© NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Integrated Project n°27705 – Priority 2.4.7 – Semantic knowledge based systems Social Semantic Desktop Reference Architecture.

Reference Architecture Evaluation 2 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 To involve various stakeholders of the Social Semantic Desktop community in the critical assessment of the Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint Refine the scope functional boundaries of the Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint To involve the stakeholders in the architectural design by bringing their experience and expertise Evaluation purpose (generic)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 3 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Evaluation process Preparation Stakeholders profile – Questionnaire A (10 min.) Introduction (5 min.) Motivation and Overview (2 min.) The Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint (40 min.) Analysis Scenarios for the Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint (5 min.) Interactive scenarios revision (20 min.) Synthesis Assessment – Questionnaire B (10 min.) Final assessment – processing the evaluation data to formulate the evaluation results

Reference Architecture Evaluation 4 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Please fill-in Questionnaire A … http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=Y7dGTHTbWa_2biudS_2fM8924g_3d_3d

Reference Architecture Evaluation 5 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 The Social Semantic Desktop Extension of the personal desktop … … into a collaboration environment Goals: Improve personal information management Improve cross-media and cross-application linking Improve sharing and exchange across social and organizational relations.

Reference Architecture Evaluation 6 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Personal Information Management Distributed Information Management Social Networks and Community Services. Social Semantic Desktop Layers

Reference Architecture Evaluation 7 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 SSD evolution

Reference Architecture Evaluation 8 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 SSD evolution (cont.)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 12 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 SSD evolution – current status

Reference Architecture Evaluation 13 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 The NEPOMUK IP Project FP6 Project IST 17 Partners: 8 research centres 4 big industry players 3 SMEs Open source

Reference Architecture Evaluation 14 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Goals Definition of the Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint Standardization of ontologies and APIs Development Prototypes The reference Social Semantic Desktop implementation The NEPOMUK IP Project (cont.)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 15 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Evaluation purpose (technical aspect)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 16 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint Personal information management -> Personal knowledge creation and organization Data interoperability -> Cross-media and cross-application linking (Distributed) Social collaboration -> Sharing, exchange and alignment of the personal knowledge in a distributed manner Evaluation = Proof that the SSD Blueprint is able to handle all the possible scenarios arising in the space of these three dimensions Evaluation purpose (technical aspect)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 18 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Overview Social Semantic Desktop – Scenario Social Semantic Desktop – Engineering cycle Social Semantic Desktop Models The Social Semantic Desktop Blueprint

Reference Architecture Evaluation 19 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Scenario

Reference Architecture Evaluation 20 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Engineering cycle

Reference Architecture Evaluation 21 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Engineering cycle (I)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 22 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Usage – Scenarios – Functionalities

Reference Architecture Evaluation 23 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Engineering cycle (II)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 24 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Knowledge Articulation and Visualization Semantic data editing and presentation Standard Desktop Classification Structures Standard set of vocabularies and ontologies (e.g. calendar, task management) Mapping and Aligning Algorithms Alignment of information from similar domains expressed with different schemas Wrapping of Legacy Information Standardized semantic representation of structured and unstructured data Technical requirements (I)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 25 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Metadata Storage and Querying Central place for storing and querying the information and the associated metadata Linking of Data Items and Relational Metadata Link of arbitrary information across different media types, file formats and applications Social Aspects Social relation building and knowledge sharing within social communities Open Architecture Clearly defined and published interfaces Open for integration with external adopters Technical requirements (II)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 26 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Engineering cycle (III)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 27 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Models

Reference Architecture Evaluation 28 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Models – Example

Reference Architecture Evaluation 29 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Personal Information Model (PIM) Vocabulary allowing individual persons to express their own mental models in a structured way Different mental models can be integrated based on matching algorithms or on domain ontologies Information Element Model (IEM) Vocabulary for describing information elements which are commonly present on the semantic desktop Annotation Model (AM) Vocabulary, commonly required to annotate resources on the semantic desktop Models

Reference Architecture Evaluation 30 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – PIMO

Reference Architecture Evaluation 32 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Requirements a representation of abstract concepts: Love, Rome, Acme Inc. a representation of concrete, addressable resources: "w3c homepage at www.w3.org" a representation of documents: "the document at http://www.w3.org/" multiple names for a thing: "Love", "Liebe“; "W3", "WWW" same name for two different things: "Apache - helicopter", "Apache - software". class-subclass relations: a subclass has all properties of the superclass + its own class-instance relations part-of relations: the city of Rome is part of Italy related information: Spaghetti is related to Italy data properties to describe details: Rome has a population of 2.8 mio document-has-topic: the document "http://www.w3.org/2001/sw" is about the "Semantic Web" a representation of time: the document was created in 2005. The project started on 1.1.2006 NEPOMUK Models – PIMO

Reference Architecture Evaluation 34 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 The NEPOMUK Information Element (NIE) Set of ontologies Vocabulary for describing information elements commonly present on the semantic desktop NEPOMUK Models

Reference Architecture Evaluation 35 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NIE Core – NEPOMUK Information Element Core Ontology NFO – NEPOMUK File Ontology NCO – NEPOMUK Contact Ontology NMO – NEPOMUK Message Ontology NCAL – NEPOMUK Calendar Ontology NEXIF – NEPOMUK EXIF Ontology NID3 – NEPOMUK ID3 Ontology NEPOMUK Models – NIE

Reference Architecture Evaluation 36 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NIE

Reference Architecture Evaluation 37 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NIE Core

Reference Architecture Evaluation 38 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NFO

Reference Architecture Evaluation 39 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NMO

Reference Architecture Evaluation 40 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NCAL

Reference Architecture Evaluation 41 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NCO

Reference Architecture Evaluation 42 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 The NEPOMUK Annotation Ontology (NAO) Vocabulary that enables users to attach custom descriptions, identifiers, tags and ratings to resources on their desktop Via other properties, the user is also able to make generic relationships between related resources explicit. Relationships between resources that are too general to be included at the domain ontology level are also defined in the annotation ontology Given the high-level status of this ontology, these properties can be used to link any related resources on the user's desktop, as well as provide custom human-readable textual annotations NEPOMUK Models

Reference Architecture Evaluation 43 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 NEPOMUK Models – NAO Basic Specific Conventional tagging

Reference Architecture Evaluation 44 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Blueprint

Reference Architecture Evaluation 48 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Blueprint (design rationale)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 49 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Blueprint (design rationale)

Reference Architecture Evaluation 50 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Blueprint – Social Services

Reference Architecture Evaluation 51 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Foundational layer for achieving social collaboration Main functionality Distributed information management Communication Security Social Services

Reference Architecture Evaluation 52 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Enables cross-desktop communication Handles both service-to-service and human- to-human communication Acts as message-carrier for the Notification service Messaging service

Reference Architecture Evaluation 53 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Enables seamless management of groups of persons Should interact closely with the Messaging service and the Access Control Management Group management

Reference Architecture Evaluation 54 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Defines and applies (fine-grained) access control on the resources present in the shared information space Should interact closely with the Group Management Access control management

Reference Architecture Evaluation 55 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Represents the main access point to the social services infrastructure Should ensure a transparent single-sign-on process Authentication

Reference Architecture Evaluation 56 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Represents the backbone of the Social Services layer Insures proper distributed storage and search of the resources present in the shared information space Should support in a transparent way both data and metadata Distributed storage and search

Reference Architecture Evaluation 57 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Overall interaction recommendation OR

Reference Architecture Evaluation 58 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Blueprint – Semantic Desktop Services

Reference Architecture Evaluation 59 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Semantic Desktop middleware – foundational layer for achieving Personal Information Management Data interoperability Structure Core services – minimum set of services needed to have a Semantic Desktop Data services – additional set of services needed to achieve data interoperability Other – extra set of services targeting different particular functionalities Service registry – main access point to the semantic desktop middleware Semantic Desktop Services

Reference Architecture Evaluation 60 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Core services

Reference Architecture Evaluation 61 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Central metadata and structured data store RDF Storage and access to semantic resources and their descriptions Provides full text indexing and inference Support for multiple query languages Main hub for data integration Lifted data from the Data Wrapper and other services User’s Personal Information Model Local storage

Reference Architecture Evaluation 62 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 High-level wrapper for the PIM concepts present in the Local Storage Implements commonly used methods to manipulate a PIM Fully dependent on the Local Storage solution Typical functionalities: creating and deleting classes, properties, and resources adding and removing ontologies various convenience methods the URI identification of the user the personal namespace of the user the URI of the user's personal information model PIM Service

Reference Architecture Evaluation 63 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Lifting the data present on the desktop Semantic wrapper for the data (RDF conversion) Uses plug-ins to interact with legacy systems – each plug-in is specialised on extracting the data from one application format (such as the addressbook) or a file-type (such as PDF, MS- Word) Stores the RDF into the Local Storage Data wrapper

Reference Architecture Evaluation 64 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Providing an abstraction layer for accessing the Local Storage and possibly other service which may be involved in the search process Enables the community to build arbitrarily complex extensions to the query processing workflow, without changing the corresponding API. Support for arbitrary query languages (language can be specified as a parameter to the query) Support for full-text search and ranking Support for search shortcuts (similar to stored procedures) of more complex SPARQL queries (e.g., my recent documents) Local search

Reference Architecture Evaluation 65 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Generic service for multiple notification mechanisms Represents a glue between the services that perform tasks based on the results of the behaviour of other services Some notifications can be directly translated into user feed-back Examples: Black-board Publish-subscribe Notification

Reference Architecture Evaluation 66 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Data services

Reference Architecture Evaluation 67 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Provides the mechanisms for: Finding mappings between ontologies Learning or enhancing mappings High-level information integration Querying data sources based on the learned mappings Examples: mappings between 2 PIMs Social data alignment

Reference Architecture Evaluation 68 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Aligns data present in the Local Storage Suggests new links or annotations between information elements and resources Finds entities that are usable as entries in the user's PIM Unifies multiple representations of the same entity into one thing (such as two information elements representing the same person into one) Improves results based on learning from the user’s feed-back Local data alignment

Reference Architecture Evaluation 69 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Translating an RDF graph from one ontology language into another Translation from the languages used for manipulating the data present in the Local Storage is other formats Example: RDF graphs from FOAF to vCard Data translation

Reference Architecture Evaluation 70 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Recommends similar or related resources as well as additional resource descriptions to a particular resource Based on the metadata describing a resource other resources and/or additional metadata descriptions are recommended The recommendations are can be performed not only from the Local Storage, but also from the Shared Information Space Resource and metadata recommender

Reference Architecture Evaluation 72 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Generic service for performing specific reasoning tasks Can be used for example by the recommendation services, or other services to reason on the data present in the Local Storage Reasoning service

Reference Architecture Evaluation 73 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Creates abstract contexts and detects the current context by observing the user activity Should contain a user observation (logging) hub Generates context models to be used by the other services for learning or profiling Context elicitation

Reference Architecture Evaluation 74 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Umbrella of services performing low-level natural language processing The results can be used for enriching the models of the information elements (lifting data) Examples Keyword extraction Speech acts detection Rhetorical elements and relations extraction Text analytics services group

Reference Architecture Evaluation 75 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Umbrella of specific services that compute recommendations for information elements, based on different criteria Examples: Tag recommender Community (group) recommender Person recommender Recommendation services group

Reference Architecture Evaluation 77 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Central access point to all the services present in the platform Allows publishing, removing and discovery of services Represents a wrapper of the Semantic Desktop middleware Service registry

Reference Architecture Evaluation 78 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Blueprint – Extensions and Presentation Layer

Reference Architecture Evaluation 79 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Services developed for specific needs Combine directly the functionality provided by the Semantic Desktop Middleware and the Social Services Can provide complex additional functionalities for the presentation layer Semantic Desktop extensions

Reference Architecture Evaluation 80 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 High level personal information management extension with focus on tasks Ad-hoc task planning and flexible changes Collaborative work on tasks Connecting tasks with personal models as well as group information objects, and integration into organizational processes Task patterns recognition and learning Task Management extension

Reference Architecture Evaluation 81 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Knowledge workbench ~ ordinary day-to- day applications Integrate functionality provided by the layers below via plug-ins or add-ons Seamless integration of semantic features into the knowledge workbench Presentation layer

Reference Architecture Evaluation 83 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Scenario revisited – implementation

Reference Architecture Evaluation 85 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Objectives Is the current list of scenarios complete? Are there scenarios missing? If yes, is the blueprint able to handle them? Does the blueprint support the revised list of scenarios?

Reference Architecture Evaluation 86 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 1. There should be a common framework for the customization and personalization of the desktop 2. There must be support of a single authentication step as a prerequisite for collaboration and access to the share information space 3. Access to the shared information space should be in a transparent manner 4. Collaboration should be transparently supported by context awareness 5. Document management and sharing should be in a transparent manner 6. Creation and management of collaborative groups should be transparent, supported by a simple management of people competence profile 7. Communication within a team should be automated supported by presence and context awareness mechanisms 8. There should be persistency of personal work spheres such that there is continuity between different working sessions 9. The document management of the work space should be semantically enriched, thus enabling sophisticated searches and filtering Scenarios

Reference Architecture Evaluation 87 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Desktop customization and personalization (1) (US) When Claudia starts her SSD she wants to see her desktop customized/organized according to her user profile, context, user preferences, interactions, collaborations and tasks she is involved in. (SS) System should be able to authenticate user based on his credentials. Once authentication is done, system should be able to process user context to determine the activity space user wants to login to. If there are specific user preferences to personalize the user desktop then they should be processed to customize the user desktop. The system should also be able to process the user context to retrieve all the files/folders owning to the user context.

Reference Architecture Evaluation 88 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Single authentication (2) (US) Claudia is working in two different projects, with two slightly overlapping teams. Claudia wants to get simple access to sensitive data subject to strict security policy enforced in the two projects. She wants to be able to do this using a single login for all her profiles, involved in the different projects. (SS) The system will need to provide identity management for different profiles of the same user. The system will also need to provide an authentication mechanism to authenticate the profiles in the different shared information spaces. The shared information space system checks the user identity and in case of success, allows access to private data. Note: the same requirements are also relevant for the transparent access to the shared information space scenario

Reference Architecture Evaluation 89 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Transparent collaboration based on context awareness (4) (US) Claudia wants to search and share specific project or group resources (based on the working context and document relationships) from different projects into a particular share information space (created for example for the company’s audit). Claudia also wants to build an ad- hoc team based on the working context (with the other project managers). (SS) The system should allow to manage (i.e. create or update) the working context for the resource (e.g. documents or folder). The system should be able to process the current working context to search the resources related to the particular working context. The system should allow uploading and sharing of documents. Sharing involves also sending notifications to relevant users. System should provide a mechanism to handle data interoperability issues while sharing different data objects.

Reference Architecture Evaluation 90 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Please fill-in Questionnaire B … http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=61wctkDVyCsCDVx3xaCzEw_3d_3d

Reference Architecture Evaluation 93 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Requirements vs. components Data Wrapper PIMO Service User Context Service Related Item Recommender Structure Recommender Wiki Open Architecture Social Aspects Linking of Data Items and Relational Metadata Metadata Storage and Querying Wrapping of Legacy Information Mapping and Aligning Standard Desktop Classification Structure Knowledge Articulation and Visualization Requirement / Component X X X X X X X X X

Reference Architecture Evaluation 94 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Requirements vs. components Community Manager Metadata Exchange Recommender Distributed Index (Data Service) Local Search (Data Service) RDF Store (Data Service) Personal Task Manager Open Architecture Social Aspects Linking of Data Items and Relational Metadata Metadata Storage and Querying Wrapping of Legacy Information Mapping and Aligning Standard Desktop Classification Structure Knowledge Articulation and Visualization Requirement / Component X X X X X X

Reference Architecture Evaluation 95 Social Semantic Desktop © NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Requirements vs. components Backbone Ranker Ontology & Metadata Aligners Open Architecture Social Aspects Linking of Data Items and Relational Metadata Metadata Storage and Querying Wrapping of Legacy Information Mapping and Aligning Standard Desktop Classification Structure Knowledge Articulation and Visualization Requirement / Component X X X X

© NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Integrated Project n°27705 – Priority 2.4.7 – Semantic knowledge based systems Social Semantic Desktop Reference Architecture.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "© NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Integrated Project n°27705 – Priority 2.4.7 – Semantic knowledge based systems Social Semantic Desktop Reference Architecture."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

© NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Integrated Project n°27705 – Priority 2.4.7 – Semantic knowledge based systems Social Semantic Desktop Reference Architecture.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "© NEPOMUK Consortium 2006 – 2008 Integrated Project n°27705 – Priority 2.4.7 – Semantic knowledge based systems Social Semantic Desktop Reference Architecture."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback