Semantic testing in oneM2M

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.

Advertisements

Dr. Leo Obrst MITRE Information Semantics Information Discovery & Understanding Command & Control Center February 6, 2014February 6, 2014February 6, 2014.

CH-4 Ontologies, Querying and Data Integration. Introduction to RDF(S) RDF stands for Resource Description Framework. RDF is a standard for describing.

Developing a Metadata Exchange Format for Mathematical Literature David Ruddy Project Euclid Cornell University Library DML 2010 Paris 7 July 2010.

ESDSWG2011 – Semantic Web session Semantic Web Sub-group Session ESDSWG 2011 Meeting – Semantic Web sub-group session Wednesday, November 2, 2011 Norfolk,

Semantic Web Introduction

A Visual Approach to Semantic Query Design Using a Web-Based Graphical Query Designer Paul R. Smart, Alistair Russell, Dave Braines, Yannis Kalfoglou,,

Semantic Annotation Options for Release2 Group Name: MAS WG Source: Catalina Mladin, Lijun Dong, InterDigital Meeting Date: Agenda Item: TBD.

Samad Paydar Web Technology Laboratory Computer Engineering Department Ferdowsi University of Mashhad 1389/11/20 An Introduction to the Semantic Web.

A Really Brief Crash Course in Semantic Web Technologies Rocky Dunlap Spencer Rugaber Georgia Tech.

TST WG Progress Report at TP 18 Group Name: TST WG Source: TST WG Chair, JaeSeung Song (KETI) Meeting Date: to Agenda Item: TP18,

9 th Open Forum on Metadata Registries Harmonization of Terminology, Ontology and Metadata 20th – 22nd March, 2006, Kobe Japan. XMDR Prototype Day: 21.

The Semantic Web Web Science Systems Development Spring 2015.

Discussions for oneM2M Semantics Standardization Group Name: WG5 Source: InterDigital Communications Meeting Date: Agenda Item: WI-0005 ASN/MN-CSE.

Digital Enterprise Research Institute HADA – An Access Controlled Application for Publishing and Discovering Linked Government Data Owen Sacco.

The MMI Tools Carlos Rueda Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute OOS Semantic Interoperability Workshop Marine Metadata Interoperability Project Boulder,

1 Ontology-based Semantic Annotatoin of Process Template for Reuse Yun Lin, Darijus Strasunskas Depart. Of Computer and Information Science Norwegian Univ.

Metadata. Generally speaking, metadata are data and information that describe and model data and information For example, a database schema is the metadata.

Ontoprise: B 3 - Semantic B2B Broker whitepaper review Bernhard Schueler CSCI 8350, Spring 2002,UGA.

©Ferenc Vajda 1 Semantic Grid Ferenc Vajda Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

What and Why? Next steps for oneM2M Semantics Group Name: WG5 Source: Joerg Swetina, Martin Bauer (NEC) Meeting Date: Agenda Item: WI-0005 oneM2M-MAS

June 15, 2009GITB Open Meeting, Brussels1 GITB Alternative Architectures and Business Models CEN/ISSS eBIF Global eBusiness Interoperability Test Bed Methodologies.

Using Semantic Mapping to Manage Heterogeneity in XLIFF Interoperability by Dave Lewis, Rob Brennan, Alan Meehan, Declan O’Sullivan CNGL Centre for Global.

Ontology Architectural Support Options Group Name: MAS WG Source: Catalina Mladin, Lijun Dong, InterDigital Meeting Date: Agenda Item: TBD.

Tool for Ontology Paraphrasing, Querying and Visualization on the Semantic Web Project By Senthil Kumar K III MCA (SS)‏

Introduction to the Semantic Web and Linked Data Module 1 - Unit 2 The Semantic Web and Linked Data Concepts 1-1 Library of Congress BIBFRAME Pilot Training.

Step by step approach Group Name: WG2 Source: Michael hs. Yang, LG uplus, Jaeseung Song, NEC Europe, Meeting.

Technical questions on oneM2M certification Group Name: TST Source: JaeSeung Song KETI, TST WG Chair Meeting Date: Agenda.

Ontology Resource Discussion

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Plenary and WGs Meetings Jeju, Korea, June 25, 2009 Jeong-Dong Kim, Doo-Kwon Baik, Dongwon Jeong {kjd4u,

THE BIBFRAME EDITOR AND THE LC PILOT Module 3 – Unit 1 The Semantic Web and Linked Data : a Recap of the Key Concepts Library of Congress BIBFRAME Pilot.

Ontology Architectural Support Options Group Name: MAS WG Source: Catalina Mladin, Lijun Dong, InterDigital Meeting Date: Agenda Item: TBD.

TST WG Progress Report at TP 19 Group Name: TP Source: TST WG Chair, JaeSeung Song (KETI) Meeting Date: to Agenda Item: TP19, Item.

ELIS – Multimedia Lab PREMIS OWL Sam Coppens Multimedia Lab Department of Electronics and Information Systems Faculty of Engineering Ghent University.

Management of Semantic Instances in resources using SPARQL update operation with HTTP verbs Group Name: MAS 19 Source: Minwoo Ryu, jaeho Kim, Sungchan.

1 Open Ontology Repository initiative - Planning Meeting - Thu Co-conveners: PeterYim, LeoObrst & MikeDean ref.:

OIC INTERWORKING OPERATIONAL PROCEDURE (ADDRESSING AND DISCOVERY) Group Name: Architecture WG Source: Kiran Vedula, Samsung Electronics,

Issues pertaining to IOP test Group Name: TST Source: Jiaxin Yin, Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Meeting Date: Agenda Item: TBD.

© The ATHENA Consortium. Susan Thomas SAP AG, Research Department How do you do semantics? Semantic Web Drawings by Sebastian Cremers Unit 3:

Architectural Considerations for Semantic Support Group Name: WG5 Source: Martin Bauer (NEC), Joerg Swetina (NEC) Meeting Date: Agenda Item:

WG5 – MAS#19 Status Report Group Name: WG5 MAS (Management, Abstraction & Semantics) Source: Yongjing Zhang (Huawei, WG5 Chair) Meeting Date:

Protocol Issues related to Plugtest Group Name: TST Source: Wolfgang Granzow, Qualcomm Inc., Meeting Date: Agenda.

TST WG Progress Report at TP 18 Group Name: TP Source: TST WG Chair, JaeSeung Song (KETI) Meeting Date: to Agenda Item: TP18, Item.

Conformance Test Development Process discussion Group Name: TST WG Source: InterDigital Meeting Date: TST Conformance_Test_Development_Procedures.

TST Developing_SEC_TP Developing SEC TP - discussion Group Name: TST WG Source: Easy Global Market (EGM) Meeting Date:

TST WG Status Report to TP #21 Group Name: TP Source: TST WG Chair, JaeSeung Song (KETI) Meeting Date: to Agenda Item: TP21, Item.

Linked Open Data for European Earth Observation Products Carlo Matteo Scalzo CTO, Epistematica epistematica.

Of 24 lecture 11: ontology – mediation, merging & aligning.

26/02/ WSMO – UDDI Semantics Review Taxonomies and Value Sets Discussion Paper Max Voskob – February 2004 UDDI Spec TC V4 Requirements.

SysML v2 Model Interoperability & Standard API Requirements Axel Reichwein Consultant, Koneksys December 10, 2015.

2 nd oneM2M Interoperability Event Prof. Song JaeSeung (KETI, TST WG Chair) TST Introduction-to-2 nd -interop-event.

Discussion for Testing related Activities Group Name: TP Source: JaeSeung Song, KETI, Meeting Date: Agenda.

Setting the stage: linked data concepts Moving-Away-From-MARC-a-thon.

oneM2M Testing and Dev. Support

Session: Towards systematically curating and integrating

oneM2M interop 3 issues and optimizations

Group multicast fanOut Procedure

2nd Interoperability testing issues

Discussions on Heterogeneous Identification Service

MAF&MEF Interface Specification discussion of the next steps

TS-0034 scope against TS-0001, and managing stage 2 Semantics

Web Ontology Language for Service (OWL-S)

Service Layer Dynamic Authorization [SLDA]

Presented by: Jacky Ma Date: 11 Dec 2001

Session 2: Metadata and Catalogues

Resource Description Framework (RDF)

Semantic-Web, Triple-Strores, and SPARQL

Taxonomy of public services

Taxonomy of public services

Presentation transcript:

Semantic testing in oneM2M Group Name: TST Source: Mengxuan Zhao, Easy Global Market, mengxuan.zhao@eglobalmark.com JaeSeung Song, Sejong University, jssong@sejong.ac.kr Meeting Date: TST 31 Agenda Item: TST-2017-0240-semantic_testing_proposal

oneM2M semantic enablement Resource level (TS0001) Semantic Descriptor Semantic FanOut point Other? Model level (TS 0012) oneM2M base ontology Other ontologies mapped to BO need to be tested? Operation level (TS0001) Semantic discovery procedure Semantic testing needs to cover all the levels above Conformance testing Interoperability testing

Semantic testing on resource level oneM2M testing framework has been focusing on resource level testing so far Quite similar to classic oneM2M test cases With the semanticDescriptor and semanticFanoutPoint specifications available, this step should not create much difficuties

Semantic testing on model level Main target: the content of « descriptor » of semanticDescriptor, semantic annotation in RDF triples Tested against the reference ontology specified in the resource Reference: TS-0034 7.10 Issuer Ontology hosting CSE Linked <semanticDescriptor> hosting CSE 1. request to validate a <semanticDescriptor> resource (Update <semanticValidation>) 2. retrieve linked <semanticDescriptor> 3. validate <semanticDescriptor> against referenced ontology 4. validation response

Basic aspects and potential semantic tests on model level Lexical tests (test1) Ill-formed RDF serialization format (XML, JSON, etc.) Syntactic tests (test2) Untyped resources and literal (test3) Ill-formed URIs and language tags on literals (test4) Problematic prefix namespaces (test5) Unknown properties and classes Semantic tests (test6) Problematic Inheritance relationships for classes and properties (test7) Inconsistency of classes and individuals (instances) Cardinality tests (test8) Cardinality inconsistency regarding the ontology Online tool available to execute these tests in the semantic annotation (reference: MAS-2016-0242)

Semantic testing on operation level Semantic discovery procedure specified in TS0001 10.2.35 Using SPARQL queries to find matched descriptors in semanticDescriptor For testing purpose, dedicated semantic resources may be needed to check the procedure execution result

Semantic testing example Preconditions: a common reference ontology Semantic descriptions are correct annotation (validated at the model level) AE 1 submits resources with semantic description AE 2 fomulates a SPARQL query to discover semantic resources based on « type » or « phenomena » or other criteria Check the discovery result with the initial resources submitted by AE 1

Discussion point New specs for semantic testing? What would be the exact scope of semantic Interop. & Conformance testing? Could the current testing framework and test cases are enough to perform semantic testing? New profiles for semantics are required: AE, MN and IN