2. 9 th Open Forum on Metadata Registries Harmonization of Terminology, Ontology and Metadata 20th – 22nd March, 2006, Kobe Japan. Presentation Title: Day: 20060322 Slot No. K3 Name: HASIDA Koiti (ISO/TC37/SC4/TDG3 Convener) Organization: AIST & GSK Semantic Computing and Standard Data Category Registry

3. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Gap  People and computers don't share meaning and value. –We don't understand computers. –Computers don't understand us.  So they cannot collaborate well.

4. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 We Don't Understand Computers. (Computers Don't Understand Themselves, either.)  I installed Service Pack 2 into my PC running Windows XP. Since then I cannot connect to wireless LAN. Why?  I cannot remove a strange line in MS Word.  We cannot coordinate workflow systems with each other in our intranet.

5. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Computers Don't Understand Us.  I cannot find the information I want. The search engine returns a lot of irrelevant information and little relevant information. –The computer doesn ’ t know what exactly I want to know.  Web sites are very hard to keep easy to use. –The computer doesn ’ t know what the Web content means.  Performance improved by banning intra- corporate e-mails. –E-mails poorly reflect contexts of real human communication.

6. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Computing = Semantics-Oriented Architecture  Glassbox Computer –design and operation of computer systems through semantics shared with people –semantic model of data and process  Straightforward provision of services meaningful to people  People can understand, compose, and improve software. –emergent total optimization by accumulation of improvements by many users

7. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Service Semantic Service Semantic Service Semantic Service Ubiquitous Platform ad-hoc wireless network sensor net gridgrid privacyprivacy dialogspeech Semantic Platform Semantic Platform Semantic Platform Semantic Platform possible-world simulation semantic Web service multiagent architecture ontologyontology retrieval semantic authoring vision agent device home info. appliance ITS Ubiquitous Info. Service behavior mining networkrobot enterprise semantic annotation securitysecurity translation summarization planning spatial reasoning accounting project management

8. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Ontology

9. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Jepson-type claim claim constituent + other claim class (concept) property description about* technology presupposes The `claim’ class subsumes the `Jepson- type claim’ class. Each `claim’ class instance has one or more `constituent’ properties with `technology’ class instances as values. Ontology of Patent Claim

10. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Jepson-type claim 0 mass spectroscope (0) (2) separates a constituent constituent ion source (1) constituent mass analyzer (2) constituent (2) extracts ion b (4) converts b to electron c ion-electron converter (4) electron detector (3) (3) detects c and extracts as electric signal presupposes constituent subslit (10) place (10) between (2) and (4) (12) determines Vs and Vc according to V0 voltage controller(12) constituent Vs ＝ V0 － k1 Vc ＝ V0 － k2 V0 = ion-extraction voltage on (1) Vs = voltage on (10) Vc = converter voltage on (4) k1 and k2 are constants purpose about constraint about about about about enables extract ion a from (1) enables enables enables Semantic Structure of Patent Claim

11. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Translation … Two-Day Work 検索質問 Q のノード x ごとに、リンク y-z がデータベース D に含まれて y のラ ベルが L であるようなノード y とノー ド z ∈ F(x) が存在するような、ラベル L のリストを、表示部に表示する displaying, on a display unit, a list of labels L in which are present a node z ∈ F(x) and a node y of which a link y- z is contained in the database D and of which the label y is L, for each of the nodes x of a search question Q wrongtranslation

12. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 検索質問 Q の各ノード x Explicit Semantic Structure z ∈ F(x) 。 データベース D がリンク y-z を含 む。 y のラベルが L である。 z ∈ F(x) 。 データベース D がリンク y-z を含 む。 y のラベルが L である。 each node x in retrieval query Q z ∈ F(x). Database D contains link y-z. The label of y is L. z ∈ F(x). Database D contains link y-z. The label of y is L. L のリストを表示部に表示する 量化 display the list of L on the display unit quantify 内包 intension

13. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Authoring

14. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 The Right Question about Semantic Annotation  How to make many people do semantic annotation (in place of machines)?  How to raise intellectual productivity of people/society?

15. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 documentdocument Traditional Authoring humanhuman contentcontent humanhuman contentcontent computercomputer understanding Huge knowledge needed. humanhuman authoring contentcontent analysis IR, translation, summarization 精度低inaccurate Information loss Linearization cost

16. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 coarse- grain graphica l content Semantic Authoring humanhuman contentcontent humanhuman contentcontent computercomputer understanding easy & accurate humanhuman semantic authoring fine- grain graphica l content content content analysis IR, translation, summarization 精度低accurate Little information loss No linearization cost

17. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Coarse-Grain Graphical Content  Result of semantic authoring  Easy for people to understand and compose –explicit logical structure –no intersentential order I had a snack. I had had a lunch. causes I was hungry. causes I became full. causes concession

18. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Fine-Grain Graphical Content  automatic analysis of coarse-grain graphical content  retrieval, translation, summarization, etc.  too fine for human browsing/editing have have causes hungry concession I aen agt snack obj lunch agt become aen full gol causes

19. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Authoring is Easier than Text Composition (1/2) I had a snack. I had had a lunch. causes I was hungry. causes I became full. causes concession

20. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Authoring is Easier than Text Composition (2/2)  A text synonymous with the graph in the previous page:  This relation is hard to reflect in the text. I had had a lunch. But I was hungry, and so I had a snack. Then I became full. * I had had a lunch but I was hungry. So I had a snack. Then I became full.

21. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Authoring  Authoring based on ontologies, together with explicit semantic structures  Easier authoring of better content than with MS Word, etc.  Accurate semantic structure in resulting content –short text in box –rhetorical structure –anaphora/coreference

22. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Improvement of Document Quality by Idea Processor Yagishita ’ s (1998) experiment  Less oversights –more points covered  Deeper thoughts –longer inference chains Compose network-type content by idea processor Compose text based on the network-type content

23. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Traditional Idea Processor  No standardized relations –Only the author or participants of brain storming can understand. –hard to share and reuse  Cost of text composition –big apparent cost → limited spread Semantic Authoring  Standardization of relations –ISO/TC37/SC4/TDG3 –easy to share and reuse –retrieval, summarization, translation, etc.  Automatic text generation –small cost → wide spread

24. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Scalability paragraph paragraph paragraph section

25. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Upgrading Semantic Levels in Software Architecture window system operating system operating system operating system operating system file system file system file system file system semantic authoring semantic platform semantic platform semantic platform semantic platform RDF database RDF database RDF database RDF database

26. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 ISO/TC37/SC4/TDG3 Semantic Content Representation

27. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 ISO/TC37 Terminology and Other Language Resources  SC1: Principles and Methods  SC2: Terminography and Lexicography  SC3: Computer Applications for Terminology –ISO12620: Data Categories  SC4: Language Resources Management

28. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 ISO/TC37/SC4 Language Resources Management –Chair: Laurent Romary –Secretariat: Key-Sun Choi  WG1: Basic descriptors and mechanisms for language resources (Laurent Romary)  WG2: Representation schemes (Kiyong Lee) –Multimodal meaning representation scheme  WG3: Multilingual text representation  WG4: Lexical resources/database (Nicoletta Calzolari)  WG5: Workflow of LR management

29. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 ISO/TC37/SC4/Ad Hoc TDGs  TDG1: Metadata (Peter Wittenburg)  TDG2: Morphosyntax (Gil Francopoulo)  TDG3: Semantic Content Representation (Koiti Hasida) –Discourse relations (Koiti Hasida) –Dialogue acts (Harry Bunt) –Referential structures and links (Laurent Romary) –Logico-semantic relations (Scott Farrar) –Temporal entities and relations (Kiyong Lee) –Semantic roles and argument structure (Thierry Declerck) –More? Thematic Domain Group

30. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Expected Products  Not ISs (International Standards) in ISO ’ s official sense  But Standard Registries of Data Categories –discourse relations, dialogue acts, etc.

31. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Scope of TDG3  Semantics, Abstracting Syntax Away –Semantic DCs usable with various annotation schemes We ’ re not writing annotation manuals. –We don ’ t care syntax-semantics mapping, syntactic markup and markables, etc.  Deliverables –Concrete Data Category Registries semantic types of function words/morphemes and their taxonomy –not full dictionaries or encyclopedias –Documents on These DCs

32. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Criteria on DC Registry  Purpose –annotation/interpretation Inter-Annotator Agreement –authoring/composition/description Descriptive Convenience  General Requirement –ease of selection clarity and coverage

33. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Collaborative Semantic Authoring

34. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Discussion-Supporting Groupware How to eliminate illegal bike-parking? Prepare more bike-parking lots. solution Remove illegally- parked bikes immediately. solution That is not profitable. con We don't have enough space to keep them. con causes We have to keep them for six months. causes

35. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Collaborative Semantic Authoring  Traditional Groupware –IBIS, Coordinator, Open Meeting, etc. –improved efficiency and quality of discussion reduced redundancy simultaneous utterances better coverage of important ponts deeper discussion –weakness ・・・ usable only for group work  Collaborative SA –seamless unification of individual SA as a major usual task and group work –the above merits + advanced retrieval, summarization, etc.

36. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Traditional Groupware  usable for group work only → hard to spread Collaborative Semantic Authoring  seamless unification of individual work (individual SA) and group work  merits of groupware + retrieval, summarization, translation, etc.

37. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 From e-Mails to Collaborative SA  Perspicuous semantic structure develops.  No spams.  TODO –user-account maintenance

38. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Knowledge-Circulating Society

39. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Knowledge Circulation shared DB  social sharing, reuse, and extended reproduction of knowledge  participation of everybody in every situation provision of knowledge acquisition of knowledge general public users general public users producers producers consumers consumers mediators mediators

40. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Semantic Enterprise System System Design and Operation Based on Business-Process Semantics  Incremental and emergent total optimization (in the sense of Enterprise Architecture) –accumulation of improvements by users –Integration of business operation, regulation, and computer system  Transparent and fair procurement

41. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 Knowledge Circulation in Research (Past) researchresearch writingpaperwritingpaper submissionsubmission reviewreview publicationpublicationevaluationevaluation  Knowledge-Circulation period > 2 years  Papers are hard to read/write.

42. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 (Future)  Collaborative creation of huge graphical content  Publication of sentences rather than papers  Fast knowledge circulation –In a week?  Evaluation better than IF and CI –Network analysis  visualization  retrieval, translation, summarization

43. 9th Open Forum for Metadata Registry, Kobe, 2006 e-Knowledge Government  Limitation of representative system –increasing diversity and complexity of social problems  Involvement of all the citizens –collection and analysis of public opinions and knowledge –policy making and consensus building  Given effective discussion by all the people: –no need for representative/indirect democracy –compositional democracy ・・・ KAWAKITA Jiro –deliberative democracy  IT-based support –retrieval, summarization, translation, etc. –Weblog not sufficient no systematic support to formation of long inference chains