- end of in-session chat-transcript --    (3E4Z)

Additional Resources:    (3E5C)

For the record ...    (3E5K)

How To Join (while the session is in progress)    (3E5L)

Conference Call Details    (3E2V)

Attendees    (3E3P)