1. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 1 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response The Right Information at the Right Fingertips at the Right Time

2. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 2 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response Part One What Does Semantic Interoperability Really Mean?

3. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 3 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response First, Foremost, Interoperability Means Teamwork

4. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 4 Semantic Interoperability (SI) First Mentioned on Web in 2000 Apparently Quick Study: u SI Conference in Houston This Date u Ontolog Forum also on This Date n explores the possibility for collaboration and convergence on the various research and standards group that are working on the state-of-the-art on semantic web services. n OWL-S - Web Ontology Language for Services n WSMO - Web Service Modeling Ontology n WSDL-S - Web Services (Description Language) Semantics, & n SWSF-FLOWS - Semantic Web Services Framework / First-Order Logic Ontology for Web Services

5. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 5 Semantic Interoperability (SI) Progression of Standards: SGML>XML/RDF>RDF/OWL>? Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP), XMLCoP Keeping Pace Moving Targets u Data Reference Model (DRM) in Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) u Global Justice XML Data Model (GJXDM) u National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) Handwriting on the Wall: Semantic Web is Real Easier to Keep Up than Catch Up

6. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 6 Semantic Interoperability Some Helpful, Simplified Similes

7. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 7 Semantics Simplified Semantics Studies MEANINGS u Seeks Linguistic Clarity & Specificity wrt LEVELS OF ABSTRACTION u Seeks no confusion of map & territory Semiotics Studies SIGNS, SIGNALS & SYMBOLS u Identifies Components of Communication u Identifies Roles of Components Interoperability Needs Semantic Roadmaps, Guides, Dictionaries, etc. for Translating Similar but Disparate Vocabularies

8. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 8 Interoperability Interoperability Much Newer Term Coined Specifically for Software u Popularizaton of XML Largely Grew out of Improvement over Document Type Definitions (DTDs) to Salvage Legacy Databases u XML Schema Much More Useful, so Mistakenly Applied to Problems Not Targeted by XML

9. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 9 Semantic Interoperability in “Semantic Web” Foundation Needs Web Ontology Language (OWL), Written in RDF) u Many Advantages, Pitfalls Understanding Relationship of Terms to Domain-Specific Context Required u EDI For Instance u UBL, ebXML, etc Setting Standards for Business Context

10. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 10 Semantic Interoperability Standards Required “Semantic Web” Requires Standards Topic Maps an Early Attempt, Useful, but Limited Structure Based on Associations, more than Relationships XML Domain-Specific Vocabulary Definitions Allow Document by Document Translations of Terms & Datatypes-Tedious and Repetitious though Templates Possible XML-based Standards Allows Document & Application Domain Vocabularies to be made Interoperable, but… u Closely Related, Previously Defined Vocabularies Problematic u Inadvertent Duplicative Efforts can Conflict

11. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 11 XML-Based Standards Make Good Start OASIS Standards in Divergent Fields demonstrate promise u Universal Business Language (UBL), u Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) and u Web Services for Remote Portlets (WSRP) Lag Time Difficult When Needs Press Adoption is Extra Work for Volunteers Momentum Slowly Building

12. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 12 First Key to Semantic Interoperability: RDF Resource Description Franmework (RDF) u Defines Relationships of Entities Using “Triples” u Triples are “Statements” Consisting of: n Subject: (Resource) Defined by Universal Resource Identifier (URI) n Object: (Property) a Named Resource that can have its own properties n Predicate: (Value/Relationship) u Statements like “x is a member of y” Allow Reasoning, or Inference Engines to Operate over Populations of Documents, over Resources and over Business Process such as Policy & Security

13. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 13 Second Key to Semantic Interoperability: OWL Web Ontology Language (OWL) u Allows Definition of Classification Systems with Inheritance of Properties u Comes in Three Sub Languages (so far) n OWL Lite Allows a Classification Hierarchy and Simple Constraints—Most Widely Used n OWL DL (Description Logic) Allows Maximum Expressiveness with Computational Completeness n OWL Full Allow Complete Expressiveness and Syntactic Freedom but no Computational Guarantees u Allows Much More Extensive Reasoning

14. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 14 Semantic Interoperability Allows Improved Search, Rules & Security Semantically Organized Registries Allow Web Service Partners to Find Each Other on Basis of Semantic Criteria (Based on Community- Managed Lists for Specific Domains): u Emergency Management/Physical Resources/Equipment Services u Healthcare/First Response/Event Type/Chemical u Financial Services/Medical Insurance/First Responder Indemnity… Semantically-Capable Partners Can Align & Automate Mutual Business Processes over Larger Range Semantically-Based Security Rules Control What is Shared, Who Shares, etc…

15. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 15 Need for Standards Still Strong Semantic Interoperability Needs the XML Vocabulary Standard Work to Continue Companies, Agencies Need to be Shown that this work is in Their Interest u Employee Time Justified u Resources Justified u Benefits need to be measured in terms of Time Saved as well as Costs Saved into Future u SI Aids InterAgency and Vendor Solutions

16. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 16 Current Developments Highlight Interoperability Issues NIEM First Draft Released October 15, 2005 Will Subsume GJXDM With DRM Will Make Information Sharing Much Easier Will Work With EDXL in Emergency Management Domain u EDXL is OverArching Category like NIEM u CAP a member of EDXL like GJXDM a member of NIEM—Specifically Semantic Relationships

17. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 17 How are we Showing Semantic Interoperability? Within CAP 1.0, (and 1.1)the Sub-element of the Element is a String (Text), Intended to Supply an “Event Type” which we Use as a Semantic Key u We Use CAP 1.0, (CAP 1.1 was not yet an OASIS Standard When this Pilot Started) u We Use a Simulated Event Type ontology (Called an ontology Because it is written in OWL/RDF) Within The Emergency Data Exchange Language Distribution Element (EDXL_DE) the Element Requires a Managed List Associated with the Keyword and the List--a Method made for Semantic Interoperability u EDXL_DE is not yet an OASIS Standard but Our Work Reflects its Functionality as a Routing Standard for Emergency Messages

18. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 18 SI Architecture Not Yet Defined Enterprise Architecture Foundation u Fits Federal Enterprise Architecture u Supports DRM Multiple Service-Oriented Architecture Components u Web Services Componentization u Registries Make Mix-&-Match Possible N-Tier Architecture Allows Flexibility u Databases, DBMSs, WebServers, Clients Separated, Supported

19. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 19 What Does a Semantic Interoperability Architecture Look Like? This Pilot is a Practical Example u Emergency Management Centric u Participants Represent Spectrum Following Slide Shows Most of the Components u Portal and Secondary Support Services To Come u Collection of Participants Would Align Themselves through Semantically Ordered Registries or Out of Band Web Services Bindings u Shows Messaging Flows Perspective

20. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 20

21. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 21 Enterprise Architecture

22. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 22 Service-Oriented Architecture

23. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 23 Registries Add Semantic Discovery of Services & Resources

24. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 24 Our Pilot of a Semantic Interoperability Architecture

25. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 25 Semantic Interoperability Summary Teamwork Through Semantically Ordered Web Services Registries Allow Related Companies/Entities to Locate Each Other Registries Allow Resources to be Located and Bound through Web Services Registries Add Layer of Role-Based Security Third Party Portals and Communities, such as Geospatial and Healthcare Can Aid Preparedness through Semantically Ordered, PreRegistered Web Services

26. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 26 Questions?

27. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 27 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response Part Two Train Derailment Example Based on January 6, 2005 Incident in Graniteville, South Carolina

28. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 28 Semantic Keys to Improving Rapid First Response Train Derailment Example: u 6 January 2005, 3:50 A.M. Graniteville, SC u Chlorine Tank Car Toxic Release Matching ResponseType with EventType Using Open Public Standards Getting the Right Information to the Right People at the Right Time

29. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 29 Original Timeline v. New Timeline Original Timeline: 17 Days Incident Starts 2:00 A.M. 6 January 2005 All Clear 21 January 2005 New Timeline: 12 Days Incident Starts 2:00 A.M. 6 January 2006 All Clear 17 January 2006

30. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 30 Original Timeline Problems Incident Starts 2:00 A.M. 6 January 2005 u No Early Public Warning Alert u First EPA Situation Report 10:00 A.M. n 8 Hour Response Quick, Given Circumstances n Injuries, Deaths Acknowledged, Chlorine Hazmat Identified u Second EPA Situation Report 4:00 P.M. n EPA Region 4 Operations Support Command (OSC) n Operations Underway

31. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 31 Original Timeline Problems u Third EPA Situation Report 7 January 2005 n EPA Region 4 OSC on Scene - Air Monitoring n Extent Hazmat Release Determined 76% of 131 Tons u Fourth EPA Situation Report 7 January 2005 - Full Operations Begin Logistical Support Operations: Non- NIMS Organizational Impedance All Clear 17 January 2005

32. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 32 New Timeline Improvements Incident Starts 2:00 A.M. 6 January 2005 u CAP Message with EDXL Header Optimizes Immediate Public Warning Alert: 2:15 A.M. n Remote Sensors from Tank Cars Trigger Alerts, Trigger Train-Mounted Sirens/PA Systems u First EPA Situation Report 4:00 A.M. n Less Than Two-Hour Severe Emergency Response Triggered by Fatal-Level Hazmat Release

33. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 33 New Timeline Improvements u Second EPA Situation Report 9:00 A.M. n Semantically Triggered Response Allows Full Operations to Start within 8 Hours Versus Next Day n Hazmat Automatically Identified, Severity Semantics Push First Responses and Eliminate Jurisdictional Duplication of ICS Logistical Support Operations: NIMS Plus Semantics Reduces or Eliminates Organizational Impedance All Clear 12 January 2006

34. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 34 Semantic Keys to Improvement Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) 1.0 u 1.1 Recently Approved as OASIS Standard, Pilot uses 1.0 EDXL_DE 1.0 Committee Specification u Simulated Event Type & Sender/Recipient Type Ontologies Drive Improved Routing u Simulated Event Type also Drives Lookup for Secondary Healthcare & Geospatial Services

35. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 35 Event Type Ontology Application: Protégé: http//www.protégé.stanford.edu

36. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 36 Event Type Ontology in Context Application: Unicorn Workbench: http//www.unicorn.com

37. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 37 Ontological (Semantic) Analysis Element & Data Asset Comparison Result: No Duplicated Elements

38. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 38 Anatomy of CAP-EDXL Emergency Response Communications for New Timeline

39. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 39 Point-by-Point Details of Collaboration Diagram 1) Upon Notification of the incident, Sheriff calls in using his phone or PDA to trigger an emergency alert. 2) A CAP message is generated and posted to the ICS hub where it is posted as “Currently Active” in message repository regularly polled by Emergency Management Community. Rules-Based Registry Standards allows a publish-subscribe mechanism for propagating alert naming messages. 3) NIMS ICS Policy-Based messages are “automatically” routed to the Local EM Agency where operators can monitor and send out message updates. 4) The Secondary Providers Services switch to “Active” Polling for any immediate update-CAP messages routed by EDXL Distribution Header Component with a “PublicAlerting” value. 5) GIS map tool provider services respond to the CAP message and process the information, adding a new WSRP Portlet for this Incident. ICS incorporates mapping service. 6) A reverse 911 geo-coded lookup is performed for the affected area and automatic telephone notification is processed and performed.

40. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 40 Network Concept A network is a graph representation for modeling objects of interest and their relationships. It contains the following elements: Nodes: objects of interests n Links: relationships between nodes n Paths: ordered list of connected links x0x0 x1x1 x2x2 s1s1 k 1. x 0 k 2. s 1 k3.s1k3.s1

41. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 41 RDF Data Model RDF data stored in a directed, logical network Subjects and objects mapped to nodes, and properties to links that have subject start nodes and object end nodes Link represent complete RDF triples S1S1 O1O1 S2S2 O2O2 P1P1 P2P2 P2P2 RDF Triples: {S 1, P 1, O 1 } {S 1, P 2, O 2 } 16

42. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 42 Semantic Web Connects Web Services

43. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 43 Adding Value with Web Services

44. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 44 Broadstrokes-Reverse 911 Wireless/VoIP outbound and inbound voice services Combines TTS and ASR technologies Support for web services, SOAP, VoiceXML, CCXML, CAP, XQUERY and XPATH

45. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 45 Broadstrokes Features Message creation using Text-to-speech Message creation using Voice Recording Definition of call lists by static lists Answering machine recognition Call rules support Call Escalation Call Bandwidth control Critical response collection & reporting Call Status Reporting Multiple Language Options

46. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 46 Broadstrokes-WSRP

47. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 47 MyStateUSA (Acting as National Incident Management System-NIMS Incident Command System-ICS)

48. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 48 MyStateUSA

49. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 49 TargusInfo TARGUSinfo provides a consolidated National E-911 equivalent database without the "official" E-911 restriction permitting it to be used for broader based emergency response such as continuity of operations (COOP) announcements, procedures, special assistance and new developments. TARGUSinfo records are geographically encoded to facilitate querying via GIS (Geographic Information System) platforms critical in an emergency management context. TARGUSinfo supports mission critical applications for the public and private sector so security is built into our system from the infrastructure down to the individual data element.

50. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 50 Humanmarkup.org, Inc.

51. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 51 Starbourne Communications Design

52. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 52 Starbourne Communications Design

53. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 53 Oracle 10g R2 Application Server & Database with RDF Network Data Model Based on XML 2004 Presentation

54. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 54 Image Matters alertSmarts™ Application

55. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 55 Warning Systems, Inc

56. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 56 Full Roster of Pilot Participants RedHat (RedHat Enterprise Linux Operating System) Oracle Corp (Database, Application Server, WSRP Portal) Humanmarkup.org, Inc. (Public Service Preparedness Portal) Starbourne Communications Design (Portal Design Development) Broadstrokes, Inc. (Reverse 911 Service) Targus Information Corporation, Inc. (Geographically encoded consolidated national E-911 database) MyStateUSA (NIMS-ICS Simulated Network) WarningSystems, Inc. (Web-based Activation of EAS, Sirens. Radios) Sandia National Laboratories (Sensor Network Simulation) NuParadigm (Alerting Framework Network Services) Unicorn Solutions, Inc. (Ontology/Data Model Workbench) ImageMatters, LLC

57. 20 October 2005 Semantic Interoperability at Work: Improving Rapid First Response 57 Questions?