Post on 12-Jan-2016
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
The Pragmatics of Geo-ontologies, and the Ontology of Geo-pragmatics
Boyan Brodaric, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa
2
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Connectivity resources
E-Geoscience
Theories, conceptsKnowledge representation
Observations, measurements, experimentsInstrumentation
Information: real-time, archives, analysesInformatics resources
Models, simulationsSupercomputing
PeopleCollaboration,
visualization, education resources
ONTOLOGIES• contain concepts used in scientific theories, classifications, schema, …
3
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Geologic structure (USArray)Geologic structure (USArray)
RuptureRupturedynamicsdynamics(SAFOD, (SAFOD, ANSS,ANSS,
USArray)USArray)InSAR Image of theHector Mine Earthquake
A satellitegeneratedInterferometricSynthetic Radar(InSAR) image ofthe 1999 HectorMine earthquake.
Shows thedisplacement fieldin the direction ofradar imaging
Each fringe (e.g.,from red to red)corresponds to afew centimeters ofdisplacement.
SeismicHazardModel
Seismicity (ANSS)Seismicity (ANSS) PaleoseismologyPaleoseismology Local site effectsLocal site effects
Faults Faults (USArray)(USArray)
Stress Stress transfertransfer(InSAR, (InSAR,
PBO,PBO,SAFOD)SAFOD)
Crustal motion (PBO)Crustal motion (PBO) Crustal deformation (InSAR)Crustal deformation (InSAR) Seismic velocity (USArray)Seismic velocity (USArray)(from Leinen, 2004)
E-geoscience example: data integration in hazard modeling
4
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
GEON Grid
Montana
Idaho
Nevada
Utah
Arizona
New Mexico
Colorado
Wyoming
E-geoscience example: geologic map data integration
5
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Levels of Map Data Interoperability
systems
syntax
schematic
semantic
Map System 1
systems
syntax
schematic
semantic
Map System 2Integrated Map
Data Content (GeoOntology)
Data Structure (GeoSciML)
Data Language (GML)
Data Services (WMS, WFS, WCS)
6
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
from www.GEONgrid.org
Systems Interoperability aligning data system interfaces (web services) but: heterogeneous structure, content, interpretation
STANDARD DATA INTERFACES• different data systems• e.g. open geospatial web services (OGC)
7
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
GEOLOGIC AGE ROCK TYPE
but: heterogeneous data content, interpretation
from www.GEONgrid.org
Schematic Interoperability aligning heterogeneous data structures (geometry, attributes)
STANDARD SCHEMA• for data transfer
8
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
GML
Client
WMS WFS
WMSWFS
WMSWFS
WMSWFS
WMSWFS
WMSWFS
USGS schema
BRGM schema
GSC schema
BGS schema
SGU schema
GA schema
GeoSciML
GeoSciML
GeoSciML
GeoSciML
GeoSciML
GeoSciML
Australia
Sweden
UK
France
USA
Canada
Example of Schematic Interoperability GeoSciML Testbed 2 • multiple viewers
• custom tools
• many databases• local data control
• standard system interface• custom translator• one output data format
9
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
GEOLOGIC AGE ROCK TYPE
Volcanic
from www.GEONgrid.org
Semantic Interoperability aligning heterogeneous definitions for data content but: heterogeneous interpretation at map borders
synonymy
STANDARD DEFINITIONS• data content: rock types, time scale, …• data schema
Era
Eon
Period
Series
polysemy
10
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
sandstone
arenite
slate
grès
arénite
french
englishworkflows
queries
e.g. find all map units with sedimentary rocks
Ontologies can define any resource in e-geoscience, e.g. data and services
Semantic Interoperability
metadata geospatial projection common concepts in metadata
slate sandstone
rock typegeol. unit
geol. concept
sandstone
slate
grès
ardoise
classifications
schema
ontology
sedimentary
vocabulary
common vocabulary
common concepts in content
common concepts in schema
11
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Example of Semantic Interoperability GEON Map Integrator Testbed
from www.GEONgrid.org
“paleozoic”
“paleozoic,
sedimentary”
12
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Trust
XML
Ontology
Logic
Proof
Social World
Pragmatics
Semantics
Syntax
Empirics
Physics
Systems
Schematics
Semantics
Consensus
Syntaxdata
information
wise use
knowledge
Unicode URI
RDF
Knowledge management
Semantic Web
Information Interoperability Computational
Semiotics
Levels of Meaning A theory for pragmatics… how does it apply to E-Geoscience?
What?ontologic… definitions
Why? How?pragmatic… explanations
13
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
from www.GEONgrid.org
Pragmatic Interoperability aligning heterogeneous scientific contexts involves actions carried out by agents (e.g. scientists)
Differences in:• geometry• geohistory• description• classification
• ontologic defs help little in selecting which version to trust• trust also requires explanatory context for:
- assessment- replication- verification
14
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Levels of Map Data Interoperability
systems
syntax
schematic
semantic
Map System 1
systems
syntax
schematic
semantic
Map System 2Integrated Map
Data Content (GeoOntology)
Data Structure (GeoSciML)
Data Language (GML)
Data Services (WMS, WFS, WCS)
pragmatic pragmatic Data Context (Geologist)
15
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Semiotic Semantics relation of sign to object (Morris, 1938)
sign
Formation Ted / T1 definition
symbolobject
concept1..n
1..m1..msynonymy
1..npolysemy
1..n
possible worlds
1..m
16
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Semiotic Pragmatics relation of sign to agent (Morris, 1938)
origins, effects and uses of sign by agent
sign
Formation Ted / T1 definition
symbolobject
concept
cons
umes
interpretsproduces
agent
17
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Agents human, machine, nature matrix of processes
HumanSign producer
MachineSign producer
NatureSign producer
HumanSign consumer
CommunicationCognitionScientific Reasoning
VisualizationAnalysis
ObservationMeasurement
MachineSign consumer
Human-Computer Interface
WorkflowsService ChainsMachine Reasoning
Earth Sensors
NatureSign consumer
Human-Nature Interface
Machine-Nature Interface
Natural Processes
18
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
interpret
produceA
consume
sign2
rock1
<Baker Brook basalt rdf_id=”unit_102”>
<rock_type rdf:resource="#extrusive"/>
<rock_environment rdf:resource="#marine"/>
</Baker_Brook_basalt>
<gsml:LithodemicUnit gml:id="ca.gc.nrcan.gdr.geologicUnit.8130">
<gml:name>X3Y1</gml:name>
<gsml:metadata xlink:href="urn:x-ogc:def:nil:OGC:unknown" />
<gsml:unitThickness xlink:href="urn:x-ogc:def:nil:OGC:unknown" />
<gsml:composition>
<gsml:CGI_TermValue>
<gsml:value codeBase="http://www.cgi-iugs.org/composition">mafic </gsml:value>
</gsml:CGI_TermValue>
GeoSciML
sign1
OWL concept1rock1
web service client
E.g. Geospatial Info. Pragmatics
19
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Origin of sign2 Effect of sign1
Object2
sign2
Concept2
Symbol2Symbol1
Object1
sign1
Concept1
A
1
interpret1
consume1 produce1
Event1
A
0
Event0
A
2
Event2
Process1
Ontology of Pragmatics
Use of sign1
20
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
(from GEON: Ludaescher, 2003, adapted from Sinha, A.K)
Rock classification from mineral composition
origin
use
effect
Machine Pragmatics--Workflows
provenance consequence
21
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Origin of Sign = { < Sign >, Event, Agent, < Origin of Sign > }
Effect of Sign = < Sign, Event, Agent, Effect of Sign >
Use of Sign = < Event, Process >
Context of Sign = { Origin of Sign, Effect of Sign, Use of Sign }
Pragmatic Context
22
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
property prototype object
concept
origins
effects
objects
properties
Geo(science)-Pragmatics
Geoscience objects are inferred from properties due to inaccessibility:
geospatial temporal
Fundamentally geoscientific :
ecology soils geologic remote-sensing
23
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
sign1
sign2
Prototype Property
Object Property
Object Property
Property Prototype
A
Property Prototype
A
Object Concept
Object Concept
Object
A
A
Object
Object Concept
sign3
Object Object Property
sign4
Individuation event
classification event
blending event
clustering event
Ontology of Geo-Pragmatics
geoscience concept & object development
24
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Representing geo-pragmatics
C: intra-geologist thematic clustering
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Time (weeks)
Dis
tan
ce M
MD
(m
ean
)
Concept C
periods of concept discovery in geologic map dataperiods of concept discovery in geologic map dataperiods of concept discovery in geologic map data (origins)
Analysis of geologic map data
ClusterMembershipSituationMembership
BlendMembership
InstanceOf
Clustering
1..*1..*
Individuation
1..*1..*
Blending
1..*1..*
Classification 1..*1..*
Cluster
IndividualOrigin
Situation
ConceptOrigin
Blend
Class
1..*1..*
Individual
0..*
1..*
0..*
clusterMember 1..*
1..*1..*
situate
0..*
1..*
0..*
instance
1..*
0..*
1..*
0..*
situationMember1..*
Concept
0..*0..*
intension
0..*
1..*
0..*
blendMember
1..*
0..10..1
extension
AttributionMembership
Attribution
0..*
1..*
0..*
1..*
0..10..1
instantiate
Instantiation
1..*1..*
GIS structure for pragmatic context of geo-concepts
Representing pragmatic contexts for geo-concepts
25
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Observed properties of C
Pragmatic Context for rock unit C to aid trust evaluation
Origin for properties of C
26
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Conclusions first steps to an ontologic theory of geoscience context oriented around agent processes and events needed for trust evaluation in E-Geoscience
Implications ‘metadata’ for concepts (vs ontologies, schema, data, ...) origin rep. necessary for ‘situated concepts’
Future Work E-Geoscience / Semantic Web implementation? Coordination with upper-level process ontologies?
27
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Acknowledgements Geological Survey of Canada GeoVISTA Center, Penn State Geography (M. Gahegan) GEON (K. Lin, A.K. Sinha, B. Ludaescher) TGIS, Semantic Web Special Issue (F. Fonseca) IUGS-CGI GeoSciML Team
28
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
29
Pragmatics and Geo-OntologiesBrodaric, 07-03-2007, Edinburgh
Questions?