Welcome !

The Semantic Web meets eGovernment 2006 AAAI Spring Symposium Series Stanford University, California, USA, March 27-29, 20061 Welcome !

The Semantic Web meets eGovernment 2006 AAAI Spring Symposium Series Stanford University, California, USA, March 27-29, 20061 Introduction and Overview

Who are we? • Nenad Stojanovic • Gregoris Mentzas • Andreas Abecker • Ljiljana Stojanovic

Structure of this introduction • Rationale for the SWEG Symposium • Topics and Sessions of the Symposium • Event Organization

The two sides of the (same?) coin • Starting from the Semantic Web … • … and applying it to eGovernment • or / and • Starting from eGovernment … • … and adding Semantics

Starting from the Semantic Web … • The Semantic Web has been in the focus of the AI community for the last years • What the Semantic Web now really needs is real-world use cases • in order to demonstrate its added (business) value • The full application potential of some SW technologies • like Semantic Web Services and Rules • ... has been largely neglected due to lack of large-scale testing domains

.. and applying it to eGovernment • The next application-driven research challenges for SW can be defined only through the feedback from real use-cases • eGovernment … • – which provides a large, dynamic, heterogeneous and shared information space – • … could be the required “testbed” for effectively evaluating semantic technologies

Starting from eGovernment … • eGovernment is unique because of its enormous challenge to achieve interoperability • given the manifold semantic differences of interpretation of, e.g., law, regulations, citizen services, administrative processes, best-practices, and, last, but not least, the many different languages to be taken into account within and across regions, nations and continents • Semantic differences are related to a great variety of IT solutions (on local, regional, inter-/national level) which will have to be networked • despite any effort of standardisation

… and adding Semantics • Some of the key obstacles for networked computer applications in governmental processes and services are those kinds of barriers in which the different meanings of data objects and interfaces cannot be automatically mediated • Setting up seamless eGovernment services requires information integration as well as process integration • involving a variety of objects with specific semantics

SWEG: Semantic Web and eGovernment: a (happy?) marriage ?? • The combination of eGov and SW seems to be quite natural • eGov domain can provide an ideal test bed for existing SW research • SW technologies can be an ideal platform to achieve the vision of a knowledge-based, user-centric, distributed and networked eGov • eGovernment further exhibits some remarkable characteristics which may lead to new SW research directions • high degree of formality of key areas (law) • strong requirements to come to same decisions in similar situations • high demands wrt. security, privacy, and trust; • sometimes extremely long-running process instances (e.g. in urban and regional planning); • sometimes extreme information imbalances between stakeholders, as well as many different stakeholders in the same process • and many more

What else is happening concerning SWEG ? • Various events take into account SWEG issues • Industry events and thematic conferences, like • “Semantic technologies for E Government” organised by TopQuadrant • Knowledge Management in Electronic Government (KMGov) • eGovernment Interoperability Conference (eGov INTEROP) • IDABC Event on Semantic Interopeability (28 Sept. 2005, Brussels) • Research and industrial projects addressing SWEG • Europe: OntoGov, FIT, SAKE, SemanticGov, HOPS, Terregov, etc • USA: WebDG, FEA, etc • National and multi-national guidelines • E.g. European Commission’s Directive on Interoperability for Pan-European eGovernment Services [13.2.2006, COM(2006) 45]

Where does the SWEG Symposium come in? • There is a need to create awareness about the potential of semantic technologies in eGovernment • The prerequisite is the possibility to exchange ideas during a well organized and dedicated event for this topic • This is the reason that we decided to address the research community with a forum like a AAAI Symposium. • It is clear that all questions cannot be answered in three days and this is not our intention • The Symposium should serve as a meeting point for harmonizing the community and defining next steps • The free form of organization provided in a AAAI Symposium seems to be an ideal opportunity to achieve this

Expected goals • Identify research and industrial challenges • At the intersection of SW and eGov research • We intend to focus on three cluster topics in break-out sessions • Develop a (hopefully) self-sustainable community • To share experience • To develop a digital social network • more than a mailling list • semantic wiki • To publish a special issue of a journal and/or a book • To keep the momentum and continue related activities • Similar workshop already organised for the ESWC 2006 (deadline 3 Apr) • Any additional expectations from you?

The role of semantics Interoperable processes/services Integrated data/application Ontology management as infrastructure • Interoperability problem • Commonly agreed interchange format • Retrieval / Integration problem • Common domain model • (Self-) Adaptivity problem including knowledge update • Formal representation / reasoning

Topics organisation Semantics Portals Application Process Session 6 Session 5 Services eGovernment Session 1 Session 2 Ontologies Session 3 Session 4

Challenges: Services • Semantic web services and eGovernment • Applicability to e-government services • SW service composition and its usefulness to egovernment • Experiences of existing frameworks and standards vs need for new ones • can we live with existing ones (OWL-S, WSMO/L/X, METEOR-S, etc) ? • If not, why? What is the problem with existing approaches ? • Semantic Web Services and Web Services • Can they live together in the eGovernment domain? • Problems? Experiences? • What is the most critical / difficult practical aspect of heterogeneity? • SWS resolves data / process / protocol heterogeneity • Experiences with real use cases • Problems, challenges and lessons learned ??? • Problems and challenges from the organisational viewpoint • Government agencies problems in applying SWS technologies

Challenges: Applications • Semantic eGovernment Portals • Benefits of semantic technologies in eGov portals • Is search and retrieval improved in semantic eGovernment portals? • Knowledge Management in Government and Semantics • Why should we address semantics in government KM? • Scenarios? Benefits? Drawbacks ? • Evaluations? Experiments that show the benefits of SW technologies? • Quality issues in Semantic Applications in Egov • How can we evaluate the benefits? • How to convince Public Administration? • Scalability Issues? Communication issues? Migration issues ? • From current solutions to semantic portals and from existing KM efforts to the use of semantics • New emerging approaches? • Mobile eGov? Grid-based approaches? Pervasive computing?

Challenges: Ontologies • Ontology development: Do we need specific methods? • Are approaches like OTK, Methontology, etc adequate+useful ??? • Ontology development: Do we need specific tools? • Are tools like Protégé, KAON2, adequate+useful ??? • Ontology population issues in government agencies • (Semi-)automatic methods applicable? Need for HLT and NLP techniques? • Ontology mapping? • Special requirements from eGov ? • Ontology evolution and change management • Changes in laws require changes in processes and ontological structures? How can we cope with this? • Ontology reasoning: Do we need specific methods / tools? • Are approaches like SWRL, SweetRules, etc adequate+useful? • Cost of ontology development? • Prerequisites and hurdles in Public Administration • Introduction of ontology management in Public Administration? • Need for training? But also process changes?

Proposal for break-out session moderators • Proposed Moderators • TopicModerator • Processes/Services Tomas Vitvar • Applications Maria Wimmer • Infrastructure Ralph Klischewski • Role of Moderators • Organise the break-out session • Facilitate the discussion • Develop and give a synthetic presentation for the wrap-up session • 15 minutes per break-out topic

Procedure for break-out discussions • People interested in each topic (processes, applications, infrastructure) contact their respective moderator • There are two break-out sessions • Monday 27 March, 16.47 – 17.45 • Tuesday 28 March, 10.10 – 11.00 • The moderator of each topic gives a brief report during the wrap-up session • Wednesday 29 March, 11.15 – 12.30

Expected outcome of the break-out sessions: try to answer questions like … • Special Requirements of eGovernment? • Do domain constraints affect traditional semantics-tasks? How? • Is there anything special in developing/using semantic technologies in eGov? • Value Added for eGovernment? • What are the main advantages of using semantics? • What would be a killer scenario for semantic technologies in eGovernment? • Value Added for Semantic Technologies? • What can be forecasted as new opportunities for semantics? • Which are the community synergies? • Critical research topic(s)? • Are there any differences between US and Europe? • Which are the most relevant standardisation issues?

Two suggestions for our Symposium • Discuss, discuss, discuss • Let’s discuss • The aims is not to have just “dry” paper presentations • but active + lively discussions • Try to keep paper presentations short and to-the-point, in order to allow for discussion • Balance, balance, balance • Let’s keep the balance • … between theoretical and practical aspects • … between formal and informal approaches • … between research and user-oriented perspectives

Let‘s start and have fun !

Welcome !

Welcome !

Presentation Transcript