1 / 46

Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP)

Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP). Brand Niemann U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, niemann.brand@epa.gov SICoP, Chair. Preface.

cyrah
Download Presentation

Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP) Brand Niemann U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, niemann.brand@epa.gov SICoP, Chair

  2. Preface • Dr. Niemann has been with the U.S. EPA for 25 years and currently works in the Office of the Chief Information Officer and Assistant Administrator for Environmental Information as an Enterprise Architect and Semantic Web Services Specialist. • He Chairs the Federal CIO Council’s Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP). • He serves as a member of the XML Conference Planning Committee, the E-Gov Institute Program Planning Committee, the Architecture & Infrastructure Committee, and the Knowledge Management Working Group of the Best Practices Committee. February 14 -16, 2006

  3. Preface • Thank you for the invitation to participate and I think it is significant that you start your conference on a day set aside to celebrate wonderful relationships: • I opened a sweet Valentines Day card from my sweetheart this morning that I found in my suitcase last night! • I opened your conference brochure and saw the names of 4 colleagues on tomorrow’s agenda that I have been privileged to develop wonderful personal and professional relationships with during the past five years. February 14 -16, 2006

  4. Preface • Continued: • I read the words “agility” and “looking inward; looking outward” in your conference theme and recalled they are about good relationships: • Agile Methods: lightweight software development methodologies that emphasize close collaboration between the programmer team and business experts; face-to-face communication (as more efficient than written documentation); frequent delivery of new deployable business value; tight, self-organizing teams; and ways to craft code and the team such that the inevitable requirements churn is not a crisis. • See the Agile Alliance Web site at http://www.agilalliance.org.home February 14 -16, 2006

  5. Preface • Continued: • I read the words “agility” and “looking inward; looking outward” in your conference theme and recalled they are about good relationships (continued): • Endocepts – from the Greek “endo” meaning inside – the “Ahas” – insights that suggest ways out of a problem situation – so building good relationships between inspirations and realities. • From stories that spark people’s imagination to formal “Solution Envisioning” sessions. • See “Capability Cases: A Solution Envisioning Approach, Polikoff, Coyne, and Hodgson, 2005, Addison Wesley. • Ralph Hodgson gives two presentation tommorrow! February 14 -16, 2006

  6. Preface • Continued: • I read about your new Semantic Technology Integrated Program Environment (IPE) and Semantic Technology Briefings and Workshops and they are about building good relationships with each other around a new technology! • So this all fits together nicely with what I want to talk to you about: • SICoP, a community of practice to improve the public-private relationships to deliver improved E-Government Services to the public. February 14 -16, 2006

  7. Preface • Continued: • So this all fits together nicely with what I want to talk to you about (continued): • Yes, you serve the government, but we serve the citizen, so by inference (a term from semantic technologies), you help us serve the citizens. • And I am pleased to say that Lockheed Martin is an excellent participant in SICoP as you will see later in this presentation. • We had 5 Lockheed Martin employees registered for our Fourth Semantic Interoperability for E-Government Conference last week. February 14 -16, 2006

  8. Overview • The Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP) has made considerable progress towards implementations of semantic technologies and web standards in the U.S. government with a series of white papers, conferences, and pilot projects. • Part I. SICoP and Data Reference Model 2.0 Implementation: Making it Real. • Part II. Highlights of the 4th Semantic Interoperability for E-Government Conference, February 9-10, 2006. • Part III. Related Presentation by Mills Davis, “Semantic Wave 2006: Executive Guide to the Business Value of Semantic Technologies” February 14 -16, 2006

  9. Some Kudos • “You should be proud of the way that DRM 2.0 turned out and how it has been accepted by the data community. The open, collaborative development process sets it apart, and gives us a high standard for our other efforts across government.” • Richard Burk, Chief Architect, OMB, 12/22/2005. • Note: The SICoP White Paper Module 1, Figure 6 (Data Structure Continuum, From Pollock and Hodgson, 2004) suggested the three basic types of data used in the DRM 2.0 ! February 14 -16, 2006

  10. Some Kudos February 14 -16, 2006

  11. Some Press • Government Computer News | GCN.com • January 11, 2006 10:00 AM • Data Reference Model 2.0 and the role of metadata • GCN Senior Writer Joab Jackson moderated an online forum Jan. 11 with Brand Niemann, chairman of the Federal CIO Council Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice. • In 2006, one of the big issues for government content managers will be how to share information more easily. Niemann helped draft the second version of the Data Reference Model, the Office of Management and Budget’s own framework for interagency sharing of information. Niemann also discussed advanced semantic technologies, the usefulness of Wikis and metadata and the upcoming Semantic Interoperability for E-Government Conference. • See Transcript at http://appserv.gcn.com/forum/qna_forum/37914-2.html February 14 -16, 2006

  12. IntroductionUse the DRM 2.0 Abstract Model:Description, Context, & Sharing • Describe Yourself: • Scientist – Atmospheric and Computer Science. • EPA Data Standards (ISO/IEC 11179), SICoP (Semantic Standards and Technologies), and DRM (Composite Applications, etc.) Pilots. • Describe Your Context: • Scientific Method – Do Experiments (Pilots) to Test Architectural (Enterprise, Knowledge, Data) Concepts. • A total of 10 public forums, meetings, and workshops and 29 pilot presentations on the DRM in the past five months! • Describe What You Want to Share: • Five Steps to Interoperability (in the domain of scientific ontology) (Barry Smith). • Find ways to use reality to take care of interoperability (when scientists disagree they let reality tell them how to resolve their disagreement – they look at instances). (Concept, instance, and the relationship between them – otherwise it is just in our minds.) February 14 -16, 2006

  13. Information Model • Part I. Ontology and Flow: • 1. What is Semantic Interoperability? • 2. What is a Community of Practice? • 3. What is DRM 2.0? • 4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • 5. Where is SICoP DRM 2.0 Implementation Going? • 6. Can semantics improve the usefulness of the ISO/IEC 11179 standard? (Pilot Demonstration) February 14 -16, 2006

  14. Information Model Two Connected Layers: Knowledge Map and the Information Resources* *SICoP and DRM Implementation Through Iteration and Testing: Making It Real, Federal Metadata Management Consortium, Dec. 13, 2005. http://web-services.gov/scopefmmc12132005.ppt Also used in “Building Semantic Webs for e-government with Wiki technology.” http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/2006-02-09/EGov%20Wiki.pdf February 14 -16, 2006

  15. Information Model • Introduce a concept in the form of a question. • Answer that question with a definition and an instance that illustrates the relationship we mean between the concept and the instance. • Provide a flow of concepts and instances that supports logic and reasoning. • This illustrates the Knowledge Reference Model we are working towards! February 14 -16, 2006

  16. Part I1. What is Semantic Interoperability? • Formal Semantics*: • Semantic is primarily concerned with sameness. It determines that two entities are the same in spite of appearing to be different. • Number semantics: 5.1, 5.10, and 05.1 are all the same number. • DNA sequence semantics: cctggacct is the same as CCTGGACCT. • XML document semantics is defined by infosets. * Introduction to the Semantic Web for Bioinformatics, Ken Baclawski, December 6, 2005, & K. Baclawski & T. Niu, Ontologies for Bioinformatics, MIT Press, October, 2005 February 14 -16, 2006

  17. Part I1. What is Semantic Interoperability? • Five Steps to Interoperability (in the domain of scientific ontology)*: • (1) Find ways to use reality to take care of interoperability (when scientists disagree they let reality tell them how to resolve their disagreement – they look at instances). • (2) Recognize that an ontology consists of names for types and of representations of relations between types defined in terms of underlying relations between instances. • (3) Recognize correspondingly that there are three kinds of relations: <class, class>, <class, instance>, & <instance, instance> • (4) Use a coherent upper level taxonomy distinguishing continuants (cells, molecules, organisms ...), occurrents (events, processes), dependent entities (qualities, functions ...), and independent entities (their bearers). • (5) Coordinate, coordinate, coordinate! * Barry Smith, Workshop on Bio-ontologies, October 28, 2005, University of Buffalo. February 14 -16, 2006

  18. Part I1. What is Semantic Interoperability? Mapping ebXML to/from UDDI* * UDDI and ebXML from One Registry, Tony Graham, XML 2005 Conference, November 14-18, Atlanta, GA. February 14 -16, 2006

  19. Part I2. What is a Community of Practice? • The concept of a Community of Practice (often abbreviated as CoP) refers to the process of social learning that occurs when people who have a common interest in some subject or problem collaborate over an extended period to share ideas, find solutions, and build innovations. • Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_practice • More recently Communities of Practice have become associated with knowledge management. February 14 -16, 2006

  20. Part I2. What is a Community of Practice? • Table of Contents: • Charter • Calendar • Future • Past • SICoP Working Groups and Projects • SICoP Conferences and Public Meetings • SICoP White Papers and Presentations • SICoP Support for the Data Reference Model • Discussion Forum Archives / File Workspace & Resources • SICoP Conference Calls See http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP February 14 -16, 2006

  21. Part I2. What is a Community of Practice? Source: http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage February 14 -16, 2006

  22. Part ILogic and Reasoning • So SICoP is “primarily concerned with sameness” using “scientific ontology” focused on “instances” by “coordination” across “community” over an extended period to find solutions to “interoperability”. • Also see the SICoP Charter: • The Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP) is established by a group of individuals for the purpose of achieving "semantic interoperability" and "semantic data integration" in the government sector. • The SICoP seeks to enable Semantic Interoperability, specifically the "operationalizing" of these technologies and approaches, through online conversation, meetings, tutorials, conferences, pilot projects, and other activities aimed at developing and disseminating best practices. February 14 -16, 2006

  23. Part I3. What is DRM 2.0? • A New FEA Reference Model* with: • (1) Reference Model: • Abstract Model. • (2) Management Strategy: • FEA Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework 2.0. • (3) Implementation Guidance: • Pilots During 2005 and Continuing in 2006. Five Vendor Implementations So Far! • (4) OMB Draft E-Gov Act 2002 Section 207d /DRM Guidance: • See Footnote 14. * Like a four-legged stool with rungs to create a stable platform going forward. Need all four legs and all four rungs connecting them to remain stable. February 14 -16, 2006

  24. Part I3. What is DRM 2.0? • Data: Three Types – structured (20%), and unstructured and semi-structured (80%). • Originally it was the Data and Information Reference Model. • Metadata: Three Roles – discovery, integration, and reasoning. • Recombine data and metadata for sharing and reuse and address Section 207d requirements (see slide 21). • Model: Three Functions – description, context, and sharing. • DRM XML Schema and DRM Abstract Model (see next slide). • Reporting: Three Documents – reference, management strategy, and implementation guide. • Integrated in the DRM Education Pilot with Pilot Metrics and CoP/CoI Templates (see slide 22). • Metamodel: Three Implementation Levels – organizational, technical, and semantic interoperability or agency, CoI, and cross-CoI. • European Interoperability Framework, Andreas Tolk, Enterprise Architecture Assessment 2.0, DoD Net-Centric Strategy, etc. February 14 -16, 2006

  25. Part I3. What is DRM 2.0? Portion of the Abstract Model where data elements are classified, specified, defined, named, and registered. February 14 -16, 2006

  26. Part I3. What is DRM 2.0? Mapping DRM Abstract Model to OMB Section 207d / DRM Guidance February 14 -16, 2006

  27. Part I3. What is DRM 2.0? Use DRM Version 2.0 itself as a pilot project for education and FEA information sharing! See http://web-services.gov and Dynamic Knowledge Repositories February 14 -16, 2006

  28. Part I3. What is DRM 2.0? The Data Reference Model 2.0 Education Pilot Implements This Schematic Diagram! Source: Expanding E-Government, Improved Service Delivery for the American People Using Information Technology, December 2005, pages 2-3. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budintegration/expanding_egov_2005.pdf February 14 -16, 2006

  29. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • What is it? Taxonomies and Ontologies for describing information relationships and associations in a way that can be accessed and searched. • What am I expected to do? Use the DRM Abstract Model to guide both your agency data architecture and your interagency data sharing activities. • What are some best practices for doing it? See Ontology and Taxonomy Coordinating Work Group, etc. • How do I work both locally in my Agency and more globally with other agencies on this? Participate in the Collaborative Workshops, the DRM ITIT Team, etc. See next slide for explanation. February 14 -16, 2006

  30. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • Metamodel by Andreas Tolk (2005): • There are four rectangular boxes on top of one another (labeled from bottom to top: data, metadata, model, and metamodel, respectively) and each box contains 2-4 circular colored dots, and these colored dots are connected with lines, meant to show that there are relationships, or need to be relationships, between say data and metadata, between metadata and models, and between models and metamodels. The purpose is to show that we need to describe information model relationships and associations in a way that can be accessed and searched. Note: This is also provided for Section 508 Compliance of the graphics. February 14 -16, 2006

  31. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? See next slide for explanation. Source: Mills Davis, “Smart Search Continuum” in DRM Implementation - Preliminary Strategy, October 11, 2005. February 14 -16, 2006

  32. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • The role of semantic metadata in increasing search capability: • In this XY graph, the X axis is labeled "Increasing Search Capability" (with sub-labels of Recovery, Discovery, Intelligence, Question Answering, and Reasoning) and the Y-Axis is labeled "Increasing Metadata" (with sub-labels from Weak Semantics to Strong Semantics). A straight line from the origin to the upper right has labels of Syntactic Interoperability (sub-label "Many Federal applications do not enable data sharing"), Structural Interoperability (DRM 2.0 sets the bar here), and Semantic Interoperability (Some Intelligence, Defense, Security, Health, Science & Business applications share information at these levels) from bottom to top. The point of this XY graph is that Increasing Metadata (from glossaries to ontologies) is highly correlated with Increasing Search Capability (from discovery to reasoning). Note: This is also provided for Section 508 Compliance of the graphics. February 14 -16, 2006

  33. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • Five Key Activities Over the Next Year: • (1) Education and Training in DRM Version 2.0 and use in FEA – DRM-based Information Sharing Pilots (started June 13, 2005). • (2) Testing of XML Schemas and OWL Ontologies by NIST and the National Center for Ontological Research, respectively, among others (began October 27, 2005). • (3) Inventory/Repository of Semantic Interoperability Assets and Development of a Common Semantic Model (COSMO) by the new Ontology and Taxonomy Coordinating Work Group (ONTACWG) (started October 5, 2005). • (4) Continued early implementation of DRM 2.0 concepts and artifacts by industry in “open collaboration with open standards” pilot projects and workshops (started July 19, 2005). • (5) Fostering champions of DRM Best Practices to improve (1) agency data architectures within agencies and (2) cross-agency data sharing across agencies in funded projects (started June 13, 2005). February 14 -16, 2006

  34. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • Pilot Metrics: • A specific instance for the “Semantic DNS - UDEF Disaster Response Pilot” (presented on November 10th, December 6th and today), based on an initial assessment subject to feedback and review, is that it covers 13 of the 15 boxes in the five by three matrix (recall slide 5 – Data, Model, Documents, Implementation, and Status). The two missing boxes are that it does not currently treat unstructured or semi-structured data. This has been addressed. • This template will be completed for all pilot projects and provides metrics to help decide what should be done with the pilots, namely, adopt them (high score), improve them (moderate score), or not adopt them (low score). • CoP/CoI Templates (see next slide): • Helps CoPs/CoIs both differentiate themselves from one another as to their unique interests as well as help discover where collaboration and synergy is possible. February 14 -16, 2006

  35. Part I4. What is DRM 2.0 Implementation Guidance? • Community Profile for XXX • By / Date: • Last Updated: • Community (name): • Date Established: • Key Stakeholders: • Constituency: • Domain: • Mission / Charter: • With respect to Ontology work (esp. eGov-related work), the community's: • Medium Term Goal: • Short Term Goal: • Deliverables within the next 6 months: • Key Differentiation (with the other communities presenting today): • What we can bring to the table to foster collaboration with other communities here today: • Additional Remarks: • Contact: • See http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2005_11_10/Prep February 14 -16, 2006

  36. Part I5. Where is SICoP DRM 2.0 Implementation Going? • The Evolution of Metadata: • In the beginning there was data, and hopefully its documentation – but it was not accessible so we resorted to: • “Metadata for Discovery” – but we still wanted to see the actual data – now both are on the Web. • “Metadata for Integration” – but that is really hard. • I spent two years doing it for the Interagency Chesapeake Bay Program databases with help from graduate classes in exploratory data analysis and statistical data visualization and produced a comprehensive “Data Story”. • And now the new paradigm is “Executable Metadata” – the data (XML), metadata (RDF), models (RDF/S) and metamodels (OWL) are all integrated to support knowledge computing, statistical computing, and stochastic inference under conditions of uncertainty referred to as the “Bayesian Web: • See "Ontologies for Bioinformatics“, Ken Baclawski and Tianhua Niu, MIT Press, October 2005: http://ontobio.org/ • And see the National Center for Ontological Research (NCOR): http://ncor.us February 14 -16, 2006

  37. Part I5. Where is SICoP DRM 2.0 Implementation Going? Source: Mills Davis, http://web-services.gov/NetCentricSemantics051110.pdf February 14 -16, 2006

  38. Part I5. Where is SICoP DRM 2.0 Implementation Going? Super Pilot: Address as Many Boxes as Possible! Yes ? ? CoP: Community of Practice LoB: Line of Business FHA/DAWG: Federal Health Architecture – Data Architecture Work Group See FHA Data Architecture Working Group: SICoP DRM 2.0 Pilot, December 28, 2005. http://web-services.gov/scopefhadawg.ppt February 14 -16, 2006

  39. Part I6. Can Semantics improve the usefulness of the ISO/IEC 11179 standard? • The “Semantic DNS - UDEF Disaster Response Pilot” comes from asking the question “can semantics improve the usefulness of the ISO/IEC 11179 standard?” • And the experiment (pilot) shows that it does! • Ron Schuldt* at the Federal Metadata Management Consortium Meeting, December 13, 2005: • Followups with National Cancer Institute and IPV6! • Applications to other emerging technologies like RFID! * Lockheed Martin and Chair, The Open Group UDEF Forum February 14 -16, 2006

  40. Part I6. Can Semantics improve the usefulness of the ISO/IEC 11179 standard? • The semantics portion of the approach is based on an evolving global standard known as the Universal Data Element Framework (UDEF). The UDEF is a method for categorizing data element concepts (as defined by ISO/IEC 11179) that exist across multiple applications. It assigns each data element concept an alphanumeric tag plus a semantically rich name – that in most cases can stand-alone without requiring a separate definition. • For example, “Purchase Order Number” found in an invoice from industry to the government is a commonly encountered data element concept. This concept has a UDEF tag d.t.2_13.35.8 and associated UDEF name Purchase.Order.DOCUMENT_Government.Assigned.IDENTIFIER. February 14 -16, 2006

  41. Part I6. Can Semantics improve the usefulness of the ISO/IEC 11179 standard? • The UDEF name and associated ID pair is similar in several ways to the Domain Name System (DNS) used to manage computer-sensible IP addresses in 123.123.123.123 format and to associate them with user-friendly formats such as www.company.com If adopted on a global scale, the UDEF could become a Semantic DNS or Semantic Bridge connecting the semantics of data element concepts across disparate applications across the globe. • The Semantic DNS - UDEF Disaster Response Pilot was submitted October 14, 2005, to the Federal Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice as a proposed solution approach and was was demonstrated live at The Open Group Semantic Interoperability Conference in Houston on October 20, 2005. February 14 -16, 2006

  42. Ron Schuldt, Lockheed Martin Corporation and Chair, The Open Group UDEF Forum By SICoP Chair, Brand Niemann, U.S. EPA Produced in Collaboration With February 14 -16, 2006 Federal CIO Council’s Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP) Special Recognition For the “Disaster Response Pilot Demonstrating Semantic Naming Technology for Web Services” at the Fourth Semantic Interoperability for E-Government Conference, February 9-10, 2006, at The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA. Presented at the Lockheed Martin Information Technology Trends Conference, February 14, 2006, Orlando,Florida

  43. Part II. Recent Conference • Fourth Semantic Interoperability for E-Government Conference, February 9-10, 2006, MITRE, McLean, Virginia: • February 9th: • Opening Keynote and Demonstration: • The Semantic Web for Bioinformatics – Professor Ken Baclawski • Ontology-based Searching for Health Information (e.g. Is my child safe from environmental toxins?) – Michael Belanger • Featured Presentation and Panel: • The Business Value for Semantic Technologies – Mills Davis • Senior Officials and Managers - CIO Council and Committees, Agency, IAC, etc. • Vendor/Poster Networking – 30 • Presentations and Work Group and Partner Reports – 32 and 4 and 3, respectively • Closing Keynote and Dialogue – Professor Jim Hendler February 14 -16, 2006

  44. Part II. Recent Conference • Fourth Semantic Interoperability for E-Government Conference, February 9-10, 2006, MITRE, McLean, Virginia (continued): • February 10th: • Work Group Sessions: • Data Reference Model Implementation, Health Information Technology Ontology, FEA Reference Model Ontology, and Ontology and Taxonomy Coordination. • Breakout Session Presentations: 12 • Tutorials (BBN, TopQuadrant/Oracle, & Baclawski) • Some Highlights: • Registered Attendees: 250+ (remote audience – video) • Special Recognitions: See next slide February 14 -16, 2006

  45. Part II. Recent Conference • Outstanding Contributions as a Member of the Planning Committee: Rick Tucker, MITRE. • Best Co-Papers: Elisa Kendall, Sandpiper, Sam Chance, US Navy, and Michael Seebold, Concurrent Technologies Corporation. • Best Semantic Harmonization Tool Application, Chuck Mosher, MetaMatrix Corporation. • Best Exhibit: Siderean. • Best Breakout Session Presentations: Gregory Fairnak, Consultant to Northrop Grumman and Ray Piasecki, BAE Systems. February 14 -16, 2006

  46. Part III. Related Presentation • Mills Davis, “Semantic Wave 2006: Executive Guide to the Business Value of Semantic Technologies”: • Mills is Project10X’s managing director for industry research and strategic programs. Mills consults with technology manufacturers, global 2000 corporations, and government agencies on next-wave semantic technologies and solutions. • Mills serves as lead for the Federal CIO council’s Semantic Interoperability Community of Practice (SICoP) research into the business value of semantic technologies. Also, he a founding member of the AIIM interoperable enterprise content management (iECM) working group, and a founding member of the National Center for Ontology Research (NCOR). • A noted researcher and industry analyst, Mills has authored more than 100 reports, whitepapers, articles, and industry studies. February 14 -16, 2006

More Related