Journal of Korean Society for Geospatial Information Science (대한공간정보학회지)

Korea Spatial Information Society (대한공간정보학회)
권호 표지

Development of MDA-based Subsurface Spatial Ontology Model for Semantic Sharing

시멘틱 공유를 위한 MDA기반 지하공간정보 온톨로지 모델 개발

  • 이상훈 (한국건설기술연구원 U-국토연구실) ;
  • 장병욱 (서울대학교 지역시스템공학과)
  • Published : 2009.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Today, it is difficult to re-use and share spatial information, because of the explosive growth of heterogeneous information and specific characters of spatial information accumulated by diverse local agency. A spatial analysis of subsurface spatial informa-tion, one of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure, needs related spatial information such as, topographical map, geologic map, underground facility map, etc. However, current methods using standard format or spatial datawarehouse cannot consider a se-mantic hetergenity. In this paper, the layered ontology model which consists of generic concept, measuremnt scale, spatial model, and subsurface spatial information has developed. Also, the current ontology building method pertained to human experts is a expensive and time-consuming process. We have developed the MDA-based metamodel(UML Profile) of ontology that can be a easy under-standing and flexiblity of environment change. The semantic quality of devleoped ontology model has evaluated by reasoning engine, Pellet. We expect to improve a semantic sharing, and strengthen capacities for developing GIS experts system using knowledge representation ability of ontology.

최근 이질적인 정보의 폭발적인 증가와 다양한 관리주체별로 생산, 축적되는 공간정보의 특성으로 인하여 공간정보의 재사용과 공유가 어려운 실정이다. 국가공간정보체계의 하나인 지하공간정보도 공간분석을 위해서는 지형도, 지질도, 지하시설물도 등 여타 공간정보와 공유가 필수적이다. 그러나, 기존 표준 혹은 데이터웨어하우스에 의한 공유방법은 시멘틱 이질성을 고려할 수 없다. 본 연구는 지하공간정보의 시멘틱 공유를 위해 일반개념, 측정스케일, 공간모델을 포함한 온톨로지 레이어 모델을 개발하였다. 또한, 기존의 수작업에 의존하는 온톨로지 개발방법론이 아닌 MDA기반 방법론을 적용하여 직관적이며 환경변화에 쉽게 대응할 수 있는 메타모델(UML Profile)을 개발하였다. 개발된 온톨로지 모델의 시멘틱 품질은 Pellet 추론엔진을 통해 검증하였다. 본 연구를 통해 시멘틱 공유를 증진시키고, 온톨로지의 지식표현 능력을 이용하여 GIS 전문가시스템 개발이 가능할 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. 건설교통부, 2000, "제2차 국가지리정보체계 기본계획", pp.12-13.
  2. 국토해양부, 2008, "국토지반정보DB구축 사업 최종보고서", pp.7-10.
  3. 지반정보DB포털, http://www.geoinfo.or.kr.
  4. Baclawski, K., et al., 2001, "Extending UML to Support Ontology Engineering for the Semantic Web", 4th Intl. Conf. on UML, Toronto.
  5. Breitman K. K., Casanova M. A., Truszkowski, W., 2007, "Methods for Ontology Development in Semantic Web : Concepts, Technologies and Applications", NASA Monographs in Systems and Software Engineering, Springer London, pp.155-173.
  6. Burton-Jones, A., et al., 2005, "A semiotic metrics suite for assessing the quality of ontologies", Data Knowledge Engineering.
  7. Chrisman, N.R., 1995, "Beyond Stevens: A Revised Approach to Measurement for Geographic Information", In Proc. of AUTO-CARTO 12 Charlotte 4, pp. 271-280.
  8. Cranefield, S., Purvis, M., 1999, "UML as an Ontology Modeling Language", In Proc. of the Workshop on Intelligent Information Integration.
  9. Devogele, T., Parent C., Spaccapietra S., 1998, "On Spatial Database Integration", Intl. Journal of Geographic Information Science, pp.335-352.
  10. Duric, D., Gasevic, D., Devdzic, V., 2003, "A MDA-based Approach to the Ontology Definition Metamodel", 6th Int. Conf. on Information Technology, pp.193-196.
  11. FGDC, 1998, "Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata".
  12. Geoontologies, http://www.mindswap.org/2004/geo/geo Ontologies.shtml.
  13. Guarino, N., 1997, "Semantic matching: formal ontological distinctions for information organization, extraction, and integration", Information Extraction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to an Emerging Information Technology, Springer Verlag, pp. 139-170.
  14. Gruber, T., 1992, "A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specification", Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, Technical Report KSL 92-71.
  15. Meersman, R., Spyns, P., Jarrar, M., 2002, "Data modelling versus ontology engineering", ACM SIGMO Vol.31, Issue4, pp. 12-17.
  16. Mika, P., et al., 2004, "Foundations for Service Ontologies: Aligning OWL-S to DOLCE", WWW2004, New York, NY.
  17. Miller, J., Mukerji, J., 2003, "MDA Guide Version 1.0", OMG.
  18. MUSIL, http://musil.uni-muenster.de.
  19. Nicola A. D., Missikoff M., Navigli R., 2009, "A Software engineering approach to ontology building", Information Systems, pp. 258-275.
  20. OMG(Object Management Group), http://www.omg.org.
  21. OntoGeo, http://ontogeo.ntua.gr.?
  22. OntoSpace, http://www.ontospace.uni-bremen.de.
  23. PEER, 2004, "Archiving and Web Dissemination of Geotechnical Data: Development of a Pilot Geotechnical Virtual Data Center", Consortium of Organizations for Strong-Motion Observation Systems.
  24. Pellet, http://www.mindswap.org/2003/pellet/demo.shtml.
  25. Poseidon for UML, http://www.gentleware.com.
  26. Protege, http://protege.stanford.edu.
  27. SEEK, http://seek.ecoinformatics.org.
  28. SWEET, http://sweet.jpl.nasa.gov.
  29. Smith, B., 1995, "On Drawing Lines on a Map", Spatial Information Theory, COSIT 95, pp. 475-484.
  30. Smith, B., Mark, D.M., 1998, "Ontology and Geographic Kinds", Intl. Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Vancouver, pp. 308-320.
  31. Stuckenschmidt, H., Visser, U., 2000, "Semantic translation based on approximate re-classification", 7th Intl. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Resoning.
  32. Teller, J., 2007, "Ontologies for an Improved Communication in Urban Development Projects", Ontologies for Urban Development, Springer, pp. 1-14.l
  33. Torres, M., et al., 2005, "Ontology-Driven Description of Spatial Data for Their Semantic", 5th Intl. Conference, GeoS, pp. 242-249.
  34. USGS-ONT, http://www.geog.buffalo.edu/ncgia/i21/i21ontology.html.
  35. W3C(World Wide Web Consortium), http://www.w3c.org.
  36. W3C Geospatial Incubator Group, http://www.w3.org/2005/ incubator/geo.
  37. Xalan, http://xml.apache.org/xalan-j.