Upload
adina
View
48
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
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 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
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
Copyright 2008 by CEBT
Outline
Introduction
SOUPA Project
SOUPA Overview
Related Ontologies
SOUPA Ontologies SOUPA Core
SOUPA Extension
SOUPA Applications
Conclusions
Discussion
2
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
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
4
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
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
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
Copyright 2008 by CEBT
SOUPA Ontologies
SOUPA SOUPA Core
SOUPA Extension
8
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
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:recipient entity that receives the effect after the action is performed
– act:target object that the action applies to
– act:location location where the action is performed
– act:time time at which the action is performed
– Act:instrument thing that the actor uses to perform the action
10
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
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
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
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
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
Copyright 2008 by CEBT
SOUPA Applications
Two Prototypes Room 338 [CoBrA]
Bob’s Palmtop [MoGATU]
16
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
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