From OntologPSMW

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Last updated at: 2012-01-05 16:42:21 By user: PeterYim)
(Fix PurpleMediaWiki references)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= [[OntologySummit2012]]: Suggestions  =
+
= [[OntologySummit2012|Ontology Summit 2012]]: Suggestions  =
  
''This is a workspace collecting suggestions on how to better organize, coordinate and facilitate [[OntologySummit2012]] activities. While mainly intended for the use by the organizing committee, this is an open page, and contributions from other summit participants who are not on the organizing committee are welcome.''  
+
''This is a workspace collecting suggestions on how to better organize, coordinate and facilitate [[OntologySummit2012|Ontology Summit 2012]] activities. While mainly intended for the use by the organizing committee, this is an open page, and contributions from other summit participants who are not on the organizing committee are welcome.''  
  
== [[OntologySummit2012]]: Ontology for Big Systems  ==
+
== [[OntologySummit2012|Ontology Summit 2012]]: Ontology for Big Systems  ==
  
 
7th in the series of a 3-month open annual event by and for the Ontology Community. This Summit is '''co-organized by [[Ontolog]], [[NIST]], [[NCOR]], [[NCBO]], [[IAOA]] & [[NCO_NITRD]]'''  
 
7th in the series of a 3-month open annual event by and for the Ontology Community. This Summit is '''co-organized by [[Ontolog]], [[NIST]], [[NCOR]], [[NCBO]], [[IAOA]] & [[NCO_NITRD]]'''  
Line 9: Line 9:
 
ref. '''OntologySummit'''  
 
ref. '''OntologySummit'''  
  
* [ [http://interop.cim3.net/forum//ontology-summit-org/ ontology-summit-org] ] message archives - http://interop.cim3.net/forum//ontology-summit-org/ <pre>(organizing committee members only)</pre>
+
* [ [http://interop.cim3.net/forum//ontology-summit-org/ ontology-summit-org] ] message archives - http://interop.cim3.net/forum//ontology-summit-org/ (organizing committee members only)  
  
* [ [http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ ontology-summit] ] message archives - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ <pre>(open - for all summit participants)</pre>
+
* [ [http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ ontology-summit] ] message archives - http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/ (open - for all summit participants)  
  
 
----
 
----
  
== Ideas on How to Frame the Discussion ==
+
== Ideas on How to Frame the Discourse ==
  
=== From the 2011_12_08 Pre-launch Community Session prep work: ===
+
=== From the 2011_12_08 Pre-launch Community Session prep work  ===
  
 
ref. http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_12_08#nid30GJ  
 
ref. http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_12_08#nid30GJ  
Line 33: Line 33:
 
::o  Heterogeneity of data (e.g. 600 different representations of patient records)  
 
::o  Heterogeneity of data (e.g. 600 different representations of patient records)  
 
::o  Federation of distributed data sources  
 
::o  Federation of distributed data sources  
::o  Extracting (useful) knowledge out of big data (using ontology to [[UNDERSTAND]] data)  
+
::o  Extracting (useful) knowledge out of big data (using ontology to UNDERSTAND data)  
  
 
* formulate recommendations for the application of ontological techniques to specific key problems we are facing in the subject area.  
 
* formulate recommendations for the application of ontological techniques to specific key problems we are facing in the subject area.  
Line 46: Line 46:
 
----
 
----
  
=== From the 2011_12_08 community brainstorm input - items to note for action: ===
+
=== From the 2011_12_08 community brainstorm input - items to note for action  ===
  
 
ref. under: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_12_08#nid3085  
 
ref. under: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_12_08#nid3085  
  
* TimWilson: I have to leave the call soon, but I am very interested in
+
* [[TimWilson|Tim Wilson]]: I have to leave the call soon, but I am very interested in
 
the System Engineering aspects of Ontology as well as Ontology
 
the System Engineering aspects of Ontology as well as Ontology
 
Acquisition, including text analytics.  
 
Acquisition, including text analytics.  
  
* [[JackRing]]: A joint Working Group of the International Council on
+
* [[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: A joint Working Group of the International Council on
 
Systems Engineering and International Society for Systems Sciences is
 
Systems Engineering and International Society for Systems Sciences is
 
pursuing the development of a Unified Ontology for Systems
 
pursuing the development of a Unified Ontology for Systems
Line 60: Line 60:
 
interaction with ontologists.  
 
interaction with ontologists.  
  
* [[AmandaVizedom]]: I will volunteer for a Quality in Context Track
+
* [[AmandaVizedom|Amanda Vizedom]]: I will volunteer for a Quality in Context Track
 
(fitness for purpose, evaluation, metrics and metrics) under whichever
 
(fitness for purpose, evaluation, metrics and metrics) under whichever
 
theme.  
 
theme.  
** [[JackRing]]: @Amanda, are you including the quality of an ontology?  
+
** [[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: @Amanda, are you including the quality of an ontology?  
** [[AmandaVizedom]]: Yes, that's what I mean, thanks for asking. The track
+
** [[AmandaVizedom|Amanda Vizedom]]: Yes, that's what I mean, thanks for asking. The track
 
I'm suggesting is the theme-focused variant of the topic Joanne and I
 
I'm suggesting is the theme-focused variant of the topic Joanne and I
 
suggested here:http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit/Suggestions#nid30E4.
 
suggested here:http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit/Suggestions#nid30E4.
Line 71: Line 71:
 
Systems Applications"  
 
Systems Applications"  
  
* KenAllgood: I will volunteer for Ontology in electronic health
+
* [[KenAllgood|Ken Allgood]]: I will volunteer for Ontology in electronic health
 
record/bioinformatics  
 
record/bioinformatics  
  
* [[MichaelRiben]]: idea for track- NoSQL infrastructure and Ontology for
+
* [[MichaelRiben|Michael Riben]]: idea for track- [[NoSQL]] infrastructure and Ontology for
 
Big Data and Cloud systems  
 
Big Data and Cloud systems  
  
* [[MatthewWest]]: If there is interest in a thread on ontology of big
+
* [[MatthewWest|Matthew West]]: If there is interest in a thread on ontology of big
 
engineering systems, I'm happy to contribute.  
 
engineering systems, I'm happy to contribute.  
** [[ToddSchneider]]: How about 'Ontological Analysis in Systems Engineering'?  
+
** [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: How about 'Ontological Analysis in Systems Engineering'?  
** [[MatthewWest]]: @Todd That sounds close to what I was suggesting. Happy to merge.  
+
** [[MatthewWest|Matthew West]]: @Todd That sounds close to what I was suggesting. Happy to merge.  
** [[ToddSchneider]]: Matthew, sound good to merge.  
+
** [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Matthew, sound good to merge.  
  
* PatCassidy: I would be willing to champion a track on exploring the
+
* [[PatCassidy|Pat Cassidy]]: I would be willing to champion a track on exploring the
 
use of a common foundation ontology as a translation mechanism
 
use of a common foundation ontology as a translation mechanism
 
(interlingua) among multiple databases or multiple systems - large or
 
(interlingua) among multiple databases or multiple systems - large or
Line 89: Line 89:
 
can just present a paper with my views.  
 
can just present a paper with my views.  
  
* [[MikeBennett]]: I'd like to suggest ontology sharing etc. but don't have
+
* [[MikeBennett|Mike Bennett]]: I'd like to suggest ontology sharing etc. but don't have
 
the bandwidth to head this up.  
 
the bandwidth to head this up.  
  
* [[JackRing]]: I was volunteering to organize a track on the hardware implications.  
+
* [[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: I was volunteering to organize a track on the hardware implications.  
** [[JackRing]]: Track: Implications of forthcoming massively parallel hardware.  
+
** [[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: Track: Implications of forthcoming massively parallel hardware.  
  
 
* Eric Chan: + for aligning dots to tracks, I have Data, Process,
 
* Eric Chan: + for aligning dots to tracks, I have Data, Process,
 
Engineered, Multi-displinary,  
 
Engineered, Multi-displinary,  
  
* [[MichaelRiben]]: tract title: Enhancing Big Data Analytics with Ontologies  
+
* [[MichaelRiben|Michael Riben]]: tract title: Enhancing Big Data Analytics with Ontologies  
  
* KenAllgood: I'd recommend "information interoperability across federated data"  
+
* [[KenAllgood|Ken Allgood]]: I'd recommend "information interoperability across federated data"  
  
* AliHashemi: @Steve -- at the end of the last summit, there was a
+
* [[AliHashemi|Ali Hashemi]]: @Steve -- at the end of the last summit, there was a
 
consideration to alongside a Communique, explicitly commit to creating
 
consideration to alongside a Communique, explicitly commit to creating
 
a website for the summit?  
 
a website for the summit?  
** AliHashemi: I can volunteer, but I definitely won't be able to do it alone.  
+
** [[AliHashemi|Ali Hashemi]]: I can volunteer, but I definitely won't be able to do it alone.  
** KenAllgood: I could assist Ali in the website  
+
** [[KenAllgood|Ken Allgood]]: I could assist Ali in the website  
  
* [[AmandaVizedom]]: I'd like to see a track refining "Big Systems," either
+
* [[AmandaVizedom|Amanda Vizedom]]: I'd like to see a track refining "Big Systems," either
 
focusing down or presenting some branches/subtopics.  
 
focusing down or presenting some branches/subtopics.  
** [[AmandaVizedom]]: Track proposal: Use cases / examples?  "Use Cases for
+
** [[AmandaVizedom|Amanda Vizedom]]: Track proposal: Use cases / examples?  "Use Cases for
 
Ontologies in Big Systems"  
 
Ontologies in Big Systems"  
** [[AmandaVizedom]]: For that use cases suggestion, I'd imagine that as a
+
** [[AmandaVizedom|Amanda Vizedom]]: For that use cases suggestion, I'd imagine that as a
 
track under which we bring in some folks in various domains and/or
 
track under which we bring in some folks in various domains and/or
 
projects to describe particular cases where ontologies are being
 
projects to describe particular cases where ontologies are being
 
brought in to support big systems.  
 
brought in to support big systems.  
  
* [[JackRing]]: @Peter, I hope the outcome will be an ontology!!  
+
* [[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: @Peter, I hope the outcome will be an ontology!!  
** [[ToddSchneider]]: Jack, Excellent thought, but an ontology of what?  
+
** [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Jack, Excellent thought, but an ontology of what?  
** [[MatthewWest]]: @Todd - an ontology of systems (broad sense) might be a
+
** [[MatthewWest|Matthew West]]: @Todd - an ontology of systems (broad sense) might be a
 
possibility.  
 
possibility.  
** [[JackRing]]: @Todd, An ontology of benefits of ontology-based systems
+
** [[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: @Todd, An ontology of benefits of ontology-based systems
 
and decisions.  
 
and decisions.  
** [[ToddSchneider]]: Jack, Brilliant!  
+
** [[ToddSchneider|Todd Schneider]]: Jack, Brilliant!  
  
 
----
 
----
  
=== From [[EricChan]] / 2012.01.05  ===
+
== From [[JackRing|Jack Ring]] / 2012.01.05  ==
  
[[EricChan]]: I have in mind about a track for "'''ontological information model for cloud infrastructure'''" with focus on "complex event processing of high-volume, high-velocity, monitoring data (Big Data)" in different layers of the infrastructure. This ontology can enable effective use of Business Activity Monitoring (BAM) tool in cloud infrastructure. ... I will be happy to support others who would like to chair this track.  
+
ref. http://interop.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit-org/2012-01/msg00016.html
 +
 
 +
[[JackRing|Jack Ring]]: I suggest a '''System Engineering (SE) track''' that
 +
 
 +
* a) focuses on the ontology of the human activity called system engineering, SE, and distinguishes it from the human activity called engineering of systems, <nowiki>EoS</nowiki>.
 +
* b) presumes that SE starts with an identification of the problem regardless of what sponsors, potential users and others may presume.
 +
* c) contributes to the system realization project in three key ways,
 +
** 1) specifying and demonstrating the languages and technologies that will be used in realizing the system,
 +
** 2) imag(in)ing the intended system and 3) converging subsequent creativity to closure.
 +
* d) notices that a system as imagined, envisioned, modeled, and realized is an evolving, situated ontology
 +
* e) acknowledges that a model of an intended system (the situated ontology) is a theory waiting to be examined for its dynamic and integrity limits (also called fallibility)
 +
* f) proposes experiments for discovering such limits, i.e., ontology quality (in the Deming / Crosby sense)
 +
* g) acknowledges that the capabilities (competencies, relationships, and capacity) of the system engineering cohort comprises a system that exhibits dynamic and integrity limits but ones that change as the cohort learns and evolves.
 +
* h) envisions techniques and tooling for knowledge exchange and choice making among the SE cohort
 +
* i) proposes metrics for
 +
** 1) quantifying the problem, e.g. Warfield's Situation Complexity Index,
 +
** 2) the system design,
 +
** 3) the system realization and
 +
** 4) the system benefit.
 +
* j) proposes metrics for the effectiveness of an SE cohort, e.g., quality, parsimony and beauty.
 +
* k) proposes ways of determining how much of what kind of SE, when, is best for each kind of problem.
 +
* l) does all this for each kind of system, e.g., state-determined, stochastic and non-deterministic and e.g., targeted (goal seeking), pursuit (goal-setting) and intelligent (value seeking).
 +
 
 +
----
 +
 
 +
=== From [[EricChan|Eric Chan]] / 2012.01.05  ===
 +
 
 +
[[EricChan|Eric Chan]]: I have in mind about a track for "'''ontological information model for cloud infrastructure'''" with focus on "complex event processing of high-volume, high-velocity, monitoring data (Big Data)" in different layers of the infrastructure. This ontology can enable effective use of Business Activity Monitoring (BAM) tool in cloud infrastructure. ... I will be happy to support others who would like to chair this track.  
  
 
----
 
----
  
=== From [[HensonGraves]] / 2012.01.02~05  ===
+
=== From [[HensonGraves|Henson Graves]] / 2012.01.02~05  ===
  
[[HensonGraves]]: Tracks should be designed to '''produce usable work products for the engineering and well as the ontology community'''  
+
[[HensonGraves|Henson Graves]]: Tracks should be designed to '''produce usable work products for the engineering and well as the ontology community'''  
  
 
My suggestion is that the summit develop a collection of challenge problems
 
My suggestion is that the summit develop a collection of challenge problems
Line 159: Line 186:
 
* 2. Develop engineering models (or axiom sets) for the human heart. Two
 
* 2. Develop engineering models (or axiom sets) for the human heart. Two
 
approaches naturally present themselves as starting points.  One is models
 
approaches naturally present themselves as starting points.  One is models
produced in SysML and the other is Description Logic with possibly
+
produced in [[SysML]] and the other is Description Logic with possibly
 
Description Graph extensions. Analysis of the difference would be of great
 
Description Graph extensions. Analysis of the difference would be of great
 
benefit for both communities and have immediate practical applications.
 
benefit for both communities and have immediate practical applications.
Line 180: Line 207:
 
If this approach with the challenge problems were to be attractive then I
 
If this approach with the challenge problems were to be attractive then I
 
would be willing to participate with the proviso that I could '''get some folks
 
would be willing to participate with the proviso that I could '''get some folks
from the ontology community to join the [[INCOSE]] Model-Based System
+
from the ontology community to join the INCOSE Model-Based System
 
Engineering Ontology Action Team (OAT)'''.  
 
Engineering Ontology Action Team (OAT)'''.  
  
 
----
 
----
  
=== From: [[NancyWiegand]] / 2011.12.17  ===
+
=== From: [[NancyWiegand|Nancy Wiegand]] / 2011.12.17  ===
  
[[NancyWiegand]] is the PI for the NSF funded [[NsfInterop_Grant|SOCoP_INTEROP]] Project  
+
[[NancyWiegand|Nancy Wiegand]] is the PI for the NSF funded [[NsfInterop_Grant|[[SOCoP_INTEROP]]]] Project  
  
[[NancyWiegand]]: [Part of the [[OntologySummit2012]] focus looks] ... similar to what I was thinking about for an [[INTEROP]] workshop, maybe along with an [[EarthCube]] Cyberinfrastructure (ref. http://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube/) workshop?  
+
[[NancyWiegand|Nancy Wiegand]]: [Part of the [[OntologySummit2012|Ontology Summit 2012]] focus looks] ... similar to what I was thinking about for an INTEROP workshop, maybe along with an [[EarthCube|Earth Cube]] Cyberinfrastructure (ref. http://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube/) workshop?  
  
 
[ppy]  indeed ... as all these things are quite interrelated. ... The (community's) choice of the theme: "Ontology for Big Systems" does
 
[ppy]  indeed ... as all these things are quite interrelated. ... The (community's) choice of the theme: "Ontology for Big Systems" does
Line 209: Line 236:
 
----
 
----
  
=== Recap: [[AmandaVizedom]] and [[JoanneLuciano]] / 2011.12.06  ===
+
=== Recap: [[AmandaVizedom|Amanda Vizedom]] and [[JoanneLuciano|Joanne Luciano]] / 2011.12.06  ===
  
 
'''An Objective Metrics for Understanding Ontology Quality in Context''' -   
 
'''An Objective Metrics for Understanding Ontology Quality in Context''' -   
Line 215: Line 242:
 
----
 
----
  
=== Recap: [[CoryCasanave]] / 2011.10.27  ===
+
=== Recap: [[CoryCasanave|Cory Casanave]] / 2011.10.27  ===
 +
 
 +
'''OMG-SIMF collaboration''' - Suggested Theme: Either "Information Federation with Ontologies" or "Solving the Data Problem".  A focus on the practical application of ontological methods and tools to a problem facing every large organization - understanding and using data from independently conceived resources together.  The concerns of information federation are not the same as the concerns of these other ontology use cases (such as proof) and this may result in differences in ontological approach, languages, notations, tooling and even theories.  Federated data is inherently distributed, uncoordinated, messy and conflicting - yet there is value in leveraging these disparate data resources in a more unified way.  It is not always clear how "neat" solutions work in this unstructured world, yet the very "scruffy" solutions seem to be insufficient. A position of the community on this question could help the application of ontologies, ontological tooling and ontological approaches to this important problem. [[CoryCasanave|Cory Casanave]] / 2011-10-27 &nbsp;&nbsp;
 +
 
 +
ref. also http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2011-12/msg00089.html
 +
 
 +
[[Category:WorkSpace]]    [[Category:OntologySummit]]    [[Category:OntologySummit2012]]
 +
 
 +
 
  
'''OMG-SIMF collaboration''' - Suggested Theme: Either "Information Federation with Ontologies" or "Solving the Data Problem".  A focus on the practical application of ontological methods and tools to a problem facing every large organization - understanding and using data from independently conceived resources together.  The concerns of information federation are not the same as the concerns of these other ontology use cases (such as proof) and this may result in differences in ontological approach, languages, notations, tooling and even theories. Federated data is inherently distributed, uncoordinated, messy and conflicting - yet there is value in leveraging these disparate data resources in a more unified wayIt is not always clear how "neat" solutions work in this unstructured world, yet the very "scruffy" solutions seem to be insufficient. A position of the community on this question could help the application of ontologies, ontological tooling and ontological approaches to this important problem. CoryCasanave / 2011-10-27 &nbsp;&nbsp;
+
This page has been migrated from the [http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki OntologWiki] - Click [http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012/Suggestions here] for original page
ref. also http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2011-12/msg00089.html
+

Latest revision as of 04:18, 9 January 2016

[ ]

Contents

This is a workspace collecting suggestions on how to better organize, coordinate and facilitate Ontology Summit 2012 activities. While mainly intended for the use by the organizing committee, this is an open page, and contributions from other summit participants who are not on the organizing committee are welcome.     (1A)

[edit] Ontology Summit 2012: Ontology for Big Systems     (1B)

7th in the series of a 3-month open annual event by and for the Ontology Community. This Summit is co-organized by Ontolog, NIST, NCOR, NCBO, IAOA & NCO_NITRD     (1B1)

ref. OntologySummit     (1B2)


[edit] Ideas on How to Frame the Discourse     (1C)

[edit] From the 2011_12_08 Pre-launch Community Session prep work     (1C1)

Systems engineering focuses on the interactions of people with their systems, so includes information technology, data and metadata, socio-technical and cultural aspects including institutional, legal, economic, and human-centered design requirements.     (1C1B)
o Software engineering     (1C1B1)
o Business rules and enterprise issues     (1C1B2)
o Socio-technical environment     (1C1B3)
o Big Data     (1C1B4)
o Ontology Quality in Context     (1C1B5)
"Big Data" to include several dimensions:     (1C1C)
o Complexity of collections     (1C1C1)
o Large quantities of data     (1C1C2)
o Heterogeneity of data (e.g. 600 different representations of patient records)     (1C1C3)
o Federation of distributed data sources     (1C1C4)
o Extracting (useful) knowledge out of big data (using ontology to UNDERSTAND data)     (1C1C5)
  • formulate recommendations for the application of ontological techniques to specific key problems we are facing in the subject area.     (1C1D)

[edit] From the 2011_12_08 community brainstorm input - items to note for action     (1C2)

the System Engineering aspects of Ontology as well as Ontology Acquisition, including text analytics.     (1C2C)

Systems Engineering and International Society for Systems Sciences is pursuing the development of a Unified Ontology for Systems Engineering. This effort is mostly practitioners getting ready for interaction with ontologists.     (1C2E)

(fitness for purpose, evaluation, metrics and metrics) under whichever theme.     (1C2G)

I'm suggesting is the theme-focused variant of the topic Joanne and I suggested here:http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit/Suggestions#nid30E4. A better title might be "Ontology Quality in Big System applications" or something like that. Or, "Evaluating Ontologies for Use in Big [X] Systems Applications"     (1C2I)

record/bioinformatics     (1C2K)

Big Data and Cloud systems     (1C2M)

engineering systems, I'm happy to contribute.     (1C2O)

use of a common foundation ontology as a translation mechanism (interlingua) among multiple databases or multiple systems - large or small. But if there are no others to make a "track" out of this, I can just present a paper with my views.     (1C2R)

the bandwidth to head this up.     (1C2T)

  • Eric Chan: + for aligning dots to tracks, I have Data, Process,     (1C2V)

Engineered, Multi-displinary,     (1C2W)

consideration to alongside a Communique, explicitly commit to creating a website for the summit?     (1C2AA)

focusing down or presenting some branches/subtopics.     (1C2AD)

Ontologies in Big Systems"     (1C2AF)

track under which we bring in some folks in various domains and/or projects to describe particular cases where ontologies are being brought in to support big systems.     (1C2AH)

possibility.     (1C2AJ)

and decisions.     (1C2AL)


[edit] From Jack Ring / 2012.01.05     (1D)

Jack Ring: I suggest a System Engineering (SE) track that     (1D2)

  • a) focuses on the ontology of the human activity called system engineering, SE, and distinguishes it from the human activity called engineering of systems, EoS.     (1D3)
  • b) presumes that SE starts with an identification of the problem regardless of what sponsors, potential users and others may presume.     (1D4)
  • c) contributes to the system realization project in three key ways,     (1D5)
    • 1) specifying and demonstrating the languages and technologies that will be used in realizing the system,     (1D5A)
    • 2) imag(in)ing the intended system and 3) converging subsequent creativity to closure.     (1D5B)
  • d) notices that a system as imagined, envisioned, modeled, and realized is an evolving, situated ontology     (1D6)
  • e) acknowledges that a model of an intended system (the situated ontology) is a theory waiting to be examined for its dynamic and integrity limits (also called fallibility)     (1D7)
  • f) proposes experiments for discovering such limits, i.e., ontology quality (in the Deming / Crosby sense)     (1D8)
  • g) acknowledges that the capabilities (competencies, relationships, and capacity) of the system engineering cohort comprises a system that exhibits dynamic and integrity limits but ones that change as the cohort learns and evolves.     (1D9)
  • h) envisions techniques and tooling for knowledge exchange and choice making among the SE cohort     (1D10)
  • i) proposes metrics for     (1D11)
  • j) proposes metrics for the effectiveness of an SE cohort, e.g., quality, parsimony and beauty.     (1D12)
  • k) proposes ways of determining how much of what kind of SE, when, is best for each kind of problem.     (1D13)
  • l) does all this for each kind of system, e.g., state-determined, stochastic and non-deterministic and e.g., targeted (goal seeking), pursuit (goal-setting) and intelligent (value seeking).     (1D14)

[edit] From Eric Chan / 2012.01.05     (1D15)

Eric Chan: I have in mind about a track for "ontological information model for cloud infrastructure" with focus on "complex event processing of high-volume, high-velocity, monitoring data (Big Data)" in different layers of the infrastructure. This ontology can enable effective use of Business Activity Monitoring (BAM) tool in cloud infrastructure. ... I will be happy to support others who would like to chair this track.     (1D15A)


[edit] From Henson Graves / 2012.01.02~05     (1D16)

Henson Graves: Tracks should be designed to produce usable work products for the engineering and well as the ontology community     (1D16A)

My suggestion is that the summit develop a collection of challenge problems which different tracks work on. A track representing an interest group could take a problem and have its members propose approaches and solutions which would be critiqued by the group. A track would not have to come to a consensus solution only produce as a work product proposed solutions and critiques. Here are some examples of the kind of thing that I have in mind, based on by experience and interests. Other examples would work as well.     (1D16B)

  • 1. Develop an ontology for metadata for engineering applications. This would     (1D16C)

include artifacts such as specifications, test plans, and test results. Something like DOLCE would be a good place to start the discussion. As participants one needs people with real experience in engineering practice and ontology theory. It is not too hard to argue that an ontology is the best way to manage the volume of data encountered on large scale engineering programs. [I spent about 7 years attempting to design a metadata based information storage and retrieval system for a very large scale product development program.] I would be happy to contribute or identify others who could contribute to understanding of the data management issues of such an endeavor.     (1D16D)

  • 2. Develop engineering models (or axiom sets) for the human heart. Two     (1D16E)

approaches naturally present themselves as starting points. One is models produced in SysML and the other is Description Logic with possibly Description Graph extensions. Analysis of the difference would be of great benefit for both communities and have immediate practical applications. Along the way one needs to look at how the literature on mereology contributes or not to developing axioms.     (1D16F)

  • 3. Develop use cases for reasoning based on engineering models (axiom sets     (1D16G)

in description logic). The use cases of course have to be grounded in everyday engineering problems and have to have to be embedded in logics for which tractable reasoning is possible. [I am very much engaged with this as I have a lot of industry experience with relatively simple cases where checking consistency of axiom sets would have saved the taxpayer a few billion dollars and 4 or 5 years of product development time. The problem is that engineering models do not represent the assumptions under which they are valid. As design progresses a model gets included in a design without knowledge of the assumptions under which it is valid. The result is inconsistent designs and the inconsistency is often not detected until test and evaluation, which of course may require years of rework to fix.]     (1D16H)

If this approach with the challenge problems were to be attractive then I would be willing to participate with the proviso that I could get some folks from the ontology community to join the INCOSE Model-Based System Engineering Ontology Action Team (OAT).     (1D16I)


[edit] From: Nancy Wiegand / 2011.12.17     (1D17)

Nancy Wiegand is the PI for the NSF funded [[NsfInterop_Grant|SOCoP_INTEROP]] Project     (1D17A)

Nancy Wiegand: [Part of the Ontology Summit 2012 focus looks] ... similar to what I was thinking about for an INTEROP workshop, maybe along with an Earth Cube Cyberinfrastructure (ref. http://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube/) workshop?     (1D17B)

[ppy] indeed ... as all these things are quite interrelated. ... The (community's) choice of the theme: "Ontology for Big Systems" does give us enough latitude to try to reach out to other Systems communities (enterprise architecture, conceptual modeling, software engineering, etc.) and team up with them to tackle "Big Systems" -- not pilot system, but real life, complex, heterogeneous, distributed system ... and not the least, the "hot-button" issues facing those who are dealing with "Big Data." ... While the Ontology Summit would come from a vantage point of Ontology (teamed up with collaborators in Systems Sciences and Engineering,) the kind of "Big Systems" as exemplified by, say, the Earth Cube Cyberinfrastructure (ref. http://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube/) would obviously be a great application that can be examined. Therefore, if the timing is right, and you could put in the bandwidth to contribute to a track (and portions of a track), let's talk some more about possible collaboration and your (+your team's) involvement in the coming Ontology Summit.     (1D17C)


An Objective Metrics for Understanding Ontology Quality in Context -     (1D18A)


[edit] Recap: Cory Casanave / 2011.10.27     (1D19)

OMG-SIMF collaboration - Suggested Theme: Either "Information Federation with Ontologies" or "Solving the Data Problem". A focus on the practical application of ontological methods and tools to a problem facing every large organization - understanding and using data from independently conceived resources together. The concerns of information federation are not the same as the concerns of these other ontology use cases (such as proof) and this may result in differences in ontological approach, languages, notations, tooling and even theories. Federated data is inherently distributed, uncoordinated, messy and conflicting - yet there is value in leveraging these disparate data resources in a more unified way. It is not always clear how "neat" solutions work in this unstructured world, yet the very "scruffy" solutions seem to be insufficient. A position of the community on this question could help the application of ontologies, ontological tooling and ontological approaches to this important problem. Cory Casanave / 2011-10-27        (1D19A)


This page has been migrated from the OntologWiki - Click here for original page     (1D19C)