1 / 7

Illustrating GeoSpatial Semantics

Service Directory. Discover / Details. Publish. Service Consumer. Service Provide r. Bind / Invoke. Illustrating GeoSpatial Semantics. “Factory”. Concepts. Factory. Symbols/ Information. Objects.

philip-madden
Télécharger la présentation

Illustrating GeoSpatial Semantics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ServiceDirectory Discover / Details Publish Service Consumer Service Provider Bind / Invoke Illustrating GeoSpatial Semantics “Factory” Concepts Factory Symbols/ Information Objects Gary Berg-Cross, Executive Secretary , Spatial Ontology Community of Practice (SOCoP) gbergcross@gmail.com 6th Semi-Annual Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) e-Gov Conference MITRE, McLean VA 29 Sept.2008 “denotata” relates signs to things in the world

  2. A semantic continuum Port: “A place on a waterway with facilities for loading and unloading ships. b. A city or town on a waterway with such facilities. c. The waterfront district of a city.” Formal Vocabulary for Port + background knowledge as axioms [After Mike Uschold, Boeing Corp] (Port differentFrom .. HasfunctionalProperty.. (Port isA (superclasses (…)) Shared human consensus Semantics hardwired; used at runtime Semantics processed and used at runtime Text descriptions Implicit Informal (explicit) Formal (for humans) RDF/RDFS Formal (for machines) OWL • Further to the right means: • Less ambiguity • More likely to have correct functionality • “Better” inter-operation • Less hardwiring • More robust to change • More difficult –needs ontological engineering methods

  3. OWL Builds on Layers below it in the Semantic Web stack • The XML syntax for exchange & XML data types (how OWL is expressed) • RDF instances & RDFS generic (ontology) statements: • OWL supports mapping among ontologies: • Import one data model/ontology into another: all things that are true in the imported ontology will thereby be true in the importing ontology • Assert that a class, property, or instance in one ontology/DB/knowledge base is equivalent to one in another ontology From 2004 Tutorial on OWL by Peter Patel-Schneider

  4. Ports Semantic Architecture Ontology Intelligence Report Ontology Service Ontology Product Ontology Semi-structured Text -ONI Reports / ASAM -World Port Index Text Parser GSW Servlet KnowledgeSmarts API Oracle Connector RDF tuples <object > < > < > < > </object > Web Sites Shipping DB Rule Engine DL Reasoner ENC Feature DB OWL Mapping DNC Feature DB KMS Mapping Web Services -Maritime ship info -WFS (GML) From SOCoP Presentation at Tech Days, May, 2008based on work by Mike Wilkins & Jim Ressler,Northrop Grumman IT TASC 4

  5. Ports of Origin Use Case Given suspect ships departed from known country, what ports and piers could the ships have originated considering ship characteristics, port characteristics and intelligence? From SOCoP Presentation at Tech Days May, 2008\ based on work by Mike Wilkins & Jim Ressler, Northrop Grumman IT TASC

  6. To express C In a Language L (Terms in L correspond to entities in world) and assign Interpretative Functions I Pragmatic validation Location of a ship is a Geospatial Entity Conceptualization starts to model (part of) the world UML OWL 2 Abstraction 1 PortSituations Ship in Port Models for Domain D Expressible In L Intended Model Fitting C Our Ontology Product (C for D with K in L using Model) Ontology Models for D Expressed In L using K Adapted liberally from Guarino’s 1998 Formal Ontology in Information Systems Models defines relationship between L syntax and interpretations Ontologies Arise from “Analysis and Conceptualization”

  7. SAW Ontology

More Related