Post on 23-Feb-2016
description
Putting Geographic Information Ontologies to Work
The Case of Geospatial Science
Helen CouclelisGeography DepartmentUniversity of California
Santa BarbaraCalifornia, USA
GEOINFO 2013 – XIV Brazilian Symposium on Geoinformatics – November 2013
Is GIScience ‘working’ hard enough for us?
great theoretical work = great practical benefits?
Werner Kuhn VGI, trust, and clean wells in Africa
Kathleen Stewart & Christophe ClaramuntCall for papers: Spatio-temporal theories and models for environmental, urban and social sciences
Gilberto Câmara & teamgeoinformatics and … and… and…
and Helen Couclelis?
Early enthusiasmmodels! planning!spatial interaction, CA, ABM *
Mature doubtsuncertainty beyond dataforecasts and policy
Mature enthusiasmthe ‘big picture’ontology and representation in space and time
*EU’s FuturICT shortlisted project
Why ontology? What Ontology?...
from Plato to SUMO and DOLCE
World versus micro-worlds
at firstinteroperability
thencognition, language, structure, meaning, concepts, measurements, physical /non-physical entities, space, time, user, culture, reality, philosophy
recentlymicro-ontologiesmicrotheories and the Semantic Web
http://keet.wordpress.com/category/philosophy/ontology/
Note Gruber’s agent-centered definition:
An ontology is “a formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization” “… an ontology is a description … of the concepts and relationships that can exist for an agent or a community of agents.” Ontologies must “constrain the possible interpretations for the defined terms.”
ontologies are social artifacts
“The ultimate source of meaning is the physical world
and the agents who use signs to represent entities in the world
and their intentions concerning them”.
(Sowa)
Overview
(Introduction)Representation and the Big Picture in GISc
Ontologies of Geographic InformationA micro-ontology generating engine?
Geodesign: an applicationQuestions & Discussion
This is not a pipe The map is not the territory The model is not reality
Representation and the Big Picture
GIScience and the big-picture questions
frameworks, general theories, ontologies, base models
“The challenge of representing fields-objects in a computer environment” (Camara 2000)“Field-object integration through a common base model” (Kjenstad 2006)
“A general theory to bring many previous ideas under a single umbrella” (Goodchild et al. 2007)
“Need for a conceptually unifying data model” (Voudouris 2010)
Goodchild et al. 2007Kjenstad 2006
Two different paradigms in geospatial representation. Spatial-primitives centered (left) and concept-centered (right). Source: M. Kavouras and M. Kokla (2008) Theories of Geographic Concepts, p. 296.
Camara et al. 2000Gangemi & Mika 2003 Kuhn 2001
Couclelis 2010 Voudouris 2010
Camara
Kuhn
Gangemi
Kjenstad
Goodchild
Voudouris
Couclelis
activity X X
aggregation X X X
cognition X X
context X X X X X
data model X X X X
design X X
field/object X X X X X X
geo-unit X X X X
intentionality X X X X X
language X X
operations X X X
reification X X X X
semantics X X X
uncertainty X
user X X X X X
manycommonalitiesamongtheseauthors
The same concepts are categorized differently depending on the context
http://vissim.uwf.edu/VOTT/VOTT_desc.htm
‘Ontologies of geographic information’*
sense-perceptionsobservations
data informationknowledge
wisdom???
?
At every step, we ask:“what is the meaning of_?”
What gives information its meaning?How are data transformed into knowledge?Why model information and not directly the world?
*Couclelis 2010, IJGIS, December
What gives information its meaning?semantics on top of structure (syntax)
How are data transformed into knowledge?by being integrated into some coherent story
Why model information and not directly the world?Information entails a source and a decoder (agent)
Modeling information, not the world:three principles
Foregrounding the perspective of the user
Distinguishing a linked sequence layers of varying degrees of semantic richness
Selecting data through criteria resulting from the users’ purpose-oriented semantic choices
A representation is constructed in a particular way for a purpose
weather maps for
scientific studyschool text illustrationTV weather forecast
river models fornavigation companywater resource agencycross-border regulation
Purpose comes from the intentionality of the user
a GIScience representation (model) is constructed in response to some user need
The popular DOLCE ontology
My 2010 framework: the static version
The foundations information spacetime framework purpose
The key ingredients spacetime granules classes of properties GI Constructs (GICs)
The structureo representation levels
Most ontologies are represented as trees or semi-lattices
The foundations information spacetime framework purpose
The key ingredients spacetime granules classes of properties GI Constructs (GICs)
The structureo representation levelso lattice
This one is a lattice, with information and spacetime framework at one end, and intentionality at the other
The foundations information spacetime framework purpose
The key ingredients spacetime granules classes of properties GI Constructs (GICs)
The structure representation levelso lattice
Actually, it should be this way around
xt P = {p7} + {p6} +…+ {p1}
{p7} …. {p3} {p2} {p1}
p71, p72,… p7i …. p31, p32,… p2j p21, p22,… p2k p1
GICi
g1 1 1 … 0 …. 1 0 … 0 1 0 … 1 1
g2 1 1 … 1 …. 0 1 … 1 1 1 … 1 1
… …. …. …. …. ….
gm 1 1 0 …. 1 1 0 0 1 … 0 1
Geographic Information Constructs (GICs)topons, chronons, and codes across 7 property domains
The principle of semantic contraction
• [
Semantic resolution levels
Decoder capabilities
Representation
7 purpose intentionality
6 function instrumentality
5 complex objects association objects
4 simple objects categorization
3 patterns classification fields2 observables perception
1 space-time framework awareness
A road map of region X A map of roads in region X7 Purpose Facilitate vehicular travel
planning and navigationIdentify and mitigate barriers to wildlife movements
6 Function Represent possible routes from place A to place B
Represent the locations where wildlife corridors intersect with roads
5 Composite objects A road network A wildlife corridor network intersecting with a road network
4 Simple objects Places, freeways, arterials, collectors, intersections, ramps, roundabouts,…
Roads, wildlife corridor segments, underpasses, culverts, high-conflict intersections,…
3 Classes Fields of properties (corresponding to surface material, slope, network structure,…) aggregated in diverse geometrical patterns
Fields of properties (corresponding to incident frequency, barrier permeability, height, width…) aggregated in diverse geometrical patterns
2 Observables Hard, rough, green, brown, wet,…
Open, blocked, green, hard, kill, dry, wet…
1 Space-time Exist. “Task-relevant information exists here-now at such-and-such appropriate granularity”
“Task-relevant information exists here- now at such-and-such appropriate granularity”
A review and assessment of land-use change models: dynamics of space, time, and human choice By Agarwal, Chetan; Green, Glen M.; Grove, J. Morgan; Evans, Tom P.; Schweik, Charles M. (2002) Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-297. Newton Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station.
A somewhat similar idea from more practical folks…
The framework, 3 years later…
A micro-ontology generating engine?...
Ontology >> language for model design
ontologies are models of modelsmicro-theories are models a model is a micro-theory
modeling is a languagea model is a statement about the worldlanguage has semantics, syntax and pragmatics
building a model is design-ingdesigned things reflect designer’s purpose purpose is supported by function
A structure emerges…
Model designer purpose perspective
Syntactics structure
Semantics meaning
Pragmatics context
contextSS
Syntax
mea
sure
men
ts
Semantics Pragmatics
cont
ext
Purpose
Patterns
Unpacking the ‘Ontologies’ framework
Data structures Interpretations Micro-ontologies
The temporal extension
• One additional key ingredient:
• R-event• For each level, a change in information
that significantly alters the structure of GICs at that level• ‘significant’ is relative to purpose!
• “Information: a difference that makes a difference” Gregory Bateson
• And the R-event types by level are…
R-events change the context of the situation described
• [
Semantic resolution levels
Decoder capabilities
R-event types
7 purpose intentionality change of purpose orobjectives
6 function instrumentality functionally relevant change
5 complex objects association addition, loss of partsdissolution
4 simple objects categorization Identity changebehavior change
3 patterns classification relevant field properties change
2 observables perception Gestalt change
1 space-time framework awareness s-t framework switch
Adding uncertainties and times
• [
Semantic resolution levels
Uncertainties(examples)
Times
7 purpose relating to purposeand purpose change
experiential
6 function as to function:fitness, repurposing
discrete-event
5 complex objects assignment parts-to objects; changing part-whole relations
multiple clocksvarious timescales
4 simple objects linguistic factors ‘lifespans’
3 patterns classification clock time
2 observables perception punctuated time
11 space-time framework awareness timeless
Some features of the framework
Guides construction of micro-ontologies (and possibly process models)
Integrates design & analysis through user perspective
Adds context-relevant notions of time, change and uncertainty
Is compatible with much other work in geographic information science
And now, something more applied!
Geodesigning from the inside out
My advisor used to say…
“there is nothing as practical as a good theory”
Searching for practical solutions by becoming more abstract
What next?...
Tentative, but a different way of looking at geospatial representationContinue connecting with literatureFormalize!Try deriving micro-ontologies foruse with the Semantic WebExperiment with environmental and other process models