Case studies for semantic web portal technologies
Download
1 / 22

Case Studies for Semantic Web Portal Technologies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 137 Views
  • Updated On :

Case Studies for Semantic Web Portal Technologies. Anna V. Zhdanova DERI-Innsbruck, 8 March 2004. Overview. Introduction Case study 1 (semanticweb.org) Case study 2 (eTourism) Case study 3 (PeopleSearch&Compare) Conclusions. Note: Case study is also referred as CS further.

Related searches for Case Studies for Semantic Web Portal Technologies

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Case Studies for Semantic Web Portal Technologies' - sebastian


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Case studies for semantic web portal technologies l.jpg

Case Studies for Semantic Web Portal Technologies

Anna V. Zhdanova

DERI-Innsbruck,

8 March 2004


Overview l.jpg
Overview

  • Introduction

  • Case study 1 (semanticweb.org)

  • Case study 2 (eTourism)

  • Case study 3 (PeopleSearch&Compare)

  • Conclusions

Note: Case study is also referred as CS further


General picture l.jpg
General Picture

We are here, thus applications of SW-portal technologies are needed


Why case studies and specifications are mutually useful l.jpg
Why case studies and specifications are mutually useful

Specifications help case studies to become real

Case studies help specifications to become perfect


Basic facilities case study 1 semanticweb org l.jpg
Basic FacilitiesCase Study 1: SemanticWeb.org

  • “We aim to bring together research groups, research projects, software developers and user communities in the Semantic Web area.” – Mission statement

  • Basic facilities should support whatever was meant


Target domain our expertise in it case study 1 semanticweb org l.jpg
Target Domain/Our Expertise in It Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org

  • Domain is not really popular, very narrow (but deep )

  • P2P

  • We are the experts here! No external expertise is needed


What s cool case study 1 semanticweb org l.jpg
What’s Cool?Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org

  • It will be possible to say that semanticweb.org is a Semantic Web portal 


How will it be achieved case study 1 semanticweb org l.jpg
How Will It Be Achieved? Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org

DERI-Galway will take care and do all the work with assistance of DERI-Innsbruck on common parts/technologies in

intersection-of(CS1, union-of(CS2, CS3)) .


Extensions case study 1 semanticweb org l.jpg
ExtensionsCase Study 1: SemanticWeb.org

  • Extensive merging into “institute” (DERI) portal

  • Reuse of the same techniques in any other research community portal


Basic facilities case study 2 etourism l.jpg
Basic FacilitiesCase Study 2: eTourism

  • Allow tourism businesses to advertise themselves effectively (semantic annotation)

  • Allow tourist to find precisely what they want (intelligent search)

    For: Satisfying specific tourist needs, e.g.

    “I want a room with kitchen facilities

    In a hotel in Tirol not far from

    Axamer Lizum and with a boat rental

    nearby.”


Target domain our expertise in it case study 2 etourism l.jpg
Target Domain/Our Expertise in It Case Study 2: eTourism

  • Domain of tourism is popular, broad, especially relevant to Austria

  • B2C

  • We are not experts in tourism => Austrian companies working in tourism are to be involved for ontology adaptation, development and usage of portal in general


What s cool case study 2 etourism l.jpg
What’s Cool?Case Study 2: eTourism

  • Usefulness of having a semantic annotation for a specific hotel, restaurant or other tourist businesses

    • WORM: Modify it once, and the changes are automatically communicated to all systems that use this data

      • It can be used by services that generate/update automatically businesses’ web-pages – isn’t it nice?

    • It will be used in the eTourism portal to advertise businesses

  • Businesses will get annotated easily (relatively): usage of linguistic tools is expected

  • Multilingual access


How will it be achieved case study 2 etourism l.jpg
How Will It Be Achieved?Case Study 2: eTourism

  • DERI-Innsbruck will take care and do all the work with assistance of DERI-Galway on common parts/technologies in

    intersection-of(CS1, union-of(CS2, CS3)) .

  • Cooperation with Mondeca on using ITM and with VisioLab on using general ontology on tourism

  • Cooperation with local Austrian tourist companies on local tourism issues


Extensions case study 2 etourism l.jpg
ExtensionsCase Study 2: eTourism

  • Web-services: This case study is planned to be aligned with the eTourism case study in WSMO. WSMO eTourism case study will enrich eTourism SW portal case study with dynamic features such as support for making reservations for train tickets or hotels.


Basic facilities case study 3 peoplesearch compare l.jpg
Basic FacilitiesCase Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare

  • Allow users to say whatever they want about themselves (semantic annotation, collaborative ontology engineering)

  • Allow users to find whatever whoever said about themselves (intelligent search)

    For: search of a friend, date, boss,

    employee, relative, ex-classmate, etc.

    compare anyone with others:

    self-assessment,

    staff evaluation, etc.


Target domain our expertise in it case study 3 peoplesearch compare l.jpg
Target Domain/Our Expertise in It Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare

  • Domain is highly popular, also the most broad domain of the existing ones

  • P2P

  • We are not really experts… but have understanding why people may need to search over and compare people’s profiles => external expertise is not necessary (at least in the beginning)


What s cool case study 3 peoplesearch compare l.jpg

Usefulness of having a personal semantic annotation

WORM: Modify it once, and the changes are automatically communicated to all systems that use your personal data

It can be used by services that generate/update automatically your web-page or CV – isn’t it nice?

It will be used in the people’s portal to connect people

High flexibility in what can be specified

Users do not just passively fill in specified slots, but also collaborativelyextend an ontology that describes anyimaginable aspect of a class “Person”

What’s Cool? Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


How will it be achieved case study 3 peoplesearch compare l.jpg
How Will It Be Achieved?Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare

DERI-Innsbruck will take care and do all the work with assistance of DERI-Galway on common parts/technologies in

intersection-of(CS1, union-of(CS2, CS3)) .


Extensions case study 3 peoplesearch compare l.jpg

Web-services: Using Web-services to search/compare people’s profiles

Extensive merging into “institute” (DERI) portal – in terms of representation of information about people, their skills

Personal information exchange and personnel evaluation at an enterprise

ExtensionsCase Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


Added value of metadata adapted to cs3 l.jpg
Added value of metadata(Adapted to CS3)


Directions for development in cs1 cs2 cs3 more or less l.jpg
Directions for Developmentin CS1, CS2, CS3 (more or less)