semantic web for the military user n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Semantic Web for the Military User PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Semantic Web for the Military User

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 8

Semantic Web for the Military User

80 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Semantic Web for the Military User

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Semantic Web for the Military User Outbrief Transition Breakout Session—Intelligence Dr. Joe Rockmore/Cyladian Technology Consulting

  2. Participants • Pamela Arya/NRO • Tim Finan/UMBC • Lee Lacy/DRC • Richard Lee/Logicon • Tom Gower/ONI • David Martin-McCormick/IMO • Bob Neches/USC-ISI • Joe Rockmore/Cyladian Technology Consulting • Al Schuler/Aerospace

  3. Value Propositions • Consumers = custom products • Producers = get credit for production • “Query mining” • Feedback from missing information, including to collection management • Feedback on use of marked up data • Hit counts are poor, but easily measured • Can measure demand • Consolidation of data • Publication once, derived products

  4. Significant Issue: Geolocation & Temporal Representation • Understand document enough to know locations mentioned in a document • Placename, lat/lon, BE num, UTM, etc. disambiguation

  5. Significant Issue: Markup Tools • Consumer-based markup tool needed soon • Culture = analysts too busy to do any more work, including markup, unless • Its very easy to do • There is clear value to producers (not consumers) • Someone measures them on the quality/quantity of markup • Produce knowledge objects from the outset, format from these objects, including English text documents • Will only work in limited cases, when reports are sufficiently structured • Expressibility limitations at odds with identifying the unusual, which is an important task in intelligence • Make key points as knowledge objects, embellish with natural language & use embellishment to improve ontologies

  6. Significant Issue: Access to Data • Tailored push; also pull (“My Intelink”), including changes of sufficient magnitude • Subscriptions and data descriptions for matching against subscriptions may be best done using hierarchical ontologies • Crawlers of value, but may have access control issues • Uncertainty of data (both by source and about source) • Inference-based retrieval of information • Pedigree critical to maintain • Indexing of markup important for speed of access

  7. Significant Issue: Collection • Tie collection, processing, production together • A common markup language will enhance collection, thus optimizing use of intel sources • Producers and consumers have different ways of looking at the world, not necessarily a mapping between them • Can consumers provide tasking to producers, via markup of requirements on collection? • Info data needs from UJTL tasks or other statement of data needs • Will DAML markup allow semantic understanding of information enough to affect releasability processes?

  8. Recommendations • Military and intelligence users, beyond those at this workshop, that particularly should hear about DAML: • NIMA Agent-Based Initiative • Information consumers (e.g., service ops centers) • SOCOM • SPACECOM, NIPC (computer network defense) • NCS • Recommendations—How do organizations understand what DAML products/approaches could help them? • Focused TIE’s with appropriate producers and consumers around specific value propositions • Organize DAML web site by functionality; describe capability, maturity, etc. Make more useful. Also, need contract approach synopses and status.