10/24/09CK 2009 1 The Open Ontology Repository Initiative: Requirements and Research Challenges Ken Baclawski Todd Schneider.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.
Advertisements

Open Ontology Repository Ken Baclawski College of Computer and Information Science Northeastern University.
1 Open Ontology Repository Planning Meeting for Ontology repositories: approaches, technologies, collaboration Ken Baclawski June 15, 2009.
OMV Ontology Metadata Vocabulary April 10, 2008 Peter Haase.
1 Ontolog OOR Use Case Review Todd Schneider 1 April 2010 (v 1.2)
1 Ontolog Open Ontology Repository Review 19 February 2009.
BioPortal as (the only functional) OOR SandBox (so far) Natasha Noy, Michael Dorf Stanford University.
August 6, 2009 Joint Ontolog-OOR Panel 1 Ontology Repository Research Issues Joint Ontolog-OOR Panel Discussion Ken Baclawski August 6, 2009.
DELOS Highlights COSTANTINO THANOS ITALIAN NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL.
Chronos: A Tool for Handling Temporal Ontologies in Protégé
IPY and Semantics Siri Jodha S. Khalsa Paul Cooper Peter Pulsifer Paul Overduin Eugeny Vyazilov Heather lane.
Introduction to Databases
Information and Business Work
Environmental Terminology System and Services (ETSS) June 2007.
File Systems and Databases
The NSDL Registry Jon Phipps Stuart Sutton Diane Hillmann Ryan Laundry Cornell U. U. of Washington.
Key integrating concepts Groups Formal Community Groups Ad-hoc special purpose/ interest groups Fine-grained access control and membership Linked All content.
Database System Development Lifecycle © Pearson Education Limited 1995, 2005.
SC32 WG2 Metadata Standards Tutorial Metadata Registries and Big Data WG2 N1945 June 9, 2014 Beijing, China.
Ontology Development Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University Harvard Medical School.
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory SKOS Ecoterm 2006 Alistair Miles CCLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment.
1 SIF Interoperability Assessment Presented by Steve Browdy.
The MMI Tools Carlos Rueda Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute OOS Semantic Interoperability Workshop Marine Metadata Interoperability Project Boulder,
Using the Open Metadata Registry (openMDR) to create Data Sharing Interfaces October 14 th, 2010 David Ervin & Rakesh Dhaval, Center for IT Innovations.
Emerging Semantic Web Commercialization Opportunities Ken Baclawski Northeastern University.
Ontology Summit2007 Survey Response Analysis -- Issues Ken Baclawski Northeastern University.
Themes Architecture Content Metadata Interoperability Standards Knowledge Organisation Systems Use and Users Legal and Economic Issues The Future.
The Agricultural Ontology Service (AOS) A Tool for Facilitating Access to Knowledge AGRIS/CARIS and Documentation Group Library and Documentation Systems.
Metadata. Generally speaking, metadata are data and information that describe and model data and information For example, a database schema is the metadata.
Definition of a taxonomy “System for naming and organizing things into groups that share similar characteristics” Taxonomy Architectures Applications.
Ocean Observatories Initiative Data Management (DM) Subsystem Overview Michael Meisinger September 29, 2009.
1 Open Ontology Repository: Architecture and Interfaces Ken Baclawski Northeastern University 1.
1 Everyday Requirements for an Open Ontology Repository Denise Bedford Ontolog Community Panel Presentation April 3, 2008.
Interoperability & Knowledge Sharing Advisor: Dr. Sudha Ram Dr. Jinsoo Park Kangsuk Kim (former MS Student) Yousub Hwang (Ph.D. Student)
Leo Obrst, Fabian Neuhaus MITRE, NIST An Open Ontology Repository: Rationale, Expectations & Requirements Session.
Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.
SKOS. Ontologies Metadata –Resources marked-up with descriptions of their content. No good unless everyone speaks the same language; Terminologies –Provide.
Oreste Signore- Quality/1 Amman, December 2006 Standards for quality of cultural websites Ministerial NEtwoRk for Valorising Activities in digitisation.
Metadata : an overview XML and Educational Metadata, SBU, London, 10 July 2001 Pete Johnston UKOLN, University of Bath Bath, BA2 7AY UKOLN is supported.
Issues in Ontology-based Information integration By Zhan Cui, Dean Jones and Paul O’Brien.
Digital Libraries1 David Rashty. Digital Libraries2 “A library is an arsenal of liberty” Anonymous.
2.An overview of SDMX (What is SDMX? Part I) 1 Edward Cook Eurostat Unit B5: “Central data and metadata services” SDMX Basics course, October 2015.
1 Ontolog OOR-BioPortal Comparative Analysis Todd Schneider 15 October 2009.
Knowledge Modeling and Discovery. About Thetus Thetus develops knowledge modeling and discovery infrastructure software for customers who: Have high-value.
1 Open Ontology Repository initiative - Planning Meeting - Thu Co-conveners: PeterYim, LeoObrst & MikeDean ref.:
Cooperation & Interoperability Architecture & Ontology.
EbXML Registry and Repository Dept of Computer Engineering Khon Kaen University.
The Semantic Web. What is the Semantic Web? The Semantic Web is an extension of the current Web in which information is given well-defined meaning, enabling.
A Portrait of the Semantic Web in Action Jeff Heflin and James Hendler IEEE Intelligent Systems December 6, 2010 Hyewon Lim.
NeOn Components for Ontology Sharing and Reuse Mathieu d’Aquin (and the NeOn Consortium) KMi, the Open Univeristy, UK
Semantic Data Extraction for B2B Integration Syntactic-to-Semantic Middleware Bruno Silva 1, Jorge Cardoso 2 1 2
Leo Obrst, Fabian Neuhaus MITRE, NIST An Open Ontology Repository: Rationale, Expectations & Requirements Session.
Semantics and the EPA System of Registries Gail Hodge IIa/ Consultant to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 18 April 2007.
LE:NOTRE Spring Workshop The Role of Ontologies for Mapping the Domain of Landscape Architecture An introduction.
1 Developing an Ontology of Ontologies for OOR Ontology Summit 2008 April 28-29, 2008 Michael Gruninger and Pat Hayes.
Of 24 lecture 11: ontology – mediation, merging & aligning.
The Agricultural Ontology Server (AOS) A Tool for Facilitating Access to Knowledge AGRIS/CARIS and Documentation Group Food and Agriculture Organization.
Semantic Web. P2 Introduction Information management facilities not keeping pace with the capacity of our information storage. –Information Overload –haphazardly.
GISELA & CHAIN Workshop Digital Cultural Heritage Network
BioPortal as (the only functional) OOR SandBox (so far)
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
The Role of Ontologies for Mapping the Domain of Landscape Architecture An introduction.
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
knowledge organization for a food secure world
File Systems and Databases
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
GISELA & CHAIN Workshop Digital Cultural Heritage Network
Bird of Feather Session
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
Presentation transcript:

10/24/09CK The Open Ontology Repository Initiative: Requirements and Research Challenges Ken Baclawski Todd Schneider

10/24/09CK OOR Charter Promote the global use and sharing of ontologies by: – establishing a hosted registry-repository; – enabling and facilitating open, federated, collaborative ontology repositories, and – establishing best practices for expressing interoperable ontology and taxonomy work in registry- repositories.

10/24/09CK Why? Isn’t the Semantic Web notion of distributed islands of semantics sufficient as a de facto repository? If you put it out there, will they come? If you build it better and put it out there, will they prefer yours? History does not show this laissez faire “field of dreams” is good reality

10/24/09CK Okay, but why a new infrastructure? The “clickable” web has been very successful in employing a “lazy strategy” for HTML documents. However the use and content of the Semantic Web has different characteristics (next slide) that make it far less tolerant of the change and frequent errors which are commonplace on the clickable web.

5 SemWeb Distinguishing Characteristics Machines are the primary consumers – Humans can handle errors and noisy content. – This is likely to be fatal for machine processing. Import dependencies – owl:imports introduces a strong transitive dependency between ontology documents. – Changes in an imported document have serious consequences. Can cause inconsistencies. Can change meaning significantly.

10/24/09CK Open Ontology Repository "An ontology repository is a facility where ontologies and related information artefacts can be stored, retrieved and managed" The persistent store The registry Value-added services

10/24/09CK Open Ontology Repository – Folksonomies – Terminologies – Controlled vocabularies – Taxonomies – Thesauri – Data schemata All types of artefacts on the ontology spectrum

10/24/09CK Open Ontology Repository Open access – compliance with open standards – open technology (with open source) – open knowledge (open content) – open collaboration (transparent community process) Open to integration with “non-open” repositories via an open interface

10/24/09CK Purpose and Scope of the OOR Initiative Limited to providing an infrastructure that enables ontology and metadata management Formal architecture – Interfaces – Required services – Enable interoperability among OOR instances Reference implementation – Basic services – Basic metadata lifecycle

10/24/09CK Metadata management The next slide shows an organization suitable for data sharing and interoperability within domains. Cross-domain interoperability requires relationships between ontologies – Import relationships – Ontology mapping/mediation relationships

Annotates Image data set Image data set Sensor data set Sensor data set Knowledge base Knowledge base Metadata Domain Specific Ontology Domain Specific Ontology Domain Specific Ontology Repository Metadata Repository Metadata Repository Metadata OOR Ontology Semantics of

10/24/09CK OOR Value Added: Part 1 The OOR is reliably available The OOR is persistent and sustainable, so you can be confident when committing to its use The OOR has information about when, why, and how an ontology has changed, so you can be aware of changes that may effect its usability Ontologies and metadata can easily be found.

10/24/09CK OOR Value Added: Part 2 Ontologies and metadata are registered, so you know who built them Metadata provides the ontology purpose, KR language, user group, content subject area, etc. The OOR includes mappings, so you can connect ontologies to other ontologies The OOR content has quality and value, as gauged by recognized criteria

10/24/09CK OOR Value Added: Part 3 The OOR enables services, so that ontologies can map and be mapped, find and be found, can review/certify and be reviewed/certified – Use services that others have developed, or – Plug in your own services Ontologies can reuse or extend other ontologies, including common middle and upper ontologies The OOR can be extended

10/24/09CK Top Requirements A well-maintained persistent store (with high availability and performance) where ontological work can be stored, shared and accessed Properly registering and “governing” ontologies, with provenance and versioning support, made available (logically) in one place so that they can be browsed, discovered, queried, analysed, validated and reused Allow ontologies to be “open” and unencumbered by IPR constraints, in terms of access and reuse

10/24/09CK Top Requirements Providing services across disparate ontological artefacts to support cross-domain interoperability, mapping, application and making inferences. Registering semantic services to support peer OORs OOR Use Case development is ongoing. OOR Use Case

10/24/09CK Research Challenges Computational Complexity Inadequacies of current repositories Representation languages Policies and best practices Outreach and education

10/24/09CK Computational Complexity Repositories permit the creation of large ontologies by import and mediation. Complexity of logical inference increases more rapidly than traditional database query complexity

10/24/09CK Current repositories Repositories already have many important features: registration/upload, browsing/search, metrics/statistics,... Ontologies are generally treated as independent entities, although this is now changing. Lack of repository standards No federation ability

10/24/09CK Representation languages The diversity of metadata and ontology languages is large and growing. Languages for representing relationships are emerging/diverging. Transformations between representations don't preserve semantics. A CL repository could address this issue.

10/24/09CK Policies and best practices Intellectual property concerns Policies and procedures – Naming conventions and policies – Maintenance policies – Documentation Provenance to enable trust

10/24/09CK Outreach and Education Integration with other semantic tools  Semantic wikis  Others? Education  Documentation is not enough Community outreach  Meet with representatives of the community  Assist in transition to ontology repositories