Using Common Sense Reasoning to Enable the Semantic Web Sakda Chaiworawitkul, Alex Faaborg.

Slides:



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

(2)(2) APNOMS 2003 Introduction Web-Service –A software application identified by a URI –Its public interfaces and bindings are defined and described.
David Martin for DAML-S Coalition 05/08/2003 OWL-S: Bringing Services to the Semantic Web David Martin SRI International
International Technology Alliance In Network & Information Sciences International Technology Alliance In Network & Information Sciences Paul Smart, Ali.
1 University of Namur, Belgium PReCISE Research Center Using context to improve data semantic mediation in web services composition Michaël Mrissa (spokesman)
16/11/ IRS-II: A Framework and Infrastructure for Semantic Web Services Motta, Domingue, Cabral, Gaspari Presenter: Emilia Cimpian.
Crucial Patterns in Service- Oriented Architecture Jaroslav Král, Michal Žemlička Charles University, Prague.
SIG2: Ontology Language Standards WebOnt Briefing Ian Horrocks University of Manchester, UK.
A Linguistic Approach for Semantic Web Service Discovery International Symposium on Management Intelligent Systems 2012 (IS-MiS 2012) July 13, 2012 Jordy.
Interoperability of Distributed Component Systems Bryan Bentz, Jason Hayden, Upsorn Praphamontripong, Paul Vandal.
Multi-Phase Reasoning of temporal semantic knowledge Sakirulai O. Isiaq and Taha Osman School of Computer and Informatics Nottingham Trent University Nottingham.
Galia Angelova Institute for Parallel Processing, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Visualisation and Semantic Structuring of Content (some.
1 Dieter Fensel, The Semantic Web: A Brain for Humankind.
MobiShare: Sharing Context-Dependent Data & Services from Mobile Sources Efstratios Valavanis, Christopher Ververidis, Michalis Vazirgianis, George C.
OntoBlog: Informal Knowledge Management by Semantic Blogging Aman Shakya 1, Vilas Wuwongse 2, Hideaki Takeda 1, Ikki Ohmukai 1 1 National Institute of.
Research topics Semantic Web - Spring 2007 Computer Engineering Department Sharif University of Technology.
Interactive Systems Technical Design Seminar work: Web Services Janne Ojanaho.
U se of UDDI to publish data of s emantic w eb Anton Naumenko, Sergiy Nikitin, Vagan Terziyan, Jari Veijalainen* Jyväskylä, Finland 27 August 2005, Industrial.
A New Computing Paradigm. Overview of Web Services Over 66 percent of respondents to a 2001 InfoWorld magazine poll agreed that "Web services are likely.
Xyleme A Dynamic Warehouse for XML Data of the Web.
Semantic Web and Web Mining: Networking with Industry and Academia İsmail Hakkı Toroslu IST EVENT 2006.
The WSMO / L / X Approach Michael Stollberg DERI – Digital Enterprise Research Institute Alternative Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services: Possibilities.
The Semantic Web Week 1 Module Content + Assessment Lee McCluskey, room 2/07 Department of Computing And Mathematical Sciences Module.
Semantic Web Mobile Internet Technical Architecture Omair Javed Institute of Software Systems Tampere University of Technology.
Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park 1 Sharath Srinivas - CMSC 818Z, Spring 2007 Semantic Web and Knowledge Representation.
Samad Paydar Web Technology Laboratory Computer Engineering Department Ferdowsi University of Mashhad 1389/11/20 An Introduction to the Semantic Web.
1 DCS861A-2007 Emerging IT II Rinaldo Di Giorgio Andres Nieto Chris Nwosisi Richard Washington March 17, 2007.
1 Adapting BPEL4WS for the Semantic Web The Bottom-Up Approach to Web Service Interoperation Daniel J. Mandell and Sheila McIlraith Presented by Axel Polleres.
Web 3.0 or The Semantic Web By: Konrad Sit CCT355 November 21 st 2011.
Semantic Web Technologies Lecture # 2 Faculty of Computer Science, IBA.
Semantic Browsing Alexander Faaborg Research Assistant MIT Media Lab Carl Lagoze Senior Research Associate Cornell University Information Science ECDL.
Some Thoughts to Consider 6 What is the difference between Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science? What is the difference between Artificial Intelligence.
1 Semantic Technologies: Diamond in the Rough? Unik Graduate Research Center Dr. Juan Miguel Gomez Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
Ontology-derived Activity Components for Composing Travel Web Services Matthias Flügge Diana Tourtchaninova
Challenges in Information Retrieval and Language Modeling Michael Shepherd Dalhousie University Halifax, NS Canada.
Web Services (Part 1) Service-Oriented Architecture Overview ITEC 625 Web Development Fall 2006 Reference: Web Services and Service-Oriented Architectures.
Search Engines and Information Retrieval Chapter 1.
Practical RDF Chapter 1. RDF: An Introduction
The Semantic Web Service Shuying Wang Outline Semantic Web vision Core technologies XML, RDF, Ontology, Agent… Web services DAML-S.
A Framework to Engineer Communities of Web Services Jamal Bentahar Concordia University (Montreal, Canada) Royal Holloway, University of London July 09,
Agent Model for Interaction with Semantic Web Services Ivo Mihailovic.
* * 0 OWL-S: Ontology Web Language For Services Reyhan AYDOĞAN Emre YILMAZ 21/12/2005OWL-S: Ontology Web Language for Services.
Semantic Web Applications GoodRelations BBC Artists BBC World Cup 2010 Website Emma Nherera.
Meta Tagging / Metadata Lindsay Berard Assisted by: Li Li.
Semantic Web Fred: Project Objectives & SWF Framework Michael Stollberg Reinhold Herzog Peter Zugmann - 07 April
NLP And The Semantic Web Dainis Kiusals COMS E6125 Spring 2010.
Linked-data and the Internet of Things Payam Barnaghi Centre for Communication Systems Research University of Surrey March 2012.
Triple-space computing* The Third International Semantic Web Conference Hiroshima, Japan, Dieter Fensel Digital Enterprise.
WSMX Execution Semantics Executable Software Specification Eyal Oren DERI
EU Project proposal. Andrei S. Lopatenko 1 EU Project Proposal CERIF-SW Andrei S. Lopatenko Vienna University of Technology
Future Learning Landscapes Yvan Peter – Université Lille 1 Serge Garlatti – Telecom Bretagne.
Ranking of Web Services Eyhab Al-Masri. Outline Discovery of Web Services 1 Ranking of Web Services 2 Approaches 3 Conclusion 4 Q & A 5.
©Ferenc Vajda 1 Semantic Grid Ferenc Vajda Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
Semantic Gadgets Pervasive Computing Meets the Semantic Web Reza Zakeri Sharif University of Technology.
Introduction to Semantic Web Service Architecture ► The vision of the Semantic Web ► Ontologies as the basic building block ► Semantic Web Service Architecture.
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.
User Profiling using Semantic Web Group members: Ashwin Somaiah Asha Stephen Charlie Sudharshan Reddy.
Semantic Web COMS 6135 Class Presentation Jian Pan Department of Computer Science Columbia University Web Enhanced Information Management.
A Portrait of the Semantic Web in Action Jeff Heflin and James Hendler IEEE Intelligent Systems December 6, 2010 Hyewon Lim.
Vermelding onderdeel organisatie 5 maart The future of databases DBDM 07/08 Leiden Bas van den Berg, Patrick van Kouteren, Rosa Meijer, Mathijs.
Semantics in Web Service Composition for Risk Management Michael Lutz European Commission – DG Joint Research Centre Ispra, Italy EcoTerm IV, Vienna,
26/02/ WSMO – UDDI Semantics Review Taxonomies and Value Sets Discussion Paper Max Voskob – February 2004 UDDI Spec TC V4 Requirements.
EBI is an Outstation of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory. Semantic Interoperability Framework Sarala M. Wimalaratne (RICORDO project)
WP1: Plan for the remainder (1) Ontology –Finalise ontology and lexicons for the 2 nd domain (RTV) Changes agreed in Heraklion –Improvement to existing.
A Semi-Automated Digital Preservation System based on Semantic Web Services Jane Hunter Sharmin Choudhury DSTC PTY LTD, Brisbane, Australia Slides by Ananta.
Semantic Web Technologies Readings discussion Research presentations Projects & Papers discussions.
OPM/S: Semantic Engineering of Web Services
Semantic Web: Commercial Opportunities and Prospects
OWL-S: Bringing Services to the Semantic Web
Presentation transcript:

Using Common Sense Reasoning to Enable the Semantic Web Sakda Chaiworawitkul, Alex Faaborg

Introduction The generally accepted user interface for the Semantic Web is an agent capable of natural language processing… Hey funky blue head, go buy me concert tickets!

Introduction In our proposal, we had a mock screen shot of a fail soft design:

Introduction Our project is a hybrid of both approaches

Introduction We have built an IE explorer bar capable of two way communication with the user You talk to it It talks to you

Part 1: Searching Web Services You talk to it Using Common Sense Reasoning for Query Expansion

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Problems WS is projected to be ubiquitous within this 10 years Locating web services can fall to the same pitfall as searching for web resources “Getting what I really want” is no longer an easy task Traditional keyword search technique cannot fulfill the needs Example: What is the population of Bulgaria? * Tourism Bulgaria (1999): 8.5 million (no date) Memory Government slide presentation (no date) 8,948,649 (1985 census), govt est 8,989,172 (1990) est expected to be wrong CIA Fact Book: 7,705,945 (July 2001 est) European Union (no date): Approx 8 million World Bank (no date) Population: 8 million (2000) Gazetteer (1992) (2001) 7946 (2003) *Adopted from Goble, C. (presentation at 1 st European Summer School on Ontological Engineering and the Semantic Web (SSSW – 2003) – Cercedilla, Spain

Common-sense in Locating Web Service How common-sense helps? Get related context from the input search query Expand the search query more efficiently than keyword matching (With high potential) The search result is well-customized to the user – if you have local-level or personal-level common-sense Where is the opportunity to approach? Metadata, metadata, & metadata WS is SELF-DESCRIBED (Web Service Description Language: WSDL) and can be published through UDDI (Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration)Web Service Description Language: WSDLUniversal Description, Discovery, and Integration These features are standardized Both standards allow WS to be annotated for querying!! So we have a repository which is dumb but we have to use them SMARTLY This is where the common-sense comes to play

Overview of our approach Common-sense Expand Common-sense in Locating Web Service

Only Expansion is enough Common-sense in Locating Web Service Users should be acknowledged of from where the services are selected and how The WSs that match users need should be able to use at hand  No need to go there and invoke them manually The resulting WSs may not be available, users should not be responsible for invoking dead services Common -sense

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Common -sense Common-sense  reasonably expand the query NLP: Extract out only parts of query (naïve rules: Verb, Adj, Adv, and Noun) Fail-soft: Use of words extracted from NLP to search OMCS Net: Inference for related context to feed into UDDI

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Common -sense Discovery: Polling WSs WSDL Ping WS: Check whether it is alive or not Distinguish ‘alive’ and ‘dead’ WSs on interface

Dynamic invocation of service Common-sense in Locating Web Service Common -sense From WSDL, we interrogate and create a proxy object on the fly User chooses the method to invoke  input interface is rendered dynamically The callback is shown to the user on the interface from the proxy object

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Demonstration of user interface Search field (Natural language) Search result panel Inference result from OMCS Alive WS (t-model name) Dead WS (t-model name) WS description WSDL URI

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Demonstration of user interface Back to search result Methods exposed in the selected WS Input arguments of the selected method (dynamically rendered) Return result from the WS

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Issues UDDI is not a strict standard for WS publishing  Many search results are not WSs WSDL standard allows documentation of everything, e.g. web methods, arguments, services  But the current APIs from vendors does not provide a means to do so  Personalized search result for WSs is still difficult Personalize WS search result can possibly be achieved by associating search results with personal or global common-sense However, the issue of whether this feedback should be of global or personal level is to be solved Dynamic composition of WS requires NOT ONLY knowledge of physical world but also those of programming world  type mismatching

Part 2: Detecting Tasks It talks to you Using Common Sense Reasoning to Determine Context

Detecting Tasks From Spinning the Semantic Web Fensel, Hendler, Lieberman, Wahlster XMLHTML XHTML UPML OWL RDF RDFS Intelligent Services

Detecting Tasks It [the agent] will "know" all this without needing artificial intelligence on the scale of 2001's Hal or Star Wars's C-3PO. Instead these semantics were encoded into the Web page when the clinic's office manager (who never took Comp Sci 101) massaged it into shape using off-the-shelf software for writing Semantic Web pages Tim Berners-Lee on the Semantic Web: Scientific American - The Semantic Web

Detecting Tasks A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be a utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self- delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. Cory Doctorow on Metadata:

Detecting Tasks From Spinning the Semantic Web Fensel, Hendler, Lieberman, Wahlster XMLHTML XHTML UPML OWL RDF RDFS Intelligent Services

Detecting Tasks

Questions

Common-sense in Locating Web Service Appendix: Sample WSDL Document