Bridging semantically different paradigms in the field of marine acquisition event logging

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Paolo Diviacco (1)
  Karien De Cauwer (2)
  Adam Leadbetter (3)
  Jordi Sorribas (4)
  Yvan Stojanov (2)
  Alessandro Busato (1)
  Andrea Cova (1)
  
  1. IRI-Infrastructures ; Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale (OGS) ; Borgo Grotta Gigante 42/c ; 34010 ; Sgonico ; Trieste ; Italy
  2. The Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences ; Belgian Marine Data Centre ; Bruxelles ; Belgium
  3. British Oceanographic Data Centre ; Liverpool ; UK
  4. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cient铆ficas ; Barcelona ; Spain
  
• 关键词：Event logging ; Contrasting paradigms ; Metadata ; Pragmatics ; Boundary objects ; Ontology
• 刊名：Earth Science Informatics
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：March 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：8
• 期：1
• 页码：135-146
• 全文大小：956 KB
• 参考文献：1. Aug茅 M (1986) Un ethnologue dans lem茅tro, trad. Francesco Lomax, Un etnologo nel metr貌, Milano, El猫uthera 2005, 88-85861-53-9
  2. Becher, T, Trowler, PR (2001) Academic tribes and territories intellectual enquiry and culture of disciplines. The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, Buckingham
  3. Bechhofer S, Miles A (2008) Using OWL and SKOS. and-owl/master.html" class="a-plus-plus">http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/skos-and-owl/master.html
  4. Berners-Lee T (2006) Linked data - design issues. Retrieved February 24, http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
  5. Bizer, C, Heath, T, Berners-Lee, T (2009) Linked data - the story so far. Int J Semant Web Inf Syst 5: pp. 1-22 CrossRef
  6. Diviacco P (2011) 鈥淭owards a collaborative research data-space in Geophysics鈥?Mediterranean Marine Science 01/2011
  7. Diviacco P (2012) Addressing conflicting cognitive models in collaborative e-research: a case study in exploration geophysics. In collaborative and distributed e-research: innovations in technologies, strategies and applications, IGI Global press, DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0125-3.ch012
  8. Diviacco P (2015) Reconciling knowledge and collaborative e-research, in collaborative knowledge in scientific research networks, IGI Global Press
  9. Diviacco P (2015) Maps, graphs and annotations as Boundary Objects in Knowledge Networks, Distributed Cognition and Collaborative e-Research, in Collaborative Knowledge in Scientific Research Networks, IGI Global Press
  10. Dolan M, Thorsnes T, Leth J, Alhamdani Z, Guinan J, Van Lancker V (2013) Standardisation and harmonisation in seabed habitat mapping: role and added value of geological data and infor-mation. Part B: Terrain characterisation. Geo-Seas report 10.5B Retrieved on April 7, 2013, from http://www.geo-seas.eu/content/content.asp?menu=0040028_000000
  11. Gauker, C (1995) Thinking out loud. Princeton University Press, Princeton
  12. Graybeal J (2011) 鈥淐hoosing and Implementing established controlled vocabularies.鈥?In The MMI Guides: Navigating the World of Marine Metadata. marinemetadata.org/guides/vocabs/cvchooseimplement" class="a-plus-plus">http://marinemetadata.org/guides/vocabs/cvchooseimplement (Accessed 2014-02-24)
  13. Hanson, NR (1958) Patterns of discovery. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  14. Hooton, AB, Hooton, C (1977) Anthropol Linguist 19: pp. 355-357
  15. Horridge M (2011) A practical guide to building OWL Ontologies Using Prot茅g茅 4 and CO-ODE Tools. Edition 1.3
  16. Hyland B, Atemezing G, Villazon-Terrazas B (2014) 鈥淏est practices for publishing linked data鈥? World Wide Web Commission Working Group Note January 9th. http://www.w3org/TR/2014/NOTE-ld-bp-20140109/
  17. Kuhn, TS (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
  18. Lave, J, Wenger, E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge CrossRef
  19. Leadbetter A (2015) 鈥淓xamining trust in collaboarative research networks.鈥?In Collaborative Knowledge in Scientific Research Networks editors Paolo Diviacco, Peter Fox, Cyril Pshenichny and Adam Leadbetter, IGI Global
  20. Leadbetter A (in press) 鈥淟inked ocean data鈥?In The SemanticWeb in Earth and Space Science: Current Status and Future Directions, editors Thomas Narock and Peter Fox, IOS Press
  21. Leadbetter, A, Lowry, R, Oliver Clements, D (2013) Putting meaning into NETMAR: the open source network for marine environmental data. Int J Digit Earth.
  22. Leadbetter A, Robert A, Cynthia C, Adam S, Roy L (2015) Loose integration of local information to generate collaborative marine science knowledge. In: Paolo D, Peter F, Cyril P, Adam L (eds) Collaborative knowledge in scientific research networks. IGI
  Group knowledge and group rationality: a judgement aggregation perspective. Episteme: J Soc Epistemol 2: pp. 25-38 CrossRef
  23. Morris, C (1971) Foundations of the theory of signs. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  24. Polanyi, M (1966) The tacit dimension. Anchor Day Books, New York
  25. Popper, KR (1934) The logic of scientific discovery. Basic Books, New York
  26. Schaap D, Lowry R (2010) SeaDataNet 鈥?Pan-European infrastructure for marine and ocean data management: unified access to distributed data sets. Int J Digit Earth 3(Suppl. 1):50鈥?9
  27. UNESCO (1987) GF3: a general formatting system for geo-referenced data. Volume 2: Technical Description of the GF3 Format and Code Tables. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission Manuals and Guides, 17
  28. Van Heteren S (2014) Transnational standards for seabed habitat mapping: harmonizing sediment related parameters, in Collaborative Knowledge in Scientific Research Networks, IGI Global Press
  29. Van Lancker V, Van Heteren S (Eds.) (2013) Standardisation and harmonisation in seabed habitat mapping: role and added value of geological data and information. Part A: Sediment characterisation. Geo-Seas report 10.5A. Retrieved on April , 2013, from http://www.geo-seas.eu/content/content.asp?menu=0040028_000000
  30. Lancker, V, Moerkerke, G, Four, I, Verfaillie, E, Rabaut, M, Degraer, S Fine-scale geomorphological mapping of sandbank envi-ronments for the prediction of macrobenthic occurrences, Belgian part of the North Sea. In: Harris, PT, Baker, E eds. (2012) Seafloor geo-morphology as benthic habitat: GeoHAB atlas of seafloor geomorphic features and benthic habitats. Elsevier Insights, London, pp. 251-260 CrossRef
  31. Wenger, E (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge CrossRef
  32. Whitley, R (2000) The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Clarendon, Oxford
  33. Zarb MP (2006) Modelling participation in virtual communities-of-practice. LSE MSc ADMIS Dissertation
  
• 刊物类别：Earth and Environmental Science
• 刊物主题：Earth sciences
  Computer Applications in Geosciences
  Geosciences
  Simulation and Modeling
  
• 出版者：Springer Berlin Heidelberg
• ISSN：1865-0481

文摘

To use data proficiently and efficiently, scientists require comprehensive metadata. This is very difficult to reconstruct conceptually, positionally and temporally far from the time and place of data acquisition. The European Commission funded Eurofleets project, whose mission is to build an integrated European oceanographic research vessel fleet, is developing a system that aims to address this issue by capturing metadata in a uniform way at time of observation. As this is a European-wide initiative, the problems associated with the desired level of integration are also broad. Having so many partners, different paradigms, schools, practices and vocabularies must be taken into consideration. Assuming that this divergence is natural and even somehow positive in the perspective of adapting to a changing environment, we detail how bridging can take place using a systemic approach. In the Eurofleets experience, this relied on the definition of a boundary object: that is an artifact that can be used by each of the diverging communities, since it embeds the core, shared conceptual entities. The structure of the boundary object is based on an event model, its ontology and the controlled vocabularies linked to it. All conceptual entities, and indeed the structure of the boundary object itself, resulted from wide discussions among the divergent communities. These discussions, allowed the extension of meaning from a semantic perspective to the pragmatic scope, where theoretical and cultural matters can also be considered, so that, eventually, the knowledge represented by the boundary object is more likely to be understood across the divergent communities. To exploit the possibilities offered by the boundary object, specific software has been developed that, using the event model and ontology, allows easier deployment across the project partners of a system intended to address the heterogeneity of the research vessel fleet. In this paper we describe in detail the underlying ontology.