Information Integration - the process of integration, evolution and versioning

At present, many information sources are available wherever you are. Most of the time, the information needed is spread across several of those information sources. Gathering this information is a tedious and time consuming job. Automating this process would assist the user in its task. Integration of the information sources provides a global information source with all information needed present. All of these information sources also change over time. With each change of the information source, the schema of this source can be changed as well. The data contained in the information source, however, cannot be changed every time, due to the huge amount of data that would have to be converted in order to conform to the most recent schema.\ud In this report we describe the current methods to information integration, evolution and versioning. We distinguish between integration of schemas and integration of the actual data. We also show some key issues when integrating XML data sources

UK utility data integration: overcoming schematic heterogeneity

In this paper we discuss syntactic, semantic and schematic issues which inhibit the integration of utility data in the UK. We then focus on the techniques employed within the VISTA project to overcome schematic heterogeneity. A Global Schema based architecture is employed. Although automated approaches to Global Schema definition were attempted the heterogeneities of the sector were too great. A manual approach to Global Schema definition was employed. The techniques used to define and subsequently map source utility data models to this schema are discussed in detail. In order to ensure a coherent integrated model, sub and cross domain validation issues are then highlighted. Finally the proposed framework and data flow for schematic integration is introduced

In the balance? Civil society and the peace process 2002-2008

As Sri Lanka slid back towards open hostilities in 2006, existing patterns of civil society engagement in peace negotiations came under widespread criticism on the grounds that they had failed to broaden participation and that they had largely excluded civil society organisations (CSOs) that were critical of peace efforts. As peace talks broke down, the need to move beyond a ‘charmed circle’ of Colombo-based peace NGOs and to engage with a ‘broader civil society’ became a perennial refrain from funding agencies. This period was also marked by an increasingly visible confrontation between pro-peace civil society and patriotic nationalist groups mobilising against peace negotiations and international engagement expressed through growing attacks on NGOs in the media and at a number of public events. \ud \ud This chapter explores this complex predicament facing civil society as Sri Lanka returned to war. First, it presents a brief summary of donors’ engagements with civil society during the ceasefire period and describes how the nature and scope of civil society peace work was shaped by the shifting political context. Second, it contrasts donor-backed peace efforts with the more robust campaigns of nationalist civil society groups after 2005. Third, it examines how the changing political climate impacted upon civil society peacebuilding efforts focusing in particular on the way in which pro-peace civil society actors managed the increasingly critical impressions of their work stemming from the domestic political arena. \ud \ud Drawing these strands together, the chapter concludes by reflecting on the collective timidity of civil society actors during the ceasefire period and argues that this was an outcome of two interconnecting sets of factors. On the one hand, civil society’s capacity to contribute to political transformation was constrained by its historical relations with the state. These patterns of interaction drove the dynamic relationship between two conflicting civil society arenas – patriotic groups fed off weaknesses in pro-peace civil society while the position of peace groups was further undermined by the success of these nationalist organizations. On the other hand, the approaches to peacebuilding pursued by donors during the ceasefire period encouraged a growing depoliticization and technicalization of civil society peace work which privileged a consensual rather than a politically engaged role for civil society actors. This analysis sees civil society organisations as confronted with a fundamental tension between a cosmopolitan view of politics that saw political change as the outcome of processes of governance reform prompted by extra-governmental actors and a local perception of politics that viewed political progress as a product of changes in government and debates conducted in an arena inhabited exclusively by political parties. Civil society’s efforts to build peace during the ceasefire period involved a perpetual balancing act between asserting liberal models of bottom-up change and reconciling these with an increasingly predominant and countervailing domestic vision of politics

Neurons and symbols: a manifesto

We discuss the purpose of neural-symbolic integration including its principles, mechanisms and applications. We outline a cognitive computational model for neural-symbolic integration, position the model in the broader context of multi-agent systems, machine learning and automated reasoning, and list some of the challenges for the area of neural-symbolic computation to achieve the promise of effective integration of robust learning and expressive reasoning under uncertainty

Modeling to Mars: a NASA Model Based Systems Engineering Pathfinder Effort

The NASA Engineering Safety Center (NESC) Systems Engineering (SE) Technical Discipline Team (TDT) initiated the Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Pathfinder effort in FY16. The goals and objectives of the MBSE Pathfinder include developing and advancing MBSE capability across NASA, applying MBSE to real NASA issues, and capturing issues and opportunities surrounding MBSE. The Pathfinder effort consisted of four teams, with each team addressing a particular focus area. This paper focuses on Pathfinder team 1 with the focus area of architectures and mission campaigns. These efforts covered the timeframe of February 2016 through September 2016. The team was comprised of eight team members from seven NASA Centers (Glenn Research Center, Langley Research Center, Ames Research Center, Goddard Space Flight Center IV&V Facility, Johnson Space Center, Marshall Space Flight Center, and Stennis Space Center). Collectively, the team had varying levels of knowledge, skills and expertise in systems engineering and MBSE. The team applied their existing and newly acquired system modeling knowledge and expertise to develop modeling products for a campaign (Program) of crew and cargo missions (Projects) to establish a human presence on Mars utilizing In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). Pathfinder team 1 developed a subset of modeling products that are required for a Program System Requirement Review (SRR)/System Design Review (SDR) and Project Mission Concept Review (MCR)/SRR as defined in NASA Procedural Requirements. Additionally, Team 1 was able to perform and demonstrate some trades and constraint analyses. At the end of these efforts, over twenty lessons learned and recommended next steps have been identified

Model Differencing for Textual DSLs

The syntactic and semantic comparison of models is important for understanding and supporting their evolution. In this paper we present TMDIFF, a technique for semantically comparing models that are represented as text. TMDIFF incorporates the referential structure of a language, which is determined by symbolic names and language-specific scoping rules. Furthermore, it employs a novel technique for matching entities existing in source and target versions of a model, and finds entities that are added or removed. As a result, TMDIFF is fully language parametric, and brings the benefits of model differencing to textual languages