1. SOUPA: Standard Ontology for Ubiquitous and Pervasive Applications Harry Chen, Filip Perich, Tim Finin, Anupam Joshi Department of Computer Science & Electrical Engineering University of Maryland, Baltimore County International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems (2004. 08. 22) 2008. 10. 01. Summarized by Babar Tareen, IDS Lab., Seoul National University Presented by Babar Tareen, IDS Lab., Seoul National University

2. Copyright  2008 by CEBT Outline  Introduction  SOUPA Project  SOUPA Overview  Related Ontologies  SOUPA Ontologies SOUPA Core SOUPA Extension  SOUPA Applications  Conclusions  Discussion 2

3. Copyright  2008 by CEBT Introduction  To represent knowledge No common ontologies No explicit semantic representation Many systems use programming language objects  Need to develop a shared ontology for supporting Knowledge sharing Context reasoning Interoperability 3

4. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Project  Project started in November 2003  GOAL Define ontologies to support pervasive computing applications  No updates since 2004  Other papers A Pervasive Computing Ontology for User Privacy Protection in the Context Broker Architecture (Harry Chen, Tim Finin, and Anupam Joshi) July 12, 2004  http://www.cs.umbc.edu/sw-ubicomp-sig/soupa-2004-06.html http://www.cs.umbc.edu/sw-ubicomp-sig/soupa-2004-06.html 4

5. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Overview  SOUPA is based on other ontologies Borrows terms from other ontologies – FOAF, DAMIL-Time, Entry Sub-ontology of Time, OpenCyc Spatial ontologies, RCC, COBRA-ONT, MoGATU BDI Ontology, Rei Policy Does not import complete ontologies to minimize overhead for reasoning Borrowed ontology terms are mapped to foreign ontology terms for interoperability – owl:equivalentClass – owl:equivalentProperty 5

6. Copyright  2008 by CEBT Related Ontologies (1)  FOAF allows the expression of personal information and relationships useful for building support for online communities  DAMIL-Time & Entry Sub-ontology of Time designed for expressing temporal concepts and properties common to any formalization of time  OpenCyc Spatial Ontologies & RCC define a comprehensive set of vocabularies for symbolic representation of space 6

7. Copyright  2008 by CEBT Related Ontologies (2)  COBRA-ONT & MoGATU BDI Ontology aimed for supporting knowledge representation and ontology reasoning  Rei Policy Ontology defines a set of concepts (rights, prohibitions, obligations and dispensations) for specifying and reasoning about security access control rules. 7

8. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Ontologies  SOUPA SOUPA Core SOUPA Extension 8

9. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Core  Consists of vocabularies for expressing concepts that are associated with Person Agent Belief-desire-intention (BDI) Action Policy Time Space Event 9

10. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Core – Details (1)  Person defines typical vocabularies for describing the contact information and the profile of a person per:Person is equivalent to foaf:Person  Policy & Action policy ontology defines vocabularies for representing security and privacy policies Actions represented by act:Action class – act:actorentity that performs the action – act:recipiententity that receives the effect after the action is performed – act:targetobject that the action applies to – act:locationlocation where the action is performed – act:timetime at which the action is performed – Act:instrumentthing that the actor uses to perform the action 10

11. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Core – Details (2)  Agent & BDI agt:Agent class represents a set of all agents – agt:believes – agt:desires – agt:intends BDI (Believe, Desire, Intention) – bdi:Fact class – bdi:Desire class – bdi:Intention class 11

12. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Core – Details (3)  Time defines a set of ontologies for expressing time and temporal relations adopts the vocabularies of the DAML-time and the entry sub-ontology of time  Space designed to support reasoning about – spatial relations between various types of geographical regions – mapping from the geo-spatial coordinates to the symbolic representation of space and vice versa – representation of geographical measurements of space 12

13. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Core – Details (4)  Event activities that have both spatial and temporal extensions event ontology can be used to describe the occurrence of – different activities – schedules – sensing events 13

14. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Extension  Purpose An extended set of vocabularies for supporting specific types of applications Demonstrate how to extend SOUPA Currently consists of experimental ontologies  Includes information about Documents Meetings Schedule Location Device 14

15. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Extension – Details (1)  Meeting & Schedule For describing typical information associated with meetings, event schedules, and event participants  Document & Digital Document For describing metainformation about documents and digital documents  Image Capture defines vocabularies for describing image capturing events (where and when a picture is taken, which device has taken the picture, etc.)  Region Connection Calculus A spatial ontology that supplements the core space ontology  Location For describing sensed location context of a person or an object 15

16. Copyright  2008 by CEBT SOUPA Applications  Two Prototypes Room 338 [CoBrA] Bob’s Palmtop [MoGATU] 16

17. Copyright  2008 by CEBT Conclusion  Overall experience in developing the SOUPA ontology was challenging what is the most appropriate ontology structure it was necessary to modify the structures and the constructs of the existing ontologies before including them into the SOUPA ontology developing methodologies to measure the success of the SOUPA ontology was difficult 17

18. Copyright  2008 by CEBT Discussion  How different is SOUPA from the concept of Domain Ontology and Upper Ontology ?  Why is project no longer active ? Is SOUPA perfect ? Or no one is using it ?  Authors have to modify existing ontologies to some extent. Isn’t it like making a completely new ontology? 18