Actions

Ontolog Forum

Revision as of 06:35, 9 January 2016 by imported>KennethBaclawski (Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Ontology Summit 2011: Panel Session-10 - "Communique draft review session" - Thu 2011_04_07

Summit Theme: OntologySummit2011: Making the Case for Ontology

Session Title: Communique draft review

Session Chair: Dr. MichaelUschold

Communique Co-Lead Editors: Dr. Michael Uschold, Dr. John F. Sowa, Mr. Mills Davis & Professor JohnBateman

Contributing co-editors: All Co-chairs & Track Champions

Today's Panelists: Communique co-Lead Editors

Abstract

OntologySummit2011 Theme: "Making the Case for Ontology"

  • Session Title: Communique draft review

This is our 6th Ontology Summit, a joint initiative by NIST, Ontolog, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA & NCO_NITRD. The theme adopted for this Ontology Summit is: "Making the Case for Ontology."

This year's Ontology Summit seeks to address the need to provide concrete evidence of successful deployment of ontologies by examining several application domains for such examples, and in better articulating where different "strengths" of ontological representation are best applied. To support that, the summit also aims to classify the categories of applications where ontology has been, and could be, successfully applied; to identify distinct types of metrics that might be used in evaluating the return on investment in an ontology application (cost, capability, performance, etc.); to lay out some strategies for articulating a case for ontological applications; and to identify remaining challenges and roadblocks to a wider deployment of such applications that represent promising application areas and research challenges for the future. The findings of the summit will be documented in the form of a communiqué intended for public consumption.

In this Communique draft review session today, we will take a look at a rough draft that John Bateman has put together, basing partly on the writing segments that various tracks have contributed. The chair, Michael Uschold, will summarize the approach that the co-lead editing team is planning to proceed with, based on their meeting earlier this week, discuss some key ideas (which they have captured during their meeting) and pose some questions for discussion. John F. Sowa and Mills Davis, who is writing the opening, and the ending of the Communique will also be taking a few minutes each to summarize their parts. The goal of this session is to allow all of us to do a status check on the progress of Communique writing, and sync up on a plan for moving forward so we can have a fairly advanced draft by the time of the Symposium (Apr-18 & 19).

See developing details on this Summit series of events at: OntologySummit2011 (home page for this summit)

Agenda

Ontology Summit 2011 - Panel Session-10

  • Session Format: this is a virtual session conducted over an augmented conference call

Proceedings

Please refer to the above

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session

see raw transcript here.

(for better clarity, the version below is a re-organized and lightly edited chat-transcript.)

Participants are welcome to make light edits to their own contributions as they see fit.

-- begin in-session chat-transcript --

Peter P. Yim: Peter P. Yim: Welcome to the

Ontology Summit 2011: Panel Session-10 - "Communique draft review session" - Thu 2011_04_07

Summit Theme: Ontology Summit 2011: Making the Case for Ontology

Session Title: Communique draft review

Session Chair: Dr. Michael Uschold

Communique Co-Lead Editors: Dr. Michael Uschold, Dr. John F. Sowa, Mr. Mills Davis & Professor John Bateman

Contributing co-editors: All Co-chairs & Track Champions

please refer to details on the session page at:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_04_07

anonymous morphed into Kurt Conrad

anonymous morphed into Fabian Neuhaus

Todd Schneider: Here's a revision to Ali's suggestion.

Todd Schneider: Every person, organization or system has an ontology: the things presumed to exist in

the world and how they behave. Interactions with the world are based on these internal ontologies.

Indeed, these ontologies pervade and underpin our deliberations, inform our decisions and guide our

actions.

In large socio-technical systems, such as companies or organizations, each person, each

technological artefact and system carries with it a view of the world relevant to its

responsibilities in this context. Operations and interactions in such environments entails

reconciling and streamlining these multiple sometimes conflicting and often tacit ontologies.

Growing complexity and a need for smarter use of resources and solutions that cut across silos,

means that it has become ever important to make explicit these implicit ontologies thereby easing

interoperability and improving operational effectiveness.

Concurrently, advances in computing, networking technologies and the Internet means that it is

possible to effectively use ontologies to address the increasing array of socio-technical problems.

Moreover, in recent years, we have witnessed the increased maturation and transition of ontology from

academia to industry and government. The time is ripe to know what you know and share it with others.

anonymous morphed into Nicola Guarino

Nicola Guarino: implicit ontology -> conceptualization

anonymous morphed into Ali Hashemi

Todd Schneider: Nicola, I agree.

Ali Hashemi: +1 to Nicola's suggestion

Ali Hashemi: I think we can also emphasize the paragraph on "Growing complexity" further as well.

Ali Hashemi: it is a natural extension of the increased dependencies on so many people and

organizations on networked and federated communication and work.

Mike Bennett: I think Nicola has clarified what I meant about systems having an [implicit] ontology.

Todd Schneider: Ali, that notion is sometimes referred to as 'net-centricity'.

Todd Schneider: There are many types of networks, not all technological.

Ali Hashemi: Todd, thanks for the clarification. Given that then - does it make sense to add and

elaborate on that angle in that paragraph

anonymous morphed into Pavithra Kenjige

Todd Schneider: Mike Bennett, in fact Ali's original terminology is more accurate. But the

introduction to the communique needs to be more general and the notion of 'conceptualization' is

better.

Todd Schneider: Ali, not sure. There are volumes on net-centricity, but I usually am involved only

with interoperability issues.

Todd Schneider: Ali, for more on net-centricity and interoperability see the materials at

https://www.ncoic.org/technology/deliverables/scope/

Ali Hashemi: What I mean to suggest is that part of the problem (and solution) in the growing

complexity is this net-centricity(?) of many people and organizations --> further highlighting the

growing importance of ontological solutions

Todd Schneider: Ali, yes. The internet and information systems have greatly added to the number of

interactions among people and systems, hence the increase in complexity (in addition to the number

of people available to participate).

Ali Hashemi: Peirce: "Find a scientific man who proposes to get along without any metaphysics... and

you have found one whose doctrines are thoroughly vitiated by the crude and uncriticized metaphysics

with which they are packed" (CP 1.129).

Todd Schneider: Rex, could you send me the latest version of the "Use Case Matrix" compilation? Or

just post it in the chat?

Rex Brooks: Okay [subsequently added] - the latest version of it is at:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/ValueMetrics/OntologySummit2011-CaseStudy--UseC

aseMatrix.pdf

Rex Brooks: @Todd: I will send a snapshot of it as an attachment to the [ontology-summit] list too.

anonymous morphed into James Davenport

Peter P. Yim: For those who joined us late ... we are viewing the Communique draft together - try

opening up [3-snapshot] (local on your desktop) or [4-wip] (shared google-doc) - under:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_04_07#nid2RL0

Ramdsriram: I need to log off to attend a meeting scheduled to address likely scenarios for next

week. Not sure whether this is relevant to the communique, but we may want to discuss some action

items for the future, i.e., what needs to be done to make ontology use more pervasive.

Mike Bennett: Re Ontologies save lives: there was a case study at SemTech 2010 from the Amsterdam

Fire Brigade, using ontology mash-up with maps, to get to fire scenes.

Rex Brooks: How about "de facto" ontologies, where they more or less "accidentally" happen to be in

force save lives?

Bruce Bray: In healthcare, ontologies are especially valuable for interoperability/integration and

representing knowledge explicitly. I don't think we have any evidence that we save lives directly

with ontologies, but of course hope they will contribute to improved health care in a meaningful and

measurable way.

Rex Brooks: I can add a bunch of examples from Haiti and other emergency management situations

similar to what Steve noted and in the standards I work on with others in OASIS which translate into

operations across the domain of emergency management.

Todd Schneider: @MichaelUschold, Mike Dean and BBN has such an example. It was presented at SemTech a

couple of years ago.

Ali Hashemi: Re what Mike Uschold is currently saying -- I think it can be useful to define a semantic

technology path, where a taxonomy or a terminology are landmarks, according to the organization /

tasks needs -- as a takeaway

Ali Hashemi: It could be useful to situate ontology within the context of an ecosystem of solutions

Todd Schneider: Ali, are you suggesting an ontology of information systems?

Ali Hashemi: No sorry. What I am suggesting is that it important that one of the take aways be that

an ontology is an integral component in any semantic technology solution to a problem.

Steve Ray: Michael Uschold, has the editing team reached a position with respect to the notion of the

communique serving as a toolkit for an ontologist trying to make the case? That aspect seems to be

less evident now.

Ali Hashemi: It really makes the most sense as something that ameliorates existing solution

approaches.

Ali Hashemi: (from selling a business solution - tying it to things that are known)

Ali Hashemi: So it's not a wholly new technology that is unclear how it fits with your current

business. But it is a natural extension of applying semantic technologies to your organization.

Ali Hashemi: The intent of what I was saying is to make it seem less "foreign" to people already

engaged in similar problems. It isn't a competing technology, but in the environment of semantic

technologies -- if you already have a terminology, a taxonomy, or a data dictionary, then a natural

extension is ontology. That's taking it to the "next level"

Alden Dima: @Ali - re situating an ontology with the context of an ecosystem of solutions - I think

that many will be confused by the distinction between an ontology and a model. I found this

interesting presentation which draws a distinction between the two: "Models versus Ontologies -

What's the Difference and where does it Matter?"

http://www.pms.ifi.lmu.de/mitarbeiter/assoziierte/spies/presentations/VORTE2006-Atkinson.pdf

Mike Bennett: @Alden good paper, but what the author means by a "model" is a "Logical Data Model"

(except near the end).

Nicola Guarino: @AldenDima: There are many kind of models. For instance, system engineers and

physicists are used to simulation models, which allow one to make preditions about a system's

behavior. Ontologies are *reference* models, which help to clarify the intended meaning of the

symbols adopted.

Rex Brooks: What Todd is asking about is important. A toolkit needs to have the ability to be adapted

to different markets or problems. So it should be made clear that the example used is just one for

its market/problem.

John Bateman: Maybe we *should* write a book!

John Bateman: @RexBrooks: there should be several examples, and the ODF should indicate how to select

among examples I guess.

Rex Brooks: We could sponsor the writing of a book, but we don't have time to do that even with "many

hands" making "small work."

Rex Brooks: @JohnBateman: Yes, definitely. I'm working on compiling the Case Studies and Use Cases

now.

Steve Ray: Could we perhaps make the linkages between the examples, and the relevant value metrics

that are improved? This would help an ontologist know which metrics to highlight, by finding similar

use cases to the one they are advocating.

Steve Ray: Check out what is essentially an ontology related to Silicon Valley startups in today's

New York Times: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/dealbook/DEALBOOK_Money_Network.pdf

Michael Uschold: how about presenting the Communique as a FAQ

Rex Brooks: I think a FAQ is BAD idea!

Nicola Guarino: I think a text is still essential, definitely

Matthew West: I think it is not a good idea. Augment with FAQ

John Bateman: FAQ only as supportive material definitely.

Ali Hashemi: ^^^ +1

Peter P. Yim: as requested by MichAelUschold, a FAQ page is already available (awaiting anyone to

contribute to) - goto: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?MakingTheCaseForOntology_FAQ

Nicola Guarino: We already discussed this point. A text plus slides, faqs, links, whatever

Rex Brooks: A wiki page is good as an adjunct. But a FAQ is associated with bad documentation.

Leo Obrst: I think the OOR intends to have ontology metadata that can also include ontology use

cases, etc., and have that accessible via services, SPARQL, etc.

John Bateman: @LeoObrst: this kind of links back with OMV, right? which we were also thinking of

referencing here in combination with the ODF but that is not in the doc at present: link:

http://omv2.sourceforge.net/description.html

Leo Obrst: @JohnBateman: Yes, that is correct. We are using OMV, but will extend it if necessary. You

might also want to reference the OOR page:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Metadata

John Bateman: @LeoObrst: yes, definitely, I believe and agree this should be an important OOR feature

and we should reference that...

Leo Obrst: @JohnBateman: there is more at:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository, in the individual metadata sessions,

e.g., http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2011_03_18

John Bateman: @LeoObrst: got it!

Todd Schneider: Have to go. Good luck editors.

Rex Brooks: What is the conclusion of the communique going to be?

Matthew West: I'm going to have to leave now. I think the direction is all looking very promising. I

think we should let you (the lead editors) get on with it, but feel free to use crowd sourcing where

you need help

Todd Schneider: First task - finish an outline everyone can agree to.

Rex Brooks: Are we going to say "Go Forth and Multiply Relevant Ontologies?"

Mike Bennett: Go forth and integrate?

Rex Brooks: That too!

Nicola Guarino: @MikeBennett: +1

Mike Bennett: Did I still need to try and go through the Case Study examples and link the high level

things we reported, to the individual case studies, or is this superseded by the cross referencing

being talked about now?

Ali Hashemi: I've gotta run. Thanks.

Peter P. Yim: Thanks, Ali ... glad you could come

Mike Bennett: I can trace name of the Case Study presentation title to the company

Mike Bennett: Originally each case study had company and presentation name, Rex is citing case study

name, which has a 1:1 with the company / presenter so that's easy

Nicola Guarino: Ciao Ali

Peter P. Yim: Michael Uschold confirms: I'll get a next draft out end-of-day next Wednesday (Apr-13)

Peter P. Yim: At our next Thursday session, we will carve out a ~30 min. slot for another status review

on the Communique

Peter P. Yim: -- session ended: 10:43am PDT --

-- end of in-session chat-transcript --

  • Further Question & Remarks - please post them to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv
    • all subscribers to the previous summit discussion, and all who responded to today's call will automatically be subscribed to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv
    • if you are already subscribed, post to <ontology-summit [at] ontolog.cim3.net>
    • (if you are not yet subscribed) you may subscribe yourself to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv, by sending a blank email to <ontology-summit-join [at] ontolog.cim3.net> from your subscribing email address, and then follow the instructions you receive back from the mailing list system.
      • please email <peter.yim@cim3.com> if you have any question.

Audio Recording of this Session

  • To download the recording of the session, click here
    • the playback of the audio files require the proper setup, and an MP3 compatible player on your computer.
  • Conference Date and Time: 7-Apr-2011 9:36am~10:43 am PST
  • Duration of Recording: 0 Hour 59 Minutes
  • Recording File Size: 6.7 MB (in mp3 format)
  • suggestions:
    • its best that you listen to the session while having the respective materials opened in front of you. You'll be prompted to advance slides by the speaker.
    • Take a look, also, at the rich body of knowledge that this community has built together, over the years, by going through the archives of noteworthy past Ontolog events. (References on how to subscribe to our podcast can also be found there.)

Additional Resources

  • Homepage of OntologySummit2011
    • Ontology Summit 2011 Launch Event - ConferenceCall_2011_01_20
    • "Ontology Application Framework" session - ConferenceCall_2011_02_03
    • "Ontology Applications & Use Cases - I" - ConferenceCall_2011_01_27
    • "Ontology Applications & Use Cases - II" - ConferenceCall_2011_02_10
    • "Value Metrics, Value Models and the Value Proposition" - ConferenceCall_2011_02_17
    • "Strategies for 'Making the case'" - ConferenceCall_2011_02_24
    • "Integrating the Ontology Application Framework, User Cases and Value Metrics" - ConferenceCall_2011_03_03
    • "Perspectives from the European Commission" - ConferenceCall_2011_03_17
    • "Grand Challenges" - ConferenceCall_2011_03_24
    • "Synthesis & Reports" - ConferenceCall_2011_03_31
  • [ontology-summit] mailing list archives - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
  • Homepage of this annual Summit series - see: OntologySummit

For the record ...

How To Join (while the session is in progress)

Note that we will start promptly; if you are new to this setting, please dial-in to the conference call 5~10 minutes before the scheduled start time!

Conference Call Details

  • Date: Thursday 7-Apr-2011
  • Start Time: 9:30am PDT / 12:30pm EDT / 6:30pm CEST / 5:30pm BST / 16:30 UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: ~1.5 hours
  • Dial-in Number:
    • from a US telephone (US): +1-218-844-8060 (domestic long distance cost will apply)
    • When calling in from a phone, use Conference ID: "4389979#"
    • from Europe, call:
      • Austria 0820-4000-1577
      • Belgium 070-35-9992
      • France 0826-100-280
      • Germany 01805-00-7642
      • Ireland 0818-270-037
      • Italy 848-390-179
      • Spain 0902-886-056
      • Switzerland 0848-560-327
      • UK 0844-581-9148
    • callers from other countries please dial into either one of the US or European numbers
  • Shared-screen support (VNC session), if applicable, will be started 5 minutes before the call at: http://vnc2.cim3.net:5800/
    • view-only password: "ontolog"
    • if you plan to be logging into this shared-screen option (which the speaker may be navigating), and you are not familiar with the process, please try to call in 5 minutes before the start of the session so that we can work out the connection logistics. Help on this will generally not be available once the presentation starts.
    • people behind corporate firewalls may have difficulty accessing this. If that is the case, please download the material above and running them locally. The speaker(s) will prompt you to advance the slides during the talk.
  • Discussions and Q & A:
    • (Unless the conference host has already muted everyone) Please mute your phone, by pressing "*2" on your phone keypad, when a presentation is in progress. To un-mute, press "*3"
    • You can type in your questions or comments through the browser based chat session by:
    • or point your browser to: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/ontolog_20110407
      • instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field). You can indicate that you want to ask a question verbally by clicking on the "hand" button, and wait for the moderator to call on you; or, type and send your question into the chat window at the bottom of the screen.
    • (when everyone is muted) If you want to speak or have questions or remarks to make, please "raise your hand (virtually)" by click on the "hand button" (lower right) on the chat session page. You may speak when acknowledged by the speaker or the session moderator (again, press "*3" on your phone to unmute). Test your voice and introduce yourself first before proceeding with your remarks, please. (Please remember to click on the "hand button" again (to lower your hand) and press "*2" on your phone to mute yourself after you are done speaking.)
    • thanks to the soaphub.org folks, one can now use a jabber/xmpp client (e.g. gtalk) to join this chatroom. Just add the room as a buddy - (in our case here) ontolog_20110407@soaphub.org ... Handy for mobile devices!
  • Please note that this session will be recorded, and the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.

Attendees

  • Expecting:
    • ... if you are coming to the session, please add your name above (plus your affiliation, if you aren't already a member of the community) above; or e-mail <peter.yim@cim3.com> so that we can reserve enough resources to support everyone's participation. ...



Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2011_04_07&oldid=1275"