Software Architecture Lab.

Software Architecture Lab.
A Framework for Exchanging Heterogeneous Messages based-on Ontology Mapping Eunchae Yoon Software Architecture Lab. Dec. 20, 2006

School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon
Table of Contents Introduction Related Work Approaches for Message Exchange Point-to-Point (P-to-P) translations Standard message Message Broker Ontology Concept Ontology Language Ontology Mapping Message Exchange Framework based-on Ontology Mapping Approach Message Format Mapping Message Instance Translation Comparison with Traditional Approach Application: Tactical Data Link Integration Tactical Data Link Adaptation Conclusion School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

I. Introduction School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Motivation (1) The more message formats are tailored to their special usage at optimum, the more effective the application using those will be. Choosing different message format or concept is such a tailoring decision. Different message format representation Structure: different structure repository Ex) Database, XML-Schema form, implicit form Datatype: application or database dependent datatype Ex) Varchar vs string Restriction: different representation Ex) Disjunctive normal form, logic, natural language, horn clause Different concept different naming on message, set, and field abstraction data scaling data representation In military tactical data link: TADIL Series (A, B, C, J), VMF, XML-MTF, XML-VMF, etc. In Healthcare domain: HL7 Version 1, HL7 Version 2, HL7 Version 3 etc. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Motivation (2) However, heterogeneity in the syntactical or semantic phase of message is considered as an unwelcome feature because it proves to be an important obstacle for interoperation of systems. In order to communicate and collaborate among the systems in the same domain, it is increasingly required to ensure the interoperability between syntactically and semantically heterogeneous messages which are independently developed, but used for the same functionality. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Message Level Heterogeneity
Heterogeneity category Syntactic heterogeneity (non-semantic) Paradigm heterogeneity: if two systems express their message format using different modelling paradigms Ex) structured object oriented Language heterogeneity: if different languages are used to present message format or message instance Ex) format: table, xml schema Instance: Binary, Character, XML, EDI Semantic heterogeneity Ontology heterogeneity: if two systems make different ontological assumptions about their message ontology Ex) naming conflicts on message, set, and field: employee vs worker abstraction: professor vs faculty data scaling: vs A-F data representation: 8bit integer vs 32 bit integer Content heterogeneity: if two systems represent different knowledge Visser P, Jones D, Bench-Capon T and Shave M, “Assessing heterogeneity by classifying ontology mismatches”, Proceedings FOIS’98, IOS Press, pp 148—162, 1998. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Previous Approaches for Message Exchange
Point-to-point translations (Adaptors) BUT Quadratic complexity Time to develop adapters Standard message People do not want to change their way of working Each message format has own application-specific advantage Message broker Linear complexity if using common interchange format Quadratic 2차(square complexity) David S. Dodge, “Gateways - 101”, IEEE MILCOM, 2001 Harmonise, IST , Tourism Harmonisation Network, Deliverable 3.2 Semantic mapping and Reconciliation Engine subsystems. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Problem Statement Message broker approach is commonly used in the domain where interoperability between significantly various message formats is required. However there is no common message format specification method and mapping representation for heterogeneous message format specifications. Consequently In the phase of development, because every message format use its own concept and representation, it requires large amount of effort to map different message formats and to develop translator which interprets the mapping. In the phase of maintenance, it is faced with translator maintenance problem in accordance with the change of message formats or common interchange format at the worst School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Our Approach Semantic Message Exchange Framework as a Solution Use XML-based environment Eliminate language heterogeneity Message translation using ontology mapping Consistent description of message format and message instance using OWL Structure: class, property (domain, range) Datatype: datatype property (boolean, float, string, date, etc.) Restriction: quantifier, hasValue, cardinality Eliminate ontology heterogeneity Support explicit semantic mapping definition at the level of conceptual knowledge using OWL Mapping Schema Benefits Separation of concern: mapping only focus on semantic mismatches on consistent message format description Easy mapping: GUI based tree mapping using predefined mapping pattern Automatic translation by generic Mapping Engine (OWL mapping interpreter) School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Research Objective Develop meSsage Exchange fRamework based-on Ontology Mapping (SEROM) Transform message formats and message instances into XML Transform XML into OWL OWL ontology translation Apply SEROM to Military Area for Tactical Data Link integration School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

II. Related Work (1) Approaches for Message Exchange Point-to-Point Translations Standard Message Message Broker David S. Dodge, “Gateways - 101”, IEEE MILCOM, 2001 School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Point-to-Point Translations
Figure out how messages overlap Write some interface translator to convert the message PRO: Almost always the simplest, fastest, and cheapest way to connect two messages (in the short term) CON: Interface software is hard (and expensive) to maintain Doesn’t work well to connect many systems interface David S. Dodge, “Gateways - 101”, IEEE MILCOM, 2001 School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Standard Message PRO: Faster data access Easier and cheaper (in the long run) for multiple systems CON: Applications become coupled through the standard message Still limited in scale; won’t work for very large enterprises or multiple enterprises Autonomy 자치, 자율 David S. Dodge, “Gateways - 101”, IEEE MILCOM, 2001 School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Message Broker (1) Design a Message Broker using Canonical Data Model that is independent from any specific application. Require each application to produce and consume messages in this common format. PRO: Provide Connectivity to Legacy Systems Easier than Modifying Each System to Interoperate Directly Move away from N-squared translations towards N translations Provide Legacy System Connections to Publish and Subscribe Information Management Canonical Data Model, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Message Broker (2) Link KVMF XML MTF Common Format CON: Still exist In the phase of development, because every message format use its own concept and representation, it requires large amount of effort to map different message formats and to develop translator which interprets the mapping. In the phase of maintenance, it is faced with translator maintenance problem in accordance with the change of message formats or common interchange format at the worst No such a silver bullet, covering every message format and considering the future variability as Canonical Data Model in reality Especially in the domains including military area, where both legacy message formats and newly–developed advanced messages coexist. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Related Work (2) Ontology Concept Ontology Language Ontology Mapping School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Concept “An ontology defines the basic terms and relations comprising the vocabulary of a topic area as well as the rules for combining terms and relations to define extensions to the vocabulary” [Robert Neches] “Explicit specification of a conceptualization” [Tom Gruber] The names of entities in the universe of discourse (the set of objects that can be represented, e.g., classes, relations, functions, objects) Text descriptions about what the names mean Formal axioms that constrain the interpretation Why Ontologies? To clarify and capture the conceptual structure of a domain (to build a body of knowledge describing a domain) To enable knowledge sharing (to allow systems to share common semantics) To enable reasoning on the domain knowledge School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Example Rooms B&B is a has Accommodation visited by is a Hotel has Address Tourist StreetName City StreetNum An ontology represents a common, shareable view of the application domain Gathers and describes concepts and define the relationships among them FROM OUR POIN OF VIEW An ontology is…. As i said, our approach is based on the idea that there must be a common view of the tourism business domain that can be used as a reference point, otherwise application interoperability will necessarily fail, no matter what technology will be used. This common understanding must be set up at least at “human level”, which means that building an ontology… Mirella Dell'Erba, "An ontology-based approach to semantic interoperability in the tourism domain", Dec 2002. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Ontology Languages XML provides a surface syntax for structured documents, but imposes no semantic constraints on the meaning of these documents. XML Schema is a language for restricting the structure of XML documents and also extends XML with datatypes. An ontology language is a formal languages used to encode the ontology RDF is a datamodel for objects ("resources") and relations between them, provides a simple semantics for this datamodel, and these datamodels can be represented in an XML syntax. RDF Schema is a vocabulary for describing properties and classes of RDF resources, with a semantics for generalization-hierarchies of such properties and classes. OWL adds more vocabulary for describing properties and classes: among others, relations between classes (e.g. disjointness), cardinality (e.g. "exactly one"), equality, richer typing of properties, characteristics of properties (e.g. symmetry), and enumerated classes. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

OWL Classes <owl:Class rdf:ID=“Crimes"> </owl:Class> Ministry of Interior has defined ontologies for their information in OWL For example: <owl:Class rdf:ID=“Robbery"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Crimes"/> </owl:Class> … <owl:Class rdf:ID=“Speeding"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Crimes"/> </owl:Class> School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

OWL Properties description <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID=“description"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Crime"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=“ </owl:DatatypeProperty > <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID=“suspect"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Robbery"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=“#Thief> </owl:ObjectProperty > <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID=“driver"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Speeding"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=“#Speeder"/> Crimes Literal suspect Robbery Thief driver Speeding Speeder School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Ontology Mapping Ontology Mapping The process where two ontologies with an overlapping content are related at the conceptual level, and the source ontology instances are transformed into the target ontology instances according to these relations. Related Works Harmonise project Develop a harmonization network for the tourism industry to allow participating tourism organizations to keep the proprietary data format based on Minimum Harmonization Ontology (IMHO) using RDF based mapping S. Suwanmannee Use OWL to describe the relationship and correspondences different resources using native OWL constructs such as equivalentClass and equivalentProperty. Artemis A Semantic Web Servicebased P2P Infrastructure for the Interoperability of Medical Information Systems, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

III. meSsage Exchange fRamework based-on Ontology Mapping (SEROM)
School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

meSsage Exchange fRamework based-on Ontology Mapping (SEROM)
Message Format Mapping XML Schema Generation Normalization & OWL Wrapping OWL Ontology Mapping Message Instance Translation Transformation of source message Instance into XML Transformation of XML to OWL instance Translation OWL source message instance to OWL target message instance Transformation of OWL instance into XML Transformation of XML into target message instance School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Architecture for Message Format Mapping

Architecture for Message Instance Translation

Sample Source Message Description
Index No. Field Name Bits Datatype Group Code 1 Pupil 32 string 1.1 name 64 G1 1.2 id integer 1.3 gender boolean 2 Date 2.1 day 5 G2 2.2 month 4 2.3 year 11 3 Class #G3 … School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Sample Target Message Description
Index No. Field Name Bits Datatype Group Code 1 Student 32 string 1.1 studentName 64 G1 1.2 studentId integer 1.3 dateOfBirth 47 1.4 sex boolean 1.5 address 128 1.6 accountNumber 2 Class … School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

XML Schema Generation XS components Simple or Complex Element Attribute Restriction Describe allowable message and field content Define restrictions on field Define field formats Built in types (integers, time, date, boolean, etc.) Custom types (telephone numbers, etc.) School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Normalization & OWL Wrapping
Automatic bidirectional transformation of XML message instances to RDF message instances as well as automatic generation of RDF Schemas from XML Schema Definitions C-Normalization (Conceptual Normalization) Generate RDFS schemas from local XSD schemas Produce a Normalization Map which defines the associations between the XML Schema and the re-engineered RDFS model D-Normalization (Data Normalization) Transform the data instances from XML to RDF or RDF to XML OWL Wrapping Harmonise, IST , Tourism Harmonisation Network, Deliverable 3.2 Semantic mapping and Reconciliation Engine subsystems. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

XS2OWL XML Schema OWL Student Student xs:ComplexType ComplexType2Class owl:Class xs:element ElementParent2PropertyRange owl:domain date Element2Property owl:hasDate type ElementType2PropertyRange owl:range Date Date xs:ComplexType ComplexType2Class owl:Class School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Source Message Ontology
Class (Pupil partial) Class (Date partial) ObjectProperty(hasDate domain (Pupil) range (Date)) DatatypeProperty(name domain(Pupil) range(xsd:string)) DatatypeProperty(id domain(Pupil) range(xsd:integer)) DatatypeProperty(gender domain(Pupil) range(xsd:boolean)) DatatypeProperty(day domain(Date) range(xsd:integer)) DatatypeProperty(month DatatypeProperty(year Pupil name id gender hasDate Date day month year School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Target Message Ontology
Class (Student partial) DatatypeProperty(studentName domain(Student) range(xsd:string)) DatatypeProperty(studentID domain(Student) range(xsd:integer)) DatatypeProperty(dateOfBirth DatatypeProperty(sex domain(Student) range(xsd:boolean)) DatatypeProperty(address DatatypeProperty(accountNumber Student studentName studentID dateOfBirth sex address accountNumber School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

OWL Ontology Mapping Ontology Mapping is the process whereby two ontologies are semantically related at conceptual level, and the source ontology instances are transformed into the target ontology entities according to those semantic relations. Artemis A Semantic Web Servicebased P2P Infrastructure for the Interoperability of Medical Information Systems, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Mapping Schema In order to eliminate the inconsistency and to automate the mapping process, we utilize OWL Mapping Schema for mapping representation Artemis A Semantic Web Servicebased P2P Infrastructure for the Interoperability of Medical Information Systems, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Ontology Mapping of Pupil and Student
Source Message Ontology Target Message Ontology Pupil Similarity_1 Student name id gender AttributeTransform_1 studentName studentID dateOfBirth sex address accountNumber RelationTransform_1 hasDate Date day month year School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Similarity_1: Pupil <j.0:Similarity> <j.0:similarityInput> <j.0:Concept> <j.0:relatedTo rdf:resource="Ontology1.owl#Pupil"/> </j.0:Concept> </j.0:similarityInput> <j.0:similarityOutput> <j.0:relatedTo rdf:resource="Ontology2.owl#Student"/> </j.0:similarityOutput> <j.0:operationName>Similarity_1</j.0:operationName> </j.0:Similarity> School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

RelationTransform_1 <j.0:RelationTransform rdf:about="Map#RelationTransform_1"> <j.0:operationName>RelationTransform_1</j.0:operationName> <j.0:includedIn rdf:resource="Map#Similarity_1"/> <j.0:conceptOperation>Ontology1.owl#Date|Map#Similarity_1|Ontology2.owl#Student|</j.0:conceptOperation> <j.0:inputPath>Ontology1.owl#Pupil|Ontology1.owl#hasDate|Ontology1.owl#Date|</j.0:inputPath> … <j.0:conceptOperationLocalName>Ontology2.owl#Student|relationDate|</j.0:conceptOperationLocalName> </j.0:RelationTransform> School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

AttributeTransform_1: name
<j.0:AttributeTransform rdf:about="Map#AttributeTransform_1"> <j.0:operationName>AttributeTransform_1</j.0:operationName> <j.0:functionPath>function Copy(arg0){return arg0;}</j.0:functionPath> <j.0:functionInputList>name </j.0:functionInputList> <j.0:attributeOutput rdf:resource=“studentName"/> </j.0:AttributeTransform> School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

AttributeTransform The need of more complex transformation operation except for copy Xpath Specification defines a set of basic operators and functions used by AttributeTransform step. String functions: concat, substring, string-length, etc. Boolean functions: not, true, lang, etc. Number functions: sum, floor, ceiling, round, etc. User defined function JavaScript W3C, XML Path Language (XPath) Version 1.0, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Architecture for Message Instance Translation

OWL Mapping Engine Artemis A Semantic Web Servicebased P2P Infrastructure for the Interoperability of Medical Information Systems, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Advantage Message heterogeneity Syntactic heterogeneity (non-semantic) Paradigm heterogeneity Language heterogeneity: if different languages are used to present message format or message instance Ex) format: table, xml schema Instance: Binary, Character, XML, EDI Semantic heterogeneity Ontology heterogeneity: if two systems make different ontological assumptions about their message ontology Ex) naming conflicts on message, set, and field: employee vs worker abstraction: professor vs faculty data scaling: vs A-F data representation: 8bit integer vs 32 bit integer Content heterogeneity: if two systems represent different knowledge SEROM Consistent description of message format using OWL. Structure: class, property (domain, range) Datatype: datatype property (boolean, float, string, date, etc.) Restriction: quantifier, hasValue, cardinality Cf. webservice, BNF for PG Reduce mapping complexity based on consistent description Support explicit semantic mapping definition at the level of conceptual knowledge using OWL Mapping Schema Cf. design pattern Easy mapping: GUI based tree mapping using OWL Mapping Schema Automatic translation by generic Mapping Engine (OWL mapping interpreter) Solution to translator development and maintenance cost Webservice, Middleware와 비교할 수 있음. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

IV. Application: Tactical Data Link Integration

Military Area NCW (Network Centric Warfare) Emphasis on system interoperability Collection of real-time warfare data Communication between units or systems Analyzing and making decision Key for victory: Carry out a preemptive strike based on rapid communications and information analysis School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Tactical Data Link (TDL)
Allow real- or near-real-time tactical, digital-information exchange among air, ground, and maritime components of United States, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, other allies, and friendly nations. Bit-Oriented Formatted Messages Allow real- or near-real-time tactical, digital-information exchange Basic Type: TADIL A, B, C J-series Family: TADIL J (Link 16), VMF, Link 22 Character-Based Formatted Messages provide common, human-readable, and media-independent messages used for planning and execution in joint and combined operations United States Message Text Format (USMTF) XML-based Formatted Messages XML-MTF XML-VMF School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon Department of Defense, “Joint Technical Architecture: Volume I Version 6.0”, 3 October 2003.

SEROM to Integrate TDL Message Formats

VMF Variable Message Format (VMF) Management Organisation U.S. Defence Information Systems Agency (DISA), MIL-STD-6017 Variable length bit-oriented syntax Very efficient bit-oriented standard designed for use in low communications bandwidth environments for time critical activities such as Fire Control, Close Air Support and Tactical Situational Message structure 11 Functional Areas, 110 Messages, 1510 Data Elements School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

VMF Position Report Message
Index No. DFI DUI DUI Name Bits Cat Group Code 1 4004 012 URN 24 M 2 4014 001 GPI 2.1 281 402 UNIT LATITUDE 25 X G1 2.2 282 UNIT LONGITUDE 26 3 4119 005 LOCATION QUALITY 4 275 ORIGINATOR ENVIRONMENT CATEGORY School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

VMF Integrated Database

Link 16 Provides for exchange of air, space, surface, subsurface, and ground tracks using “J” series messages and operating in the upper UHF spectrum, and for the identification, location, and status of friendly forces. Message Structure A combination of one initial word and any legal combination of extension and continuation words School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Link 16 Participant Location Message
Index No. Field Name Bits Datatype 1 J2.0I 2 integer 1.1 TRACK NUMBER 32 string 1.2 POSITION QUALITY 24 J2.0E 2.1 LATITUDE 64 2.2 LONGITUDE 3 J2.0C 3.1 ORIGINATOR ENVIRONMENT 16 School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

XML-Link 16 Format School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Message Format Mapping (1)
Generate each XML Schema of message formats VMF side Input: Specification of VMF message stored in VID(VMF Integration Database) Output: XML-VMF schema definition Link 16 side Output: XML-Link 16 schema definition School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

VMF Integrated Database VMF XML Schema Definition <xsd:element name="POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element ref="URN" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xsd:element ref="POSITION" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xsd:element ref="LOCATION_QUALITY" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xsd:element ref="ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> … School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Link 16 XML Schema Definition <xsd:element name="PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE"> <xsd:complexType> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element ref="J2.0I" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xsd:element ref="J2.0E" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xsd:element ref="J2.0C" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> <xsd:element name="J2.0I"> <xsd:element ref="TRACK_NUMBER" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xsd:element ref="POSITION_QUALITY" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> … School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Message Ontology mapping (2)
Transform XML Schema to OWL ontology VMF side Input: XML-VMF schema definition Output: OWL for VMF, VMF Normalization Map Link 16 side Input: XML-Link 16 schema definition Output: OWL for Link 16, Link 16 Normalization Map School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Ontology for VMF Ontology ( VMFMessage Class (POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE partial) Class (URN partial) Class (POSITION partial) Class (LOCATION_QUALITY partial) Class (UNIT_LATITUDE partial) Class (UNIT_LONGITUDE partial) Class (ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY partial) ObjectProperty(hasURN domain(POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE) range(URN)) ObjectProperty(hasP domain(POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE) range(POSITION)) ObjectProperty(hasULo domain(POSITION) range(UNIT_LONGITUDE)) ObjectProperty(hasULa domain(POSITION) range(UNIT_LATITUDE)) ObjectProperty(hasLQ domain(POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE) range(LOCATION_QUALITY)) ObjectProperty(hasOEC domain(POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE) range(ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY)) ) Relationship School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Ontology for Link 16 Ontology ( Link16Message Class (PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE partial) Class (J2.0I partial) Class (J2.0C partial) Class (J2.0E partial) Class (TRACK_NUMBER partial) Class (POSITION_QUALITY partial) Class (ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY partial) Class (LONGITUDE partial) Class (LATITUDE partial) ObjectProperty(hasInitWord domain(PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE) range(J2.0I)) ObjectProperty(hasContWord domain(PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE) range(J2.0C)) ObjectProperty(hasExtWord domain(PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE) range(J2.0E)) ObjectProperty(hasTN domain(J2.0I) range(TRACK_NUMBER)) ObjectProperty(hasPQ domain(J2.0I) range(POSITION_QUALITY)) ObjectProperty(hasLa domain(J2.0C) range(LATITUDE)) ObjectProperty(hasLo domain(J2.0C) range(LONGITUDE)) ObjectProperty(hasOEC domain(J2.0C) range(ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY)) ) Relationship School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Message Ontology mapping (3)
Map OWL ontologies one another Intermediate side Input: OWL for VMF, OWL for Link 16 Output: Mapping Definition between VMF and Link 16 School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Ontology Mapping of VMF Position Report Message and Link 16 Participant Location Message Similarity_1 RelationTransform_1 AttributeTransform_1 School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Similarity Definition <j.0:Concept rdf:about="Map#Concept_1"> <j.0:relatedTo rdf:resource=" </j.0:Concept> <j.0:Similarity rdf:about="Map#Similarity_1"> <j.0:similarityOutput> <j.0:Concept rdf:about="Map#Concept_2"> <j.0:relatedTo rdf:resource="Ontology2.owl#PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE"/> </j.0:similarityOutput> <j.0:similarityInput rdf:resource="Map#Concept_1"/> <j.0:operationName>Similarity_1</j.0:operationName> </j.0:Similarity> Similarity on OWLmt School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

RelationTransform Definition <j.0:RelationTransform rdf:about="Map#RelationTransform_1"> <j.0:conceptOperationLocalName>Ontology2.owl#TRACK_NUMBER|relationURN|</j.0:conceptOperationLocalName> <j.0:conceptOperation>Ontology1.owl#URN|Map#Similarity_1|Ontology2.owl#TRACK_NUMBER|</j.0:conceptOperation> <j.0:operationName>RelationTransform_1</j.0:operationName> <j.0:includedIn rdf:resource="Map#Similarity_1"/> <j.0:inputPath>Ontology1.owl#POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE|Ontology1.owl#hasURN|Ontology1.owl#URN|</j.0:inputPath> <j.0:outputPath>Ontology2.owl#PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE|Ontology2.owl#hasInitWord|Ontology2.owl#J2.0I|Ontology2.owl#hasTN|Ontology2.owl#TRACK_NUMBER|</j.0:outputPath> … </j.0:RelationTransform> RelationTransform on OWLmt School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

AttributeTransform Definition <j.0:AttributeTransform rdf:about="Map#AttributeTransform_1"> <j.0:inputPath>Ontology2.owl#PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE|Ontology2.owl#hasInitWord|Ontology2.owl#J2.0I|Ontology2.owl#hasTN|Ontology2.owl#TRACK_NUMBER|Ontology2.owl#trackNumber|</j.0:inputPath> ... <j.0:functionPath>function Copy(arg0){return arg0;}</j.0:functionPath> <j.0:operationName>AttributeTransform_1</j.0:operationName> <j.0:functionInputList>urn </j.0:functionInputList> <j.0:attributeOutput rdf:resource="/Map#Attribute_2"/> <j.0:inputPath>Ontology1.owl#POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE|Ontology1.owl#hasURN|Ontology1.owl#URN|Ontology1.owl#urn|</j.0:inputPath> </j.0:AttributeTransform> AttributeTransform on OWLmt School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Source VMF Message Binary VMF Message XML-VMF Message <POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="CHECK_FIRE_MESSAGE.xsd"> <URN index="1">KOREA ARMY BLOCK</URN> <POSITION index="2"> <UNIT_LATITUDE index="2.1">37 30N</UNIT_LATITUDE> <UNIT_LONGITUDE index="2.2">127 00E</UNIT_LONGITUDE> </POSITION> <LOCATION_QUALITY index="3">100M</LOCATION_QUALITY> <ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY index="4">LAND</ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY> </POSITION_REPORT_MESSAGE> School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Translated XML-Link 16 Message
<PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE.xsd"> <J2.0I index=“1”> <TRACK_NUMBER index="1.1">KOREA ARMY BLOCK</TRACK_NUMBER> <POSITION_QUALITY index=“1.2">100M</POSITION_QUALITY> </J2.0I> <J2.0E index=“2”> <LATITUDE index=“2.1">37 30N</LATITUDE> <LONGITUDE index=“2.2">127 00E</LONGITUDE> </J2.0E> <J2.0C index=“3”> <ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY index=“3.1">LAND </ORIGINATOR_ENVIRONMENT_CATEGORY> </J2.0C> </PARTICIPANT_LOCATION_MESSAGE> School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

V. Conclusion School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

SEROM Consistent description of message format at using OWL. Structure: class, property (domain, range) Datatype: datatype property (boolean, float, string, date, etc.) Restriction: quantifier, hasValue, cardinality Separation of concern: mapping only focus on semantic mismatches Support explicit semantic mapping definition at the level of conceptual knowledge using OWL Mapping Schema Easy mapping: GUI based tree mapping using OWL Mapping Schema Automatic translation by generic Mapping Engine (OWL mapping interpreter) Solution to translator development and maintenance cost School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

References (1) Heterogeneity Visser P, Jones D, Bench-Capon T and Shave M, “Assessing heterogeneity by classifying ontology mismatches”, Proceedings FOIS’98, IOS Press, pp 148—162, 1998. Meenakshi Nagarajan, Kunal Verma, Amit P. Sheth, John Miller, Jon Lathem, "Semantic Interoperability of Web Services – Challenges and Experiences", Canonical Data Model, Message Broker Jörn Guy Süß1, Michael Mewes, “An architecture proposal for enterprise message brokers”, the Second International Workshop on Engineering Distributed Objects , November 2000. David S. Dodge, “Gateways - 101”, IEEE MILCOM, 2001. Cui, Z; Shepherdson, J; Li, Y, "Staying `On Message' — Mapping from A to B", BT Technology Journal, Volume 21, Oct 2003. XML and OWL OWL: W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004, XML Schema1.1: W3C, Bohring, H.; Auer, S., “Mapping XML to OWL Ontologies”, Leipziger Informatik-Tage (LIT 2005), 2005. W3C, XML Path Language (XPath) Version 1.0, School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

References (2) Ontology Mapping Michael Czajkowski, Benjamin Ashpole, Todd Hughes, Tuong Le, “Bridging Semantic eGovernment Applications Using Ontology-to-Ontology Message Translation”, American Association for Artificial Intelligence ( Mirella Dell'Erba, "An ontology-based approach to semantic interoperability in the tourism domain", Dec 2002. Harmonise, IST , Tourism Harmonisation Network, Deliverable 3.2 Semantic mapping and Reconciliation Engine subsystems. Isabel F. Cruz, Huiyong Xiao, Feihong Hsu, “An Ontology-based Framework for XML Semantic Integration”, Proceedings of the International Database Engineering and Applications Symposium (IDEAS’04), 2004. Artemis A Semantic Web Servicebased P2P Infrastructure for the Interoperability of Medical Information Systems, OWL Mapping Tool (OWLmt), artemis/owlmt/. S. Suwanmannee, D. Benslimane and Ph. Thiran, "OWL-based Approach for Semantic Interoperability", in the Proceedings of AINA, IEEE Computer Science Press, March 2005. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

References (3) Tactical Data Link 윤은채, 이지현, 강성원, 이노복, “가변 포맷 메시지로부터 XML 포맷 메시지로의 변환 기술”, 한국통신학회 2006년도 추계종합학술발표회 논문집 7A IT I 167, 2006. Department of Defense, “Joint Technical Architecture Volume I, Version 6.0, October 2003. DOD, MIL-STD-6017, Variable Message Format, Apirl 2004. DOD, MIL-STD-6020, Data Forwarding Between Tactical Data Links, March 2004. Joseph J. Molitoris, "USE OF COTS XML AND WEB TECHNOLOGY FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE C2 SYSTEMS", IEEE, 2003. Joergensen, F.D. Larsen, P.G. Stadtmueller, J.M., ” Untangling technology debates on information sharing and interoperability”, Military Communications Conference 2005 (MILCOM), 2005. School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Thank you School of Engineering, Eunchae Yoon

Software Architecture Lab.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Software Architecture Lab."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Software Architecture Lab.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Software Architecture Lab."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback