Actions

Ontolog Forum

Ontology Summit Theme: Community Brainstorm Session - Thu 2013-09-19

Session Co-chairs: MichaelGruninger (IAOA; U of Toronto) & PeterYim (Ontolog; CIM3)

Topic: Brainstorm Session on the Ontology Summit 2014 Theme: Community Input & Planning

* * * Note that this session will start 1 hour earlier than our normal session time * * *

Archives

Conference Call Details

  • Date: Thursday, 19-Sep-2013
  • Start Time: 8:30am PDT / 11:30am EDT / 5:30pm CEST / 4:30pm BST / 1530 UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: ~1.5 hours
  • Dial-in:
    • Phone (US): +1 (206) 402-0100 ... (long distance cost may apply)
      • ... [ backup nbr: (415) 671-4335 ]
      • when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
    • Skype: joinconference (i.e. make a skype call to the contact with skypeID="joinconference") ... (generally free-of-charge, when connecting from your computer ... ref.)
      • when prompted enter Conference ID: 141184#
      • Unfamiliar with how to do this on Skype? ...
        • Add the contact "joinconference" to your skype contact list first. To participate in the teleconference, make a skype call to "joinconference", then open the dial pad (see platform-specific instructions below) and enter the Conference ID: 141184# when prompted.
      • Can't find Skype Dial pad? ...
        • for Windows Skype users: Can't find Skype Dial pad? ... it's under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad"
        • for Linux Skype users: please note that the dial-pad is only available on v4.1 (or later; or on the earlier Skype versions 2.x,) if the dialpad button is not shown in the call window you need to press the "d" hotkey to enable it. ... (ref.)
  • 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 slides above (where applicable) and running them locally. The speaker(s) will prompt you to advance the slides during the talk.
  • In-session chat-room url: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/summit_20130919
    • instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field from "anonymous" to your real name, like "JaneDoe").
    • 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.
    • 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) summit_20130919@soaphub.org ... Handy for mobile devices!
  • Discussions and Q & A:
    • Nominally, when a presentation is in progress, the moderator will mute everyone, except for the speaker.
    • To un-mute, press "*7" ... To mute, press "*6" (please mute your phone, especially if you are in a noisy surrounding, or if you are introducing noise, echoes, etc. into the conference line.)
    • we will usually save all questions and discussions till after all presentations are through. You are encouraged to jot down questions onto the chat-area in the mean time (that way, they get documented; and you might even get some answers in the interim, through the chat.)
    • During the Q&A / discussion segment (when everyone is muted), If you want to speak or have questions or remarks to make, please raise your hand (virtually) by clicking on the "hand button" (lower right) on the chat session page. You may speak when acknowledged by the session moderator (again, press "*7" on your phone to un-mute). 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 "*6" on your phone to mute yourself after you are done speaking.)
  • RSVP to peter.yim@cim3.com with your affiliation appreciated, ... or simply just by adding yourself to the "Expected Attendee" list below (if you are a member of the community already.)
  • Please note that this session may be recorded, and if so, the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content, along with the proceedings of the call to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.

Attendees

Abstract

The Ontology Summit is an annual series of events (first started by Ontolog and NIST in 2006) that involves the ontology community and communities related to each year's theme chosen for the summit. The Ontology Summit program is now co-organized by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA, NCO_NITRD along with the co-sponsorship of other organizations that are supportive of the Summit goals and objectives.

While the actual events of Ontology Summit 2014 will be rolled out between January and April of 2014, we have decided we will try to plan for it early. An initial round of input has already been received, as part of the Ontology Summit 2013 postmortem session on 2013.05.23. During that session, the community also agreed on having today's session, so we can dedicate some quality time to specifically discuss the possibilities and options on the choice of Themes for OntologySummit2014. This session will, therefore, be devoted to explore the theme(s) and topics that would best allow us to leverage next year's OntologySummit.

Ideas and suggestions collected so far are available at: OntologySummit/Suggestions. Members of the community are encouraged to continuously and asynchronously provide further input via this wiki page and via the [ontology-summit] mailing list as well.

See developing details on the next Summit's homepage at: OntologySummit2014

Agenda

Brainstorm Session on the Ontology Summit 2014 Theme: Community Input & Planning

Session Format: this is a virtual session conducted over an augmented conference call
  • 3. Any other business (10 min.)

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 --

Chat transcript from room: summit_20130919

2013-09-19 GMT-08:00 [PDT]

[8:16] Peter P. Yim: Welcome to the

Ontology Summit Theme: Community Brainstorm Session - Thu 2013-09-19

Session Co-chairs: Professor Michael Grüninger & Mr. Peter P. Yim

Topic: Brainstorm Session on the Ontology Summit 2014 Theme: Community Input & Planning

Logistics:

  • (if you haven't already done so) please click on "settings" (top center) and morph from "anonymous" to your RealName (in WikiWord format)
  • Mute control: *7 to un-mute ... *6 to mute
  • Can't find Skype Dial pad?
    • for Windows Skype users: it's under the "Call" dropdown menu as "Show Dial pad"
    • for Linux Skype users: please note that the dial-pad is only available on v4.1 (or later or the earlier Skype versions 2.x,)

if the dialpad button is not shown in the call window you need to press the "d" hotkey to enable it.

Attendees: Michael Grüninger (co-chair), Peter P. Yim (co-chair), Ali Hashemi, Bob Smith, Henson Graves,

Jack Ring, Ken Baclawski, Lamar Henderson, Leo Obrst, Matthew West, Mike Dean, Richard Martin,

Stefano Borgo, Todd Schneider

proceedings

[8:33] Peter P. Yim: == Michael Grüninger & Peter P. Yim starts session by providing an overview - see intro

slides at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2013_09_19#nid3XST

[8:42] List of members: Ali Hashemi, Bob Smith, Henson Graves, Ken Baclawski, Lamar Henderson, Leo Obrst,

Michael Grüninger, Mike Dean, Peter P. Yim, Richard Martin, Todd Schneider, vnc2

[8:43] Peter P. Yim: == open discussion begins ...

[8:44] Leo Obrst: How about, a slight merger of topics: Ontologies and Reasoning over Big Data

[8:44] Peter P. Yim: Michael suggested Todd Schneider starts the discussion off ... telling us about his

suggestion of the "Reasoning with Ontologies" theme (that he brought up during the

Ontology Summit 2013 postmortem session)

[8:45] Peter P. Yim: @Todd - how do you see this theme interact with the RulesReasoningLP mini-series

that is just starting on Ontolog?

[8:47] Todd Schneider: Peter, yes. They overlap.

[8:--] Peter P. Yim: I suggest we capitalize on the buzz in "Big Data" and work on a theme that shows

the world how Ontology can contribute to Big Data

[8:48] Ali Hashemi: I'd be very interested in Ontologies in Hybrid Reasoning Systems.. It is relevant

to both Todd and Peter's points.

[8:49] Ali Hashemi: Given that in many contexts, people assert that reasoning over declarative

constructs is not particularly efficient, it would be interesting to see how various people cordon

off declarative reasoning, and pass off the reasoning task to some alternative system

[8:49] Ali Hashemi: I suspect many Big Data problems would invoke such a methodology.

[8:50] Leo Obrst: There is a AAAI Fall Symposium on "Semantics for Big Data":

http://www.aaai.org/Symposia/Fall/fss13symposia.php#fs04. Also, STIDS 2013 theme is "Semantics

Technologies for Big Data": http://stids.c4i.gmu.edu/.

[8:52] Henson Graves: Metadata and its generalization to ontologies for managing large data is one

promising area where reasoning is applicable for finding and drawing conclusions about data

[8:53] Todd Schneider: Another aspect of big data is search and semantic search.

[8:57] Michael Grüninger: I really like the idea of a Summit that brings together the Semantic Web

community with the formal and applied ontology community

[8:57] Peter P. Yim: Leo / Michael: ... the merged "merger of topics: Ontologies and Reasoning over Big

Data" (plus Ali's suggestion on "hybrid reasoning") provides a theme that will bring the ontology

community and the semantic web community together too

[8:58] Leo Obrst: The Linked Data community typically addresses the lower range of the Semantic Web,

i.e., RDF + URIs / IRIs. That too is "big" distributed data.

[8:58] Ali Hashemi: A common complaint from the ontology community is that sem web vocabularies don't

often have explicit semantics. In many cases, these semantics are interpreted by other tools,

because ontology reasoning tools are not perceived as being adequate to the task.

[8:59] Ali Hashemi: Elaborating on these rationales, and identifying why and how the reasoning is

passed to external processes would be informative

[9:00] Ali Hashemi: Isn't there a danger at casting too broad a scope for the theme? It can detract

from generating something actionably useful for the community(ies)

[8:59] Todd Schneider: Peter, what's the schedule for the Rules, Reasoning, LP meetings?

[9:00] Peter P. Yim: @Todd - see:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2013_09_12#nid3XF2

[9:01] Peter P. Yim: mini-series sessions: (3XF2)

R1. RulesReasoningLP: Survey and Introduction [LeoObrst, BenjaminGrosof] (3XF3)

session date: Thu 2013.10.24 (3XF6)

R2. Concepts and Foundations of Logic Programming and Semantic Web Programming [LeoObrst, PascalHitzler] (3XF7)

session date: Thu 2013.10.31 (3XFA)

R3. Rule Standards: Common Logic, RuleML, and RIF [HaroldBoley, Adrian Paschke, MikeDean] (3XFB)

session date: Thu 2013.11.21 (3XFE)

R4. Guide to Reasoning Applications Development and Cases [HensonGraves, KenBaclawski] (3XFF)

session date: Thu 2013.12.19 (3XFI)

[9:02] Leo Obrst: The "standard" approach to Semantic Web / OWL + logic programming (with rules)

reasoning has been explicitly hybrid, i.e., some approaches in logic programming use two parts to

any rule, a description logic part and a standard logic programming part. Other approaches do try to

merge these, e.g., Grosof's work, etc.

[9:03] Ali Hashemi: Can we identify some of the pain points @ the interfaces between the two

communities?

[9:03] Ali Hashemi: My impression is that the Semantic Web community stays away from more formal

ontologies because (a) they're hard, (b) suspicions about the value of reasoning over the ontologies

[9:03] Ali Hashemi: *i could be wrong*

[9:04] Henson Graves: upper ontologies are quite useful for describing large data sets

[9:06] Todd Schneider: Henson, but the descriptions (based on a foundational ontology) usually don't

support the detailed analysis that users expect.

[9:08] Henson Graves: Todd, the upper ontologies give a good, common place to start, they may have to

be enriched

[9:05] Todd Schneider: What about the something along the lines of creating ontologies from big data?

[9:05] Ali Hashemi: If the idea is to try to bridge the gap, I would suggest we do some "market

research" and identify what the real pain points between the two communities are

[9:05] Ali Hashemi: and perhaps focus in on these issues.

[9:06] Todd Schneider: Ali, which communities?

[9:06] Ali Hashemi: for @12:05 - communities would be Formal Ontology and Semantic Web

[9:09] Todd Schneider: Should we spin the notion as 'big linked data':)?

[9:09] Peter P. Yim: when we are doing an "internal-facing theme" we want to be *very focused* ... but

when we are doing an "external-facing" theme, having a wider scope can actually be useful, and allow

us to be more inclusive, get more people engaged, and so on

[9:10] Richard Martin: How does the topic proposal for the two communities fit with the topic of

Semantic Federation?

[9:12] anonymous morphed into Matthew West

[9:15] Matthew West: Apologies for late arrival.

[9:12] Mike Dean: Jim Hendler named director of new RPI Institute for Data Exploration and

Applications (IDEA): http://prod3.server.rpi.edu/oth/update.do?artcenterkey=3060

[9:12] Ali Hashemi: Well, why does Jim think that deep semantics are not fruitful?

[9:12] Ali Hashemi: And why do we give the impression that lightweight semantics are not enough?

[9:19] Jack Ring: Beyond today's session focus on the [Ontology community + Semantic Web community]

is the N other communities who do not have necessary, sufficient and efficient ways of understanding

one another. Is it time to address the larger problem? Until we respond to the issue of semantic

federation we will not serve the "marketplace"

[9:26] Jack Ring: This may be too far off the wall but please consider why the Morse Code was

embraced by many people world-wide whereas Esperanto exhibited far less market standing.

[9:33] Jack Ring: As the bumper sticker says, "Ontologies Happen" or is there a way to precipitate an

ontology representative of some field of discourse? The decisions and choices that arrive at an

ontology are quite similar to those that arrive at a model of most any system, describing its

intended purpose along with what it IS, KNOWS and DOES. A large vote for how to arrive at an

ontology.

[9:20] Ali Hashemi: IMO, the hybrid reasoning approach would help bridge these multiple communities.

In each community, what an ontology can offer is limited by a variety of factors, and how the

ontology operates in the larger systems is dependent on the perception of the community of the

limits of ontology, and the passing off of erstwhile reasoning tasks to other system components.

[9:20] Bob Smith: The Financial Industry BUSINESS Ontology (FIBO) effort seems rich with potential

facets to discuss

[9:23] Peter P. Yim: @RichardMartin, Jack Ring, Bob Smith, Lamar Henderson - are you alluding to the use of

"ontological analysis" as the means whereby we can reach out to a lot of other communities?

[9:24] Leo Obrst: "Big data" is a bit of a misnomer. Typically what is meant is vast uninterpreted,

barely interpreted, or disparately interpreted data. Hence the usual use of quantitative methods

(statistical, data-mining, etc.) But there is other big data, such as in e-science, the financial

community, where there is a need for finer semantic interpretation.

[9:24] Henson Graves: Peter, yes i agree

[9:30] Todd Schneider: Use of ontology for managing big data?

[9:31] Henson Graves: Todd, as I was saying earlier ontology is very useful for managing big data.

this is using an ontology as a generalized version of metadata

[9:32] Todd Schneider: If the theme is ontology development, do we then have a ready set of speakers

(i.e., the upcoming book contributors?:)

[9:33] Michael Grüninger: Theme 1: Semantic Web and Formal Applied Ontology

[9:33] Michael Grüninger: Theme 2: Semantic Federation

[9:34] Michael Grüninger: Theme 3: Development of Ontologies

[9:34] Richard Martin: Assuming that 1) a very specific domain ontology is possible for each of

several related domains, 2) how do we use ontological tools to communicate amongst those

communities?

[9:34] Matthew West: The challenge with Big Data and Linked Data is that it is just data, and the

problems are the same problems we have discussed before, mostly about meaning and integration.

However, engaging with the latest buzz words obviously has some merit. I would also be interested in

looking at some of the "What" we identified in this year's communique, and developing it into a "How

to" methodology for some of those tasks.

[9:35] Peter P. Yim: Theme 3a: Development of Ontologies within and across domains

[9:35] Todd Schneider: If the theme is development of ontologies, then I would expect the outcome and

the communique to provide a paradigm for developing ontologies.

[9:35] Henson Graves: development of ontologies as a way of bridging different communities, and

communities such as construction which have to broaden their conversation

[9:36] Jack Ring: If we pursue Theme 3 then Semantic Federation becomes a facet of the design

process. Then we notice that Big Data is a pile of needles in which there may be several straws

belonging to several systems.

[9:37] Leo Obrst: Semantic Web and Formal Applied Ontology for Big Data

[9:38] Peter P. Yim: @LeoObrst and All: how about - Theme 1a:Semantic Web and Formal Applied Ontology

for Big Data

[9:38] Lamar Henderson: We need to define big data.

[9:38] Matthew West: Rather we need to discover how Big Data is being used.

[9:43] Richard Martin: How do we craft a domain ontology to maximize the use of reasoning methods

across domains?

[9:44] Leo Obrst: Potential tracks:

1) definition of big data and kinds of semantic interpretations needed, i.e., use cases.

2) combining ontological reasoning and lightweight SW reasoning over big data.

3) Combining quantitative methods with ontological reasoning over big data.

[9:45] Jack Ring: 2 and 3 are not the same. 2 presumes entities already exist and must be

rationalized whereas 3 creates the entities

[9:47] Ali Hashemi: For what it's worth, while I believe reasoning could be a single track in the

Semantic Web + Formal Ontology track is viable

[9:47] Todd Schneider: How about the application of ontology analysis in big data and the semantic

web as a theme?

[9:47] Ali Hashemi: It is a distinct theme, because reasoning in Systems vs reasoning in Semantic Web

vs reasoning in Big Data have separate components

[9:48] Ali Hashemi: and could be individual tracks each

[9:48] Leo Obrst: Also, a topic like "Semantic Web and Formal Applied Ontology for Big Data" kind of

teams up the two communities to collaboratively address "big data" issues.

[9:48]MatthewWest: It would be better to pick something specific rather than try to combine everything.

[9:48] Henson Graves: got to go, by

[9:49] Ali Hashemi: I've got to run. Bye.

[9:50] Leo Obrst: I must go too.

[9:52] Peter P. Yim: summarize (title and one paragraph):

Theme-1 - Michael Grüninger;

Theme-2 - Richard Martin;

Theme-3 - Todd Schneider

-> send to Michael Grüninger

[9:53] Peter P. Yim: Michael will then post to the [ontology-summit] list and we will further discuss these theme

there with the rest of the community

[9:53] Peter P. Yim: great session ... thanks everyone!

[9:54] Peter P. Yim: -- session ended - 9:52am PDT --

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

A Summary of the Three Candidate Themes Discussed

Here is the summary of the three themes that were discussed at the Brainstorming Meeting (summarised by Michael Grüninger, Richard Martin & ToddSchneider):

Theme 1: Formal Ontology and the Semantic Web

  • Potential Tracks:
    • bridging the gaps between the formal ontology and Semantic Web communities
    • reasoning with formal ontologies on the Web -- the challenge of tractability
    • formal ontology and big open linked data
    • combining ontological reasoning and lightweight Semantic Web reasoning over big data
    • what ontologies are needed for Semantic Web applications?
    • (contributions from earlier Summits on Upper Ontologies and Ontology Repositories)

Theme 2: Semantic Federation

Recent Ontology Summit themes have largely been "internal-facing", focusing on issues important to the ontological community participants. Ontology Summit 2011: "Making the Case for Ontology" offered an "external-facing" theme intended to promote ontology as a way for users to express and regularize their conceptual terminology. Given this exposition of capabilities from the past, we can now apply this knowledge and the techniques identified to resolve an urgent need for communication among cross discipline teams responsible for creating very complicated and complex systems in health care, international commerce, defense, and civil infrastructure. Today multi-domain, multi-national teams, each with its own conceptual foundation, cultural distinctions, and operational languages are addressing these systemic problems. We waste enormous quantities of capital resources and human energy with ineffective and inefficient communication among participants, not for lack of trying to communicate, but because we have insufficient means for understanding the semantic similarity and dissonance in attempted communication. Our failures to interoperate successfully must be resolved if we are to meet expanding obligations.

The summit would include tracks such as

  • 1) definition of a semantic federation situation;
  • 2) ontological reasoning and inference in a semantic federation;
  • 3) identifying achievable objectives for semantic federation;
  • 4) necessary and sufficient specification of domain ontology for semantic federation participation;
  • 5) tools for semantic mapping of domain ontology to each other.

Theme 3: Development of Ontologies

The goal of the Summit will be: the promotion of common 'best' practices for the development of ontologies; development of requirements, promotion of an understanding and use of ontological analysis, the role and use of foundational ontologies, and testing/evaluation.

Possible tracks:

  • 0) Defining Ontology Requirements - A systems perspective
    • Understand the intended uses (this can include federation)
    • How intended uses impact ontology development and evaluation
  • 1) Ontological Architecture
  • 2) Automated techniques for proto-ontology development
    • Data mining for terminology and interpretation extraction
    • How to develop ontologies applicable from big data
  • 3) Ontological Analysis
    • Bring in Barry Smith to start things off
    • Follow up with practices to avoid the issues Barry raised
    • Introduction to ontological analysis - what it is, how it helps
    • Ontology development trade-offs based on ontological analysis
  • 4) Performance
    • How to 'tune' an ontology
    • How reasoning impacts development and performance
  • 5) Reuse
    • How to evaluate existing ontologies for reuse

Further Question & Remarks - please post them to the [ ontology-summit ] listserv

Resources

For the record ...

How To Join (while the session is in progress)



Retrieved from "https://ontologforum.com/index.php?title=ConferenceCall_2013_09_19&oldid=2785"