ACUMEN: Amplifying Control and Understanding of Multiple ENtities

In virtual environments, the control of numerous entities in multiple dimensions can be difficult and tedious. In this paper, we present a system for synthesizing and recognizing aggregate movements in a virtual environment with a high-level (natural language) interface. The principal com- ponents include: an interactive interface for aggregate con- trol based on a collection of parameters extending an exist- ing movement quality model, a feature analysis of aggregate motion verbs, recognizers to detect occurrences of features in a collection of simulated entities, and a clustering algorithm that determines subgroups. Results based on simulations and a sample instruction application are shown

The Energy Application Domain Extension for CityGML: enhancing interoperability for urban energy simulations

The road towards achievement of the climate protection goals requires, among the rest, a thorough rethinking of the energy planning tools (and policies) at all levels, from local to global. Nevertheless, it is in the cities where the largest part of energy is produced and consumed, and therefore it makes sense to focus the attention particularly on the cities as they yield great potentials in terms of energy consumption reduction and efficiency increase. As a direct consequence, a comprehensive knowledge of the demand and supply of energy resources, including their spatial distribution within urban areas, is therefore of utmost importance. Precise, integrated knowledge about 3D urban space, i.e. all urban (above and underground) features, infrastructures, their functional and semantic characteristics, and their mutual dependencies and interrelations play a relevant role for advanced simulation and analyses. As a matter of fact, what in the last years has proven to be an emerging and effective approach is the adoption of standard-based, integrated semantic 3D virtual city models, which represent an information hub for most of the abovementioned needs. In particular, being based on open standards (e.g. on the CityGML standard by the Open Geospatial Consortium), virtual city models firstly reduce the effort in terms of data preparation and provision. Secondly, they offer clear data structures, ontologies and semantics to facilitate data exchange between different domains and applications. However, a standardised and omni-comprehensive urban data model covering also the energy domain is still missing at the time of writing (January 2018). Even CityGML falls partially short when it comes to the definition of specific entities and attributes for energy-related applications. Nevertheless, and starting from the current version of CityGML (i.e. 2.0), this article describes the conception and the definition of an Energy Application Domain Extension (ADE) for CityGML. The Energy ADE is meant to offer a unique and standard-based data model to fill, on one hand, the above-mentioned gap, and, on the other hand, to allow for both detailed single-building energy simulation (based on sophisticated models for building physics and occupant behaviour) and city-wide, bottom-up energy assessments, with particular focus on the buildings sector. The overall goal is to tackle the existing data interoperability issues when dealing with energy-related applications at urban scale. The article presents the rationale behind the Energy ADE, it describes its main characteristics, the relation to other standards, and provides some examples of current applications and case studies already adopting it

SkyMapper Southern Survey: First Data Release (DR1)

We present the first data release (DR1) of the SkyMapper Southern Survey, a hemispheric survey carried out with the SkyMapper Telescope at Siding Spring Observatory in Australia. Here, we present the survey strategy, data processing, catalogue construction and database schema. The DR1 dataset includes over 66,000 images from the Shallow Survey component, covering an area of 17,200 deg$^2$ in all six SkyMapper passbands $uvgriz$, while the full area covered by any passband exceeds 20,000 deg$^2$. The catalogues contain over 285 million unique astrophysical objects, complete to roughly 18 mag in all bands. We compare our $griz$ point-source photometry with PanSTARRS1 DR1 and note an RMS scatter of 2%. The internal reproducibility of SkyMapper photometry is on the order of 1%. Astrometric precision is better than 0.2 arcsec based on comparison with Gaia DR1. We describe the end-user database, through which data are presented to the world community, and provide some illustrative science queries.Comment: 31 pages, 19 figures, 10 tables, PASA, accepte

Coupling tableau algorithms for expressive description logics with completion-based saturation procedures

Abstract. Nowadays, saturation-based reasoners for the OWL EL profile are able to handle large ontologies such as SNOMED very efficiently. However, saturation-based reasoning procedures become incomplete if the ontology is extended with axioms that use features of more expressive Description Logics, e.g., disjunctions. Tableau-based procedures, on the other hand, are not limited to a specific OWL profile, but even highly optimised reasoners might not be efficient enough to handle large ontologies such as SNOMED. In this paper, we present an approach for tightly coupling tableau-and saturation-based procedures that we implement in the OWL DL reasoner Konclude. Our detailed evaluation shows that this combination significantly improves the reasoning performance on a wide range of ontologies

A conceptual framework and a risk management approach for interoperability between geospatial datacubes

De nos jours, nous observons un intérêt grandissant pour les bases de données géospatiales multidimensionnelles. Ces bases de données sont développées pour faciliter la prise de décisions stratégiques des organisations, et plus spécifiquement lorsqu’il s’agit de données de différentes époques et de différents niveaux de granularité. Cependant, les utilisateurs peuvent avoir besoin d’utiliser plusieurs bases de données géospatiales multidimensionnelles. Ces bases de données peuvent être sémantiquement hétérogènes et caractérisées par différent degrés de pertinence par rapport au contexte d’utilisation. Résoudre les problèmes sémantiques liés à l’hétérogénéité et à la différence de pertinence d’une manière transparente aux utilisateurs a été l’objectif principal de l’interopérabilité au cours des quinze dernières années. Dans ce contexte, différentes solutions ont été proposées pour traiter l’interopérabilité. Cependant, ces solutions ont adopté une approche non systématique. De plus, aucune solution pour résoudre des problèmes sémantiques spécifiques liés à l’interopérabilité entre les bases de données géospatiales multidimensionnelles n’a été trouvée. Dans cette thèse, nous supposons qu’il est possible de définir une approche qui traite ces problèmes sémantiques pour assurer l’interopérabilité entre les bases de données géospatiales multidimensionnelles. Ainsi, nous définissons tout d’abord l’interopérabilité entre ces bases de données. Ensuite, nous définissons et classifions les problèmes d’hétérogénéité sémantique qui peuvent se produire au cours d’une telle interopérabilité de différentes bases de données géospatiales multidimensionnelles. Afin de résoudre ces problèmes d’hétérogénéité sémantique, nous proposons un cadre conceptuel qui se base sur la communication humaine. Dans ce cadre, une communication s’établit entre deux agents système représentant les bases de données géospatiales multidimensionnelles impliquées dans un processus d’interopérabilité. Cette communication vise à échanger de l’information sur le contenu de ces bases. Ensuite, dans l’intention d’aider les agents à prendre des décisions appropriées au cours du processus d’interopérabilité, nous évaluons un ensemble d’indicateurs de la qualité externe (fitness-for-use) des schémas et du contexte de production (ex., les métadonnées). Finalement, nous mettons en œuvre l’approche afin de montrer sa faisabilité.Today, we observe wide use of geospatial databases that are implemented in many forms (e.g., transactional centralized systems, distributed databases, multidimensional datacubes). Among those possibilities, the multidimensional datacube is more appropriate to support interactive analysis and to guide the organization’s strategic decisions, especially when different epochs and levels of information granularity are involved. However, one may need to use several geospatial multidimensional datacubes which may be semantically heterogeneous and having different degrees of appropriateness to the context of use. Overcoming the semantic problems related to the semantic heterogeneity and to the difference in the appropriateness to the context of use in a manner that is transparent to users has been the principal aim of interoperability for the last fifteen years. However, in spite of successful initiatives, today's solutions have evolved in a non systematic way. Moreover, no solution has been found to address specific semantic problems related to interoperability between geospatial datacubes. In this thesis, we suppose that it is possible to define an approach that addresses these semantic problems to support interoperability between geospatial datacubes. For that, we first describe interoperability between geospatial datacubes. Then, we define and categorize the semantic heterogeneity problems that may occur during the interoperability process of different geospatial datacubes. In order to resolve semantic heterogeneity between geospatial datacubes, we propose a conceptual framework that is essentially based on human communication. In this framework, software agents representing geospatial datacubes involved in the interoperability process communicate together. Such communication aims at exchanging information about the content of geospatial datacubes. Then, in order to help agents to make appropriate decisions during the interoperability process, we evaluate a set of indicators of the external quality (fitness-for-use) of geospatial datacube schemas and of production context (e.g., metadata). Finally, we implement the proposed approach to show its feasibility

Chinese DE constructions in secondary predication: Historical and typological perspectives

This dissertation investigates the history of Chinese DE [tə] constructions in light of the typology of secondary predication. A secondary predicate, such as hot in He drank the tea hot, is a predicate that provides subsidiary information to a substructure (the participant tea) of the more salient primary event (drank). Mandarin DE features in two strategies: (i) a DE-marked primary event elaborated by a predicate following it, and (ii) a DE-marked secondary predicate preposed to the primary predicate. Focusing on Late Medieval Chinese (7th to mid-13th c.), the study examines the evolution of the DE-marked strategies from three distinctive constructions: resultative [V DE1 VP] by DE1 (得), nominal modification by DE2 (底/的), and secondary predication by DE3 (地). The first theme concerns the interactions between DE2-marked nominalization and DE3-marked secondary predicate constructions. Results show that DE2 and DE3 developed from opposite poles of the attribution vs. predication continuum, overlapping in categories intermediate between prototypical restrictive modification and secondary predication. Their distinctive information-packaging functions are consistently mapped to different construals of a property’s time-stability, which are reflected in their collocational preferences. The second theme of the study deals with the merger of DE1 and DE2 constructions and the creation of the [V DE Pred] topic-comment schema, where [V DE] represents an event as the topic, and Pred makes an assertion about a substructure of V. The discussion focuses on the structural and semantic changes of the [V DE1 VP] construction that facilitate its alignment with the DE2-marked topic-comment construction. The development of DE constructions mirrors semantic shifts between temporally anterior vs. simultaneous relations and conceptual fluidity between event- vs. participant-orientation, parameters that feature in the encoding of secondary predication crosslinguistically (Verkerk 2009, Himmelmann and Schultze-Berndt 2005, van der Auwera and Malchukov 2005, Loeb-Diehl 2005). The findings also suggest a reevaluation of the typology. Notably, semantic orientation is not crucial to whether a semantic relation is encoded by a DE construction, or which DE construction is selected. Instead, it is information-packaging functions, construals of time-stability, and iconic principles that play a dominant role

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO; Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually pe

Ontology based data warehousing for mining of heterogeneous and multidimensional data sources

Heterogeneous and multidimensional big-data sources are virtually prevalent in all business environments. System and data analysts are unable to fast-track and access big-data sources. A robust and versatile data warehousing system is developed, integrating domain ontologies from multidimensional data sources. For example, petroleum digital ecosystems and digital oil field solutions, derived from big-data petroleum (information) systems, are in increasing demand in multibillion dollar resource businesses worldwide. This work is recognized by Industrial Electronic Society of IEEE and appeared in more than 50 international conference proceedings and journals

Towards a Semantic Knowledge Management Framework for Laminated Composites

The engineering of laminated composite structures is a complex task for design engineers and manufacturers, requiring significant management of manufacturing process and materials information. Ontologies are becoming increasingly commonplace for semantically representing knowledge in a formal manner that facilitates sharing of rich information between people and applications. Moreover, ontologies can support first-order logic and reasoning by rule engines that enhance automation. To support the engineering of laminated composite structures, this work developed a novel Semantic LAminated Composites Knowledge management System (SLACKS) that is based on a suite of ontologies for laminated composites materials and design for manufacturing (DFM) and their integration into a previously developed engineering design framework. By leveraging information from CAD/FEA tools and materials data from online public databases, SLACKS uniquely enables software tools and people to interoperate, to improve communication and automate reasoning during the design process. With SLACKS, this research shows the power of integrating relevant domains of the product lifecycle, such as design, analysis, manufacturing and materials selection through the engineering case study of a wind turbine blade. The integration reveals a usable product lifecycle knowledge tool that can facilitate efficient knowledge creation, retrieval and reuse, from design inception to manufacturing of the product

Control and operation of a spinning disc reactor

PhD ThesisThe aim of the present research is to assess the control and operation of a Spinning Disc Reactor (SDR), carried out via four separate investigations. Firstly, the effect of equipment size reduction on control is studied by comparing the performance of a PID controller applied to simulated intensified and conventional processes. It was found that superior control performance in terms of Integral of Absolute Error (IAE) is achieved for the simulated intensified system. However, the results showed that intensified systems are more susceptible to disturbances and the controlled variable exhibits larger overshoots. Furthermore, the frequency response analysis of the two systems showed that the simulated intensified system has reduced stability margins. The second part of the research investigates the task of pH control in a SDR using a PID controller by means of simulation and experimental studies. The effectiveness of a disturbance observer (DO) and a pH characteriser to compensate for the severe pH system nonlinearity is also explored in detail. The experimental studies showed that a PID controller provides adequate setpoint tracking and disturbance rejection performances. However, sluggish transient responses prevailed and the effluent pH limit cycled around the setpoint. There were indications of unstable behaviour at lower flowrates, which implied more advanced control schemas may be required to adapt to various operating regions dictated by the complex thin film hydrodynamics. The addition of the DO scheme improved the control performance by reducing the limit cycles. In the third segment of the investigations, the potential of exploiting the disc rotational speed as a manipulated variable is assessed for the process of barium sulphate precipitation. A PI controller is successfully used to regulate the conductivity of the effluent stream by adjusting the disc rotational speed. The results are immensely encouraging and show that the disc speed may be used as an extra degree of freedom in control system design. Finally, the flow regimes and wave characteristics of thin liquid films produced in a SDR are investigated by means of a thermal imaging camera. The film hydrodynamics strongly affect the heat and mass transfer processes within the processing films, and thus the intensification aspects of SDRs. Therefore, effective control and operation of such units is significantly dependent on the knowledge of film hydrodynamics and the underlying impact of the operating parameters and the manipulated variables on a given process. The results provided an interesting insight and unveiled promising potentials for characterisation of thin liquid film flow and temperature profiles across the disc by means of thermographic techniques. The present study reveals both challenges and opportunities regarding the control aspects of SDRs. It is recommended that equipment design and process control need to be considered simultaneously during the early stages of the future developments. Furthermore, intensified sensors and advanced controllers may be required to achieve an optimum control capability. Currently, the control performance is inhibited by the lack of sufficient considerations during the SDR design and manufacturing stages, and also by the characteristics of the commercially available instrumentation.EPSRC Doctoral Training Awar