DOCSLIB.ORG

Bridging the Gap Between User Generated Spatial Content and the Semantic Web

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bridging the Gap Between User Generated Spatial Content and the Semantic Web Gianfranco Gliozzo Msc GIMA Master thesis Bridging the gap between user generated spatial content and the semantic web Bridging the gap between user generated spatial content and the semantic web Master of Science Thesis Gianfranco Gliozzo December 10 th 2010 Professor: Prof. Dr. M.J. (Menno-Jan) Kraak, Department of Geoinformation Processing Faculty of Geoinformation Science and Earth Observation University of Twente Supervisor: Dr. Ir. Rob Lemmens Department of Geoinformation Processing Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation University of Twente Supervisor: Aldo Gangemi Senior Researcher Semantic Technology Lab (STLab) Institute for Cognitive Science and Technology, Italian National Research Council (ISTC-CNR) Reviewer: Mw. drs. M.E. (Marian) de Vries OTB Research Institute for the Built Environment Delft University of technology i Gianfranco Gliozzo Msc GIMA Master thesis Bridging the gap between user generated spatial content and the semantic web ii Gianfranco Gliozzo Msc GIMA Master thesis Bridging the gap between user generated spatial content and the semantic web Acknowledgments The present work could not have been completed without the loving support of my parents and my sister, old and new friends made on the occasion of the thesis. Let me quote my cousin, Alfio, always ready to stimulate and to suggest visions from a different perspective, he is the “guilty”, who suggested me the way of the semantic web and introduced me to Aldo Gangemi. Aldo Gangemi I will always be grateful for his generous support. The fantastic community of OpenStreetMap with in particular I want to thank simone (Simone Cortesi) for our long and pleasant conversations on OpenStreetMap story and perspectives and for his kind suggestions, tosky as well (Luigi Toscano) and David Paleino for their generous and tireless support in the struggle with open source applications and operating systems. iii Gianfranco Gliozzo Msc GIMA Master thesis Bridging the gap between user generated spatial content and the semantic web Table of contents Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................. iii Table of contents.................................................................................................................iv Table of figures..................................................................................................................vii Table of tables.................................................................................................................. viii Abstract................................................................................................................................1 PART I: TECHNOLOGIES, TOOLS AND RESOURCES............................................3 1 Chapter one: background. ..........................................................................................4 1.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................4 1.2 Web2.0 or social web ............................................................................................4 1.3 Geoweb2.0.............................................................................................................5 1.4 Quality of Crowdsourced data...............................................................................5 1.5 VGI data quality analysis ......................................................................................6 1.6 Modelling the problem: semantic heterogeneity in multiple databases ................7 1.7 Naming conflict: solving approaches....................................................................7 1.8 Web 3.0 or semantic web.......................................................................................8 1.9 Geoweb3.0.............................................................................................................9 1.10 A step further – innovation aimed at ..............................................................10 Research aims ...............................................................................................................10 1.11 Problem setting...............................................................................................10 1.12 Problem statement ..........................................................................................12 1.13 Research objectives and questions..................................................................12 1.14 Research Limitations ......................................................................................13 Extent limitations:....................................................................................................13 1.15 Research Method ............................................................................................14 Method Extent limitations........................................................................................14 Research Depth limitations ......................................................................................14 1.16 Thesis development ........................................................................................15 2 Chapter two: The web environment: from web 2.0 to the semantic web. ...............16 Introduction...................................................................................................................16 2.1 The web of data ...................................................................................................16 2.2 Semantic web stack .............................................................................................16 2.3 Queries in SPARQL ............................................................................................19 2.3.1 Query forms ...............................................................................................19 2.3.2 Dealing with precision...............................................................................20 2.4 Ontologies ...........................................................................................................20 2.4.1 Formalised ontologies................................................................................21 2.4.2 Ontology matching.....................................................................................22 2.4.3 Elicited ontologies .....................................................................................22 2.4.4 Ontologic precision/expressivity ...............................................................23 2.4.5 Ontologies and folksonomies.....................................................................24 2.5 The environment of the proposed development: Linking Open Data.................25 2.5.1 DBpedia .....................................................................................................26 2.5.2 Geodata in DBpedia...................................................................................26 iv Gianfranco Gliozzo Msc GIMA Master thesis Bridging the gap between user generated spatial content and the semantic web 2.6 WordNet and WordNet RDF/OWL .....................................................................27 2.6.1 WordNet data model ..................................................................................28 2.6.2 Previous applications of WordNet in GI....................................................29 2.6.3 WordNet in the semantic web....................................................................29 2.7 Folksonomies and the semantic web...................................................................30 2.8 Maturity of ontology development......................................................................32 3 Chapter three: Geoweb 2.0 and OpenStreetMap......................................................33 Introduction...................................................................................................................33 3.1 OpenStreetMap and VGI.....................................................................................33 3.2 Data in OpenStreetMap.......................................................................................36 3.3 The OSM structure ..............................................................................................37 3.4 Data format..........................................................................................................38 3.5 Database ..............................................................................................................39 3.6 Tools to extract data.............................................................................................42 4 Chapter four: OpenStreetMap and the semantic web ..............................................43 Introduction...................................................................................................................43 4.1 Geographic Information ontologies.....................................................................43 4.2 Semantic efforts and OpenStreetMap..................................................................44 4.3 The Semantic MediaWiki – Machine readable map feature list effort................45 4.4 LinkedGeoData ...................................................................................................46 4.4.1 Overview....................................................................................................46 4.4.2 The LinkedGeoData ontology....................................................................46
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Need for Ontologies: Bridging the Barriers of Terminology and Data Structure
    spe482-10 page 1 The Geological Society of America Special Paper 482 2011 The need for ontologies: Bridging the barriers of terminology and data structure Leo Obrst* The MITRE Corporation, 7515 Colshire Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102-7508, USA Patrick Cassidy MICRA, Inc., 735 Belvidere Ave., Plainfield, New Jersey 07062, USA ABSTRACT This chapter describes the need for complex semantic models, i.e., ontologies of real-world categories, referents, and instances, to go beyond the barriers of terminol- ogy and data structures. Terms and local data structures are often tolerated in infor- mation technology because these are simpler, provide structures that humans can seemingly interpret easily and easily use for their databases and computer programs, and are locally salient. In particular, we focus on both the need for ontologies for data integration of databases, and the need for foundational ontologies to help address the issue of semantic interoperability. In other words, how do you span disparate domain ontologies, which themselves represent the real-world semantics of possibly multiple databases? We look at both sociocultural and geospatial domains and pro- vide rationale for using foundational and domain ontologies for complex applications. We also describe the use of the Common Semantic Model (COSMO) ontology here, which is based on lexical-conceptual primitives originating in natural language, but we also allow room for alternative choices of foundational ontologies. The emphasis throughout this chapter is on database issues and the use of ontologies specifically for semantic data integration and system interoperability. INTRODUCTION Nationwide, lack of semantic interoperability is estimated to have cost U.S. businesses over $100 billion per year in lost produc- Differing terminology and different database structures tivity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_interoperability).
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT an ADAPTATION METHODOLOGY for REUSING ONTOLOGIES by Vishal Bathija Ontologies Are an Emerging Means of Knowledge Repres
    ABSTRACT AN ADAPTATION METHODOLOGY FOR REUSING ONTOLOGIES By Vishal Bathija Ontologies are an emerging means of knowledge representation that can improve information organization and management in an application. They have demonstrated their value in numerous application areas such as intelligent information integration or information brokering since they offer the technical support for sharing and exchanging information between human and/or software agents. Despite their successes, their time- consuming and expensive development process deters the prevalent use of ontologies. Thus, research is focusing on ways to improve the process of ontology construction which involves recognizing, representing, and recording concept definitions and their relationships. This thesis research investigates existing methods for ontology learning and develops ontology adaptation software architecture for transforming an ontology from one domain to a related or similar domain. Using this software, the SEURAT’s Argument Ontology for the domain of software engineering is adapted to create an initial ontology that supports engineering design for the specific problem domain of spacecraft design. AN ADAPTATION METHODOLOGY FOR REUSING ONTOLOGIES A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Computer Science Department of Computer Science & Systems Analysis by Vishal Bathija Miami University Oxford, Ohio 2006 Advisor______________________________________ Dr. Valerie Cross Reader_______________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Ontologies and Semantic
    Ontologies for the Intelligence Community (OIC) 2009 Tutorial: Information Semantics 101: Semantics, Semantic Models, Ontologies, Knowledge Representation, and the Semantic Web Dr. Leo Obrst Information Semantics Information Discovery & Understanding Command & Control Center MITRE [email protected] October 20, 2009 Copyright © Leo Obrst, MITRE, 2009 Overview • This course introduces Information Semantics, i.e., Semantics, Semantic Models, Ontologies, Knowledge Representation, and the Semantic Web • Presents the technologies, tools, methods of ontologies • Describes the Semantic Web and emerging standards Brief Definitions (which we‘ll revisit): • Information Semantics: Providing semantic representation for our systems, our data, our documents, our agents • Semantics: Meaning and the study of meaning • Semantic Models: The Ontology Spectrum: Taxonomy, Thesaurus, Conceptual Model, Logical Theory, the range of models in increasing order of semantic expressiveness • Ontology: An ontology defines the terms used to describe and represent an area of knowledge (subject matter) • Knowledge Representation: A sub-discipline of AI addressing how to represent human knowledge (conceptions of the world) and what to represent, so that the knowledge is usable by machines • Semantic Web: "The Semantic Web is an extension of the current web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation." - T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. 2001. The Semantic Web. In The Scientific American, May, 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fuzzy Grassroots Ontology for Improving Weblog Extraction
    A Fuzzy Grassroots Ontology for improving Weblog Extraction Edy Portmann, Andreas Meier Information Systems Research Group Department of Informatics University of Fribourg Journal of Digital Boulevard de Pérolles 90 Information Management CH-1700 Fribourg Switzerland {edy.portmann, andreas.meier}@unifr.ch ABSTRACT: This paper presents fuzzy clustering algorithms to top-down-approach of ontologies, because fuzzy sets are establish a grassroots ontology – a machine-generated weak more suitable for characterizing vague information. Murthy ontology – based on folksonomies. Furthermore, it describes and Biswas state in [3] that fuzzy logic is an addition to a search engine for vaguely associated terms and aggregates conservative logic and handles the concept of partial truth them into several meaningful cluster categories, based on the along with true and false, which is used for qualitative rather introduced weak grassroots ontology. A potential application than quantitative judgement. Hence fuzzy logic follows the of this ontology, weblog extraction, is illustrated using a simple way humans think and helps to handle real world complexi- example. Added value and possible future studies are discussed ties more efficiently. Therefore, it converts imprecise human in the conclusion. information to precise mathematical models. Consider, for example, the following paradox of a marriage: I Categories and Subject Descriptors cannot live with her, and I cannot live without her. Both state- I.2.3 [Deduction and Theorem Proving]; Uncertainty, ``fuzzy,'' and ments are – to a certain degree – true. The dynamic between probabilistic reasoning: H.3.3 [Information Search and Retrieval]; those statements is – along with other things – what keeps Clustering marriage interesting. That is what fuzzy logic deals with.
    [Show full text]
  • Axiomatized Relationships Between Ontologies by Carmen Chui A
    Axiomatized Relationships Between Ontologies by Carmen Chui A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science Graduate Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering University of Toronto c Copyright 2013 by Carmen Chui Abstract Axiomatized Relationships Between Ontologies Carmen Chui Master of Applied Science Graduate Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering University of Toronto 2013 This work focuses on the axiomatized relationships between different ontologies of varying levels of expressivity. Motivated by experiences in the decomposition of first- order logic ontologies, we partially decompose the Descriptive Ontology for Linguistic and Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE) into modules. By leveraging automated reasoning tools to semi-automatically verify the modules, we provide an account of the meta-theoretic relationships found between DOLCE and other existing ontologies. As well, we examine the composition process required to determine relationships between DOLCE modules and the Process Specification Language (PSL) ontology. Then, we propose an ontology based on the semantically-weak Computer Integrated Manufacturing Open System Ar- chitecture (CIMOSA) framework by augmenting its constructs with terminology found in PSL. Finally, we attempt to map two semantically-weak product ontologies together to analyze the applications of ontology mappings in e-commerce. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Professor Michael Gr¨uninger for his support and guidance over the course of my undergraduate and graduate studies. It is through our various discussions and brainstorming sessions that the theme for this thesis arose. His passion and enthu- siasm to explain concepts found within the fields of ontologies and logic have guided me throughout the course of writing this thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Vol.2 / No.1 January-June 2019 An Exploration of the Creative Work Ontology for the Ontology Aggregation of Social Media Edward C. K. Hung Pages 37 - 50 Received: August 6, 2018, Received in revised form: September 27, 2018, Accepted: October 16, 2018 ABSTRACT In view of the great success of social media, this paper raises an interesting question about how we should strengthen the existing social media so that we can have an even better communication means for business, education, e- government, etc. , as suggested by some scholars. This question further leads us to investigate the possibility of having a social media ontology to reveal the room for creativity and the fundamentals that must be preserved for these possible new designs. However, forging a social media ontology may require ontology aggregation of various ontologies of the popular social media platforms and therefore, trigger the data loss issue involved. This paper aims at providing a solution to this data loss issue, and proposes the use of the properties of the Creative Work Ontology for the ontology aggregation of social media. It also provides an example of the proposed solution regarding the partial ontologies of Facebook and Snapchat. KEYWORDS: Creative Work Ontology, ontology aggregation, social media Edward C. K. Hung, Ph. D. ([email protected]) is an Assistant Professor at Department of Journalism and Communication, Hong Kong Shue Yan University, Hong Kong 37 Communication and Media in Asia Pacific (CMAP) Introduction In view of the successful stories of Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Line and other social media platforms (Miles, 2014; Salman, 2018; Wojdynski & Evans, 2016), how should we study social media collectively so that we can have a better understanding of them and get ready to strengthen them in order to offer an even better communication means? Garimella and his colleagues (2018) claim that many research methods of social media are domain- specific.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology Evaluation
    Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Wirtschaftswissenschaften (Dr. rer. pol.) von der Fakult¨atf¨urWirtschaftswissenschaften des Karlsruher Instituts f¨urTechnologie (KIT) vorgelegte Dissertation von Dipl.-Inform. Zdenko Vrandeˇci´c. Ontology Evaluation Denny Vrandeˇci´c Tag der m¨undlichen Pr¨ufung: 8. June 2010 Referent: Prof. Dr. Rudi Studer Erster Koreferent: Prof. James A. Hendler, PhD. Zweiter Koreferent: Prof. Dr. Christof Weinhardt Vorsitzende der Pr¨ufungskommission: Prof. Dr. Ute Werner This document was created on June 10, 2010 Koji su dozvolili da sanjam, koji su omogu´cilida krenem, koji su virovali da ´custi´ci, Vama. -2 Acknowledgements Why does it take years to write a Ph.D.-Thesis? Because of all the people who were at my side. TonˇciVrandeˇci´c,my father, who, through the stories told about him, made me dream that anything can be achieved. Perica Vrandeˇci´c,my mother, who showed me the truth of this dream. Rudi Studer, my Doktorvater, who is simply the best supervisor one can hope for. Martina N¨oth,for carefully watching that I actually write. Elena Simperl, for giving the most valuable advises and for kicking ass. Anupriya Ankolekar, for reminding me that it is just a thesis. Uta L¨osch, for significant help. Miriam Fernandez, for trans- lating obscure Spanish texts. Markus Kr¨otzsch, for an intractable amount of reasons. York Sure, for being a mentor who never restrained, but always helped. Sebastian Rudolph and Aldo Gangemi, for conceptualizing my conceptualization of conceptual- izations. Stephan Grimm for his autoepistemic understanding. Yaron Koren, for his support for SMW while Markus and I spent more time on our theses.
    [Show full text]