OntologySummit2012: (Track-1&2) "Ontology for Big Systems and Systems Engineering" Community Input    (337F)

Track Co-Champions: Dr. MatthewWest and Dr. HensonGraves    (337G)

Mission Statement:    (337H)

We aim to bring key challenges to light with large-scale systems and systems of systems for ontology and identify where solutions exist, where the problems require significant research, and where we can work towards solutions as part of this summit. The areas to be considered include:    (3385)

see also: OntologySummit2012_BigSystemsEngineering_Synthesis    (337J)

Refinement of Threads we could follow during this summit:    (345U)

[2012.02.02] ... Brought forward from the session-04 discussion: ... (see: [ below)]    (3462)

ref. HensonGraves' "Triage" slides    (345V)

identify thread champions too!    (345W)

Triage on Engineering Tracks 1 & 2    (34TG)

-- HensonGraves / 2012.02.03 - ref. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/2012-02/msg00082.html    (34T6)

The mission statement for tracks 1 and 2 is within the engineering domain is to bring key challenges to light with large-scale systems and systems of systems for ontology and identify where solutions exist, where the problems require significant research, and where we can work towards solutions as part of this summit. A number of areas are identified in the mission statement. From this list a smaller list of threads has emerged in the dialog.    (34T7)

The next step to achieving the mission goal is to triage the list of threads emerging from the mission statement. The emerging list has been constructed by examining the email and chat dialog. The purpose of the triage is to produce a more manageable for which there is the interest and opportunity to make useful progress within the timescale of the ontology summit. In some cases the progress may be only to identify solutions which already are available. In other cases significant research may be needed, but within the Summit context we can at least identify the research and a plan forward. There will of course a number of other topics which would be relevant to this track, but to pursue them would dissipate our resources.    (34T8)

The following list is the current candidate list of threads. I ask you to weigh in on whether the list should be changed, dropped, reformulated, or added to.    (34T9)

Please feel free edit, comment, and most importantly sign up to champion a thread.    (34TF)

Enter your input below ... (please identify yourself and date your entry)    (337N)

1. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/2011-12-10 Object Management Group (OMG), Semantic Information Modeling for Federation (SIMF) Request for Proposal, OMG Document: ad/2011-12-10, Letters of Intent due: March 15, 2012, Submissions due: August 13, 2012    (39TS)

2. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:99e103. doi:10.1136/jamia.2010.007864 Approaching semantic interoperability in Health Level Seven Robert H Dolin,1 Liora Alschuler2    (39TT)

3. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Volume 13 Number 3 May / Jun 2006 The Clinical Document Architecture and the Continuity of Care Record: A Critical Analysis JEFFREY M. FERRANTI, MD, R. CLAYTON MUSSER, MD,MS, KENSAKU KAWAMOTO, W. ED HAMMOND, PHD    (39TU)

4. http://jamia.bmj.com/content/7/4/333.full.html Toward Vocabulary Domain Specifications for Health Level 7—coded Data Elements Suzanne Bakken, Keith E Campbell, James J Cimino, Stanley M Huff, W Ed Hammond    (39TV)

5. http://jamia.bmj.com/content/12/4/410.full.html Toward Semantic Interoperability in Home Health Care: Formally Representing OASIS Items for Integration into a Concept-oriented Terminology JEUNGOK CHOI, RN, MPH, PHD, MELINDA L. JENKINS, FNP, PHD, JAMES J. CIMINO, MD, THOMAS M. WHITE, MD, MS, MA, SUZANNE BAKKEN, RN, DNSC    (39TW)

6. http://jamia.bmj.com/content/8/6/552.full.html The HL7 Clinical Document Architecture ROBERT H. DOLIN, MD, LIORA ALSCHULER, CALVIN BEEBE, PAUL V. BIRON, MLIS, SANDRA LEE BOYER, DANIEL ESSIN, MD, ELLIOT KIMBER, TOM LINCOLN, MD, JOHN E. MATTISON, MD    (39TX)

7. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Volume 8 Number 1 Jan / Feb 2001 Common Data Model for Neuroscience Data and Data Model Exchange DANIEL GARDNER, PHD, KEVIN H. KNUTH, PHD, MICHAEL ABATO, STEVEN M. ERDE, MD, PHD, THOMAS WHITE, MD, OBERT DEBELLIS, ESTHER P. GARDNER, PHD    (39TY)

8. Workshop #2 - The Second International Workshop on "Semantic Interoperability for Smart Spaces" (SISS 2011) 2011 IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet SAINT 2011    (39TZ)

9. www.kyoto-project.eu A full knowledge cycle for semantic interoperability Piek Vossen Wauter Bosma Faculty of Arts, VU University Amsterdam De Boelelaan 1101, 1081HV, msterdam p.vossen,w.bosma@let.vu.nl Eneko Agirre German Rigau Aitor Soroa Ixa Research Group, Universidad Del Pais Vasco 649 Posta kutza, 20080 Donostia, Basque Country e.agirre,g.rigau,a.soroa@ehu.es In this paper, we describe the KYOTO project, which is a platform for establishing semantic interoperability across languages and cultures. Semantic interoperability is achieved in three ways: through a shared annotation format for representing text, through an interlinked repository of lexical resources and ontologies, and through a uniform system for mining text that enriches lexical resources and extracts new relations based on the ontology. Whereas most efforts focus on separate aspects of semantic interoperability, KYOTO implements a full knowledge cycle for sharing and exchanging knowledge by integrating these different operability layers. Sharing of knowledge as expressed in natural language is the genuine test for semantic interoperability. Also: Chapter 12 KYOTO: A Wiki for Establishing Semantic Interoperability for Knowledge Sharing Across Languages and Cultures 10. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2012, Volume 7239/2012, 243-249, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-29035-0_18 Study on the International Standardization for the Semantic Metadata Mapping Procedure Sungjoon Lim, Taesul Seo, Changhan Lee and Soungsoo Shin    (39U0)

11. http://bib.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/04/06/bib.bbs014.abstract Semantic Web meets Integrative Biology: a survey Huajun Chen    (39U1)

12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.03.007, Environmental model access and interoperability: The GEO Model Web initiative Stefano Nativia, Paolo Mazzettia, , Gary N. Gellerb, a National Research Council of Italy - Institute of Atmospheric Pollution Research - (CNR-IIA), c/o University of Florence, Piazza Ciardi 25, 59100 Prato, Italy b NASA Ecological Forecasting Program, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA Received 13 May 2011. Revised 20 February 2012. Accepted 9 March 2012. Available online 6 April 2012.    (39U2)

13. Interlinking Geospatial Information in the Web of Data LM Vilches-Blázquez, V Saquicela… - Bridging the Geographic Information …, 2012 ... a framework, which uses Dempster-Shafer belief propagation to capture specific features of Semantic Web data (ontological constraints, data ... lexical, syn- tactic, semantic, and pragmatic) that commonly appears in works that deal with semantic interoperability (Euzenat, 2001 ...    (39U3)

14. Critical Remarks on the Use of Conceptual Schemas in Geospatial Data Modelling—A Schema Translation Perspective T Kutzner… - Bridging the Geographic Information Sciences, 2012... However, other transformation languages are also in use in geospa- tial research such as the Ontology Mapping Language (OML) (Reitz et al. ... Staub P, Gnägi HR, Morf A (2008) Semantic Interoperability through the Definition of Conceptual Model Transformations. ... 15. Development of Ontology for the Representation of Adverse Drug Events of Diabetes Disease N Zina… - International Journal of Computer Applications, 2012... The knowledge model of protg-2000: combining interoperability and exibility. ... An example of food ontology for diabetes control. Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference 2005 workshop on Ontology Patterns for the Semantic Web. ...    (39U4)

16. Integrating Clinical Pathways into CDSS using Context and Rules–A Case Study in Heart Disease W Yao… - 2012... Moreover, semantic web technologies can help to create medical ontologies that are interchangeable and provide rich semantics for customizing a clinical process. ... The Web Ontology Language (OWL) [5] is a semantic markup language for defining and sharing ontologies. ...    (39U5)

17. Emerging practices for mapping and linking life sciences data using RDF—A case series MS Marshall, R Boyce, HF Deus, J Zhao… - Web Semantics: Science, …, 2012 ... that enables SPARQL queries over the relational schema 7. Create Semantic Web applications ...services at BioPortal [9] from the National Center for Biomedical Ontology (NCBO ... To ensure interoperability with other LODD datasets, the following domain ontologies were selected ...    (39U6)

18. http://eprints-phd.biblio.unitn.it/700/1/Maltese_Vincenzo_PHD_THESIS.pdf DISI - UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO DEALING WITH SEMANTIC HETEROGENEITY IN CLASSIFICATIONS Vincenzo Maltese Advisor: Prof. Fausto Giunchiglia Università degli Studi di Trento    (39U7)

19. BCIO: Brain Computer Interface Ontology M Siddiq, SK Raffat… - International Journal of Computer Applications, 2012... Gibaud, ―Use case: Ontology with rules for identifying brain anatomical structures,‖ W3C Workshop on Rule Languages for Interoperability, Washington, 2005. [7] W. Wang, A. D. Degenhart, GP Sudre, DA Pomerleau, EC Tyler-Kabara, ―Decoding semantic information from ...    (39U8)

20. An Intelligent Trust Based Interoperable Grid Environment K Selvi… - European Journal of Scientific Research, 2012... along with grid middleware interoperability techniques. The framework considers four different middlewares GT2, GT4, gLite and UNICORE. The significant feature of this framework is the semantic matchmaking component which builds interoperable trust ontology by ranking of ...    (39U9)

21. Ontology-based collaborative framework for disaster recovery scenarios Sakkaravarthi Ramanathan(1), Aymen Kamoun(1,2), Christophe Chassot(1,2) {sakkaravarthi, akamoun, chassot} @laas.fr 1 CNRS ; LAAS ; 7 avenue du Colonel Roche, F-31077 Toulouse, France 2 Université de Toulouse ; UPS, INSA , INP, ISAE ; LAAS ; F-31077 Toulouse, France    (39UA)

22. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2012/0078595.html METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ONTOLOGY MATCHING United States Patent Application 20120078595 An approach is provided for ontology matching. An information space infrastructure determines a first ontology and a second ontology. The first ontology and the second ontology describe one or more information closures, one or more computation closures, or a combination thereof. The information space infrastructure then determines to apply a plurality of comparison models on the first ontology and the second ontology and to compute a degree of similarity of the first ontology and the second ontology based, at least in part, on the plurality of comparison models. Balandin, Sergey (Helsinki, FI) Boldyrev, Sergey (Soderkulla, FI) Oliver, Ian Justin (Soderkulla, FI) Turenko, Timofey (Espoo, FI) Smirnov, Alexander Victorovich (Saint-Petersburg, RU) Shilov, Nikolay Germanovich (Saint-Petersburg, RU) Kashevnik, Alexey Mixailovich (Saint-Petersburg, RU) 23. Formal foundations for situation awareness based on dependent type theory Richard Dapoigny, , Patrick Barlatier University of Savoie, Laboratory of Computer Science, Systems, Information and Knowledge Processing, PO Box 80439, 74944 Annecy-le-vieux cedex, France Received 1 July 2010. Revised 28 February 2012. Accepted 29 February 2012. Available online 8 March 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2012.02.006 Abstract - Cognitive situation awareness has recently caught the attention of the information fusion community. Some approaches have developed formalizations that are both ontology-based and underpinned…    (39UB)

24. http://uclab.khu.ac.kr/resources/publication/C_251.pdf Achieving Interoperability among Healthcare Standards:Building Semantic Mappings at Models Level Wajahat Ali Khan et al.    (39UC)

25. http://www.springerlink.com/content/l044712h18417305/ Ontology Engineering in a Networked World 2012, Part 2, 147-170, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-24794-1_7 Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Enrico Motta and Aldo Gangemi (1) the NeOn Methodology Framework, (2) the set of ontology engineering activities, (3) the NeOn Toolkit and plugins, and (4) three use cases. Primary goals of this book are (a) to disseminate the results from the NeOn project in a structured and comprehensive form, (b) to make it easier for students and practitioners to adopt ontology engineering methods and tools, and (c) to provide a textbook for undergraduate and postgraduate courses on ontology engineering.    (39UO)

26. http://www.springerlink.com/content/k234831676q2m273/ Ontology Development by Reuse Mariano Fernández-López, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa and Asunción Gómez-Pérez    (39UD)

27. http://www.taibahu.edu.sa/iccit/allICCITpapers/pdf/p462-sheta.pdf Implementation of ICT in Sustainable Architecture Transforming Design and Construction to Overcome Industry Challenges Sherif A. Sheta Department of Architectural Engineering Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura University Dakaheia, Egypt E-mail: shetas@ecu.edu    (39UE)

28. http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijdsn/2012/247346/ Hindawi Publishing Corporation International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks Volume 2012, Article ID 247346, 11 pages doi:10.1155/2012/247346 Research Article CA5W1HOnto: Ontological Context-AwareModel Based on 5W1H Jeong-Dong Kim, Jiseong Son, and Doo-Kwon Baik Department of Computer and Radio Communications Engineering, Korea University, Seoul 136-701, Republic of Korea Correspondence should be addressed to Doo-Kwon Baik, baikdk@korea.ac.kr Received 11 October 2011; Accepted 24 December 2011 Academic Editor: Tai Hoon Kim Copyright © 2012 Jeong-Dong Kim et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.    (39UF)

Snippets: Definition 3.2. ����5W1H�������� Model �������������������� = {Concepts, Instances, Contexts},Context  Model = {5W1H(Who, Why, How, What, Where, When,)},Who = {Role(Actor(Profile), Organization, System)},Why = {Goal(Personal_Goal, Role_Goal, Nonfunctional_Goal, Functional_Goal)},How = {Action(Atomic_Action, Composite_Action, Expectation(Failure), Input, Output, Effect, Precondition, contextual, trustworthy)},What = {Status(Atomic_Status, Composite_Status)},Where = {Location(Atomic_Location, Composite_Location)},When = { Time(Start_Time, End_Time, Repetition_Time) } .    (39UG)

29. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169023X12000225 Quality of hierarchies in ontologies and folksonomies ☆ ☆☆ Geir Solskinnsbakka, , , Jon Atle Gullaa, , Veronika Haderleinb, , Per Myrsethb, , Olga Cerratob, a Department of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway b Det Norske Veritas (DNV), Oslo, Norway Available online 17 March 2012.    (39UH)

30. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1467089512000140 XBRL and open data for global financial ecosystems: A linked data approach S O'Riain, E Curry… - International Journal of Accounting Information …, 2012 ... The emergence of Linked Data from Semantic Web efforts has promoted the availability of semi-structured and structured data on the web in a format that provides standard access and interoperability between and among Open Data sets. ...    (39UI)

31. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2012/0066661.html VERIFYING PROGRAMMING ARTIFACTS GENERATED FROM ONTOLOGY ARTIFACTS OR MODELS NG Balani, MG Shenoy… - US Patent 20,120,066,661, 2012 ... ontology model with a validation tool, in order to verify their semantic equivalence. ... language) is the most expressive language for representing and sharing ontologies over the ... It facilitates greater machine interoperability of Web content than other description languages like XML ... Abstract: A transformation tool and a validation tool are used to verify programmable artifacts, such as Java models, that are generated from an original ontology model. The verification process ensures that the programmable artifacts are semantically equivalent to the original ontology model from which they are created. Each element in the programmable artifacts is tagged with appropriate metadata, using, for example, Java language annotation support. Once tagged, the programmable artifacts can be parsed to form a generated ontology model. This generated ontology model can then be compared to the original ontology model with a validation tool, in order to verify their semantic equivalence.    (39UJ)

32. http://www.scientific.net/AMR.488-489.1288 Research on Emergency Plan Ontology Model 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.488-489.1288 Citation Min Ren et al., 2012, Advanced Materials Research, 488-489, 1288 Online since March, 2012    (39UK)

33. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/asp/asl/2012/00000005/00000001/art00061 On Configuration of Multi-Parameter and Reasoning for Ontology Mapping Authors: Junwu, Zhu; Bin, Li Source: Advanced Science Letters, Volume 5, Number 1, January 2012 , pp. 337-344(8)    (39UL)

34. http://jucs.org/jucs_18_2/generic_temporal_and_fuzzy/jucs_18_02_0177_0193_mahmood.pdf Generic Temporal and Fuzzy Ontological Framework (GTFOF) for Developing Temporal-Fuzzy Database Model for Managing Patient’s Data Nadeem Mahmood (Department of Computer Science, UBIT, University of Karachi, Pakistan nmahmood@uok.edu.pk) S. M. Aqil Burney (Department of Computer Science, UBIT, University of Karachi, Pakistan burney@uok.edu.pk) Kamran Ahsan Faculty of Computing, Engineering and Technology and Centre for Ageing and Mental Health, Staffordshire University, Stafford, UK K.Ahsan@staffs.ac.uk)    (39UM)

dialog between Henson Graves and Matthew West: Dear Matthew, I have been attempting to follow the discussion on “system components, roles, fillers, and role relations”. For the most part I think that I agree with you and disagree with a lot of people. Sometimes I am not sure whether this is the case and wonder if the problem is different terminology. Perhaps we can sort this out.    (351Z)

Figure: A crude distillation unit.    (352E)

P101 is a system component of the Crude Distillation Unit. It is the bottoms pump from C1 to C2. Initially the pump with serial No S1234 is installed. At a later date this pump is removed and pump with serial no S3456.    (352F)

System Descriptions for Different Uses. We should distinguish at least 5 stakeholder groups with different interests in big systems: designers, analysts, builders, users, and theorists. Designers imagine new configurations of materials, new communication networks, or new transformations of energy to produce novel results. They write down their imaginings for the benefit of analysts and builders. Analysts apply specialized techniques, usually from an established discipline, to vet known aspects of designers' creations. (For example, the materials engineer will verify the strength requirements of structural components.) Builders of systems create physical manifestations of the designer's imagination: they obtain the materials, arrange the activities, fabricate and assemble the components, and deliver the product or service. And users adapt themselves as needed--for better or worse--when a big system intersects their lives.    (353O)

Lastly we have the theorists (a class which includes all of us in this forum along with various OMG and ISO technical committees and Sowa's pantheon of knowledge engineers: Aristotle, Leibniz, Kant, Peirce, Whitehead, and others). Theorists are usually the least relevant players in big systems, and the most likely to be wrong about them. It is off topic to explore in depth the reasons for this, but let us be aware of the different ideals and motivations of theorists, and therefore wary of their recommendations and pronouncements. We theorists favor the abstract, eternal, universal, static, and rational; those who do real work are intricately bound up with the real world of special cases, exceptions, creativity, change, and irrationality. Theorists are immune to the profit motive and exempt from budget constraints; and if they have any interest in market share it is only in the marketplace of ideas. (I say this as one who believes that "there is nothing so practical as a good theory" and finds nothing more pleasing than an apt principle or pattern.) I don't say all theory is useless. I just suggest we ask of our theories how, specifically, they favorably affect the day-to-day activities of designers, analysts, builders, or users of big systems.    (353P)

I don't mean to impose a rigid or unnatural separation of duties on these groups. Designers can be competent analysts or builders; practically anyone touched by a system can contribute to its design. Different stakeholders can often profit from close communication--in some phases of system development a great deal of interaction is required. Furthermore each group has activity specializations within it, with specialized information diets.    (353Q)

An ontology, in this forum, is a theory about the classification and relationships of things of interest to users of that ontology. It seems clear that no single ontology can simultaneously satisfy the needs of designers, analysts, builders, and users of a big system. Their mental models of the world are different; they parse the universe differently; their evaluation-execution loops are triggered by different signals and effected with different affordances (to borrow a model and terminology from Donald Norman, The Design of Everyday Things). However, it is equally clear that there are some threads of meaning that connect multiple stakeholders in a big system. The required research program is: how to construct separately useful ontologies for each group of stakeholders, and connect them as necessary in natural and useful ways. (--PaulTyson / 2012-02-18)    (353R)