SRG: A Digital Document-Enhanced Service Oriented Research Grid

1. SRG: A Digital Document-Enhanced Service Oriented Research Grid Ahmet E. Topcu Ahmet Fatih Mustacoglu Geoffrey C. Fox Aurel Cami Indiana University Computer Science Department Community Grids Laboratory atopcu@cs.indiana.edu August 13, 2007 IRI-2007, Las Vegas, NV, U.S.A.

2. Outline • Introduction • Motivation • Semantic Research Grid (SRG) System • Architecture • Research Issues • Security Model • SRG System Modules • Example Applications • Summary

3. Introduction • Efforts for collaboration and sharing between users and communities. • Grid • Virtual Organizations • Sakai • Collaboration and Learning Environment for Education • Web 2.0 • Represents new web-based services. • Provides rich and lightweight online tools • Provides reusable services and data • Updates software and data often very rapidly • Provides interactive user interfaces • Provides an architecture for easy user contribution

4. Web 2.0 Examples • Blogs (blogger.com, GoogleBlog) • Wikis(Wikipedia, WikiWikiWeb) • Social Networking Tools(MySpace ,LinkedIn) • Social Bookmarking Tools(del.icio.us ,YouTube) • Domain of scientific research (CiteULike , Connotea , and Bibsonomy) • Domain specific academic search tools(CiteSeer, Google Scholar, Windows Live Academic)

10. Motivation • Numerous annotation tools • Generates multiple instances of metadata about the same object • Huge amount of data • Necessity for the reconciliation • Lack of interoperability between annotation sites • Applying service-based architecture to annotation systems

11. Need for exploiting large set of data sources Google Scholar (GS), Windows Live Academic (WLA) may have different scope Utilizing best capabilities of the tools GS has number of cited publications. WLA has Digital Object Identifier (DOI) Motivation II

12. Big Picture: Semantic Research Grid (SRG) Architecture

14. Architecture Summary • Build integration architecture • We do not reinvent existing tools • Use existing features of tools • Supports microformats and universal tagging services • Provides common metadata • Allows to use consistent data • Provides consistency model for using minor and major events • Provides a mechanism to upload/download DEs

15. Research Issues • Integration • A model to integrate community tools. • A model to easily collect related documents • Ontologies to describe wealth of different information including traditional Dublin Core style information but also tagging, "favorite status" etc. • Performance • The cost of integration of the systems • Overhead for extracting information and uploading them to the tools • Flexibility and Extensibility • Easy to add and remove service mechanism • Easy to integrate and collaborate services or gadgets

16. Research Issues II • Event-based model • Manipulating data and metadata • How to build event-based model ? • Major and Minor events • Datasets (collection of minor events) • How to apply modifications to a record (Digital Entity) ? • Keep them in user’s session and let user apply them • Apply them directly to a DE • How to merge metadata field of a Digital Entity ? • Identification of metadata fields as dynamic or static field • How to apply service-based framework as wrapper? Ahmet E. Topcu

17. SRG System Modules I • Digital Entity (DE) Management Service • Manual DE entity into the system • DE history • DE versioning and flexible choices (rollback) • Editing and more info tools for a DE (Update Model) • Session and Event Management Services • Event and dataset management • DE view options • User credentials (username/password) - cookie-based • Annotation Tools Service • Transfer Service • Download service • Upload Service

18. SRG System Modules II • Search Tools Services • Google Scholar/Windows Live Academic • Google Scholar Advanced • Local Database Search: • Via integrated PubsOnline Tool from Indiana University • My Research Database • My Research Database Advanced • Authentication and Authorization Services • Login and Logout service • DE Access rights management • Database access rights management • Administrative tools • Other Services • User Registration • Username and password recovery • User’s Profile Management • DE metadata view options

19. Security Model • Security in web 2.0 is inadequate. Provide security for inconsistent/in existed security model in web 2.0 domain. • There exists a number of security methods: • Access control matrix (ACL) • Role-based access control (RBAC) • Task-based access control (TBCA) • We used an access-control matrix model to provide security for our information system • Supports multiple groups and multiple users for each object. • Similar to UNIX file system • The Unix RWX bits corresponds to Read, Write, and Execute operation for each file and directory. • In proposed system, DE (Digital Entity) correspond to the file element and folder corresponds to the directory element. • For each DE and folder, there are three types of access rights defined in the systems: Read, Write, and Delete.

20. Security Model II • We have a security model that supports • Level of Authorization • Roles are defined as Super Administrator (SA) and Group Administrator (GA), User (U) • The system allows having more than one SA. • An existing SA can add other SAs to the system. • SA can assign any U to become GA, and remove GA from group. • Each group should at least one GA. GA add/remove U from group • User profile • Share user profile between sites.

21. Typical Scenario for Generating Minor Events Research Databases • 1: Client tries to modify a DE • 2: Check user access rights. • 3-4: If user has write access to this DE; (a) build the current DE metadata from its events , (b) saved the update metadata into session as minor event. • 5: Show confirmation message RDBMS RDBMS RDBMS Main Database Client 3 SRG Web Services 1,5 2 4 Session and Event Management

22. Typical Scenario for Downloading DEs Research Databases • 1: Client request to download records from a social bookmarking website into a research database • 2: Check user access rights • 3-4-5: If user has write access, and DEs do not exist, then download them into the associated research database. If a DE exist in the research database, save the update metadata into user session as a minor event • 6:Confirmation message RDBMS RDBMS RDBMS Client 6 Main Database 4 SRG Web Services 1 2 3 Session and Event Management 5 Social Bookmarking Websites

23. Usage of Semantic Research Grid Project • We have used/tested Semantic Research Grid (SRG) (a prototype model) for published scientific research publications in Community Grids Lab at Indiana University • In CGL 20 students ,post-docs and faculty members works. • They are using the prototype model for collecting of publication, uploading/ downloading them and sharing them with other users

24. Summary • Integration • We have successfully integrated Google Scholar and Windows Live Academic search tools and CiteUlike, Delicious, and Connotea annotation tools which provide a system that allow dynamic publication. • Flexibility and Extensibility • We provides flexibility allowing integration of different tools having common metadata. • Easy to add and extend service mechanism • Management of Digital Entities Architecture for reconciling digital entities • Allows the manipulation of a digital entity • Applies Event-based model based on the concept of: • Major events • Minor events • Datasets

25. THANK YOU! Ahmet E. Topcu atopcu@cs.indiana.edu http://gf6.ucs.indiana.edu:58080/SRGrid