Enhancing the expressiveness of linguistic structures

In the information society large amounts of information are being generated and transmitted constantly, especially in the most natural way for humans, i.e., natural language. Social networks, blogs, forums, and Q&A sites are a dynamic Large Knowledge Repository. So, Web 2.0 contains structured data but still the largest amount of information is expressed in natural language. Linguistic structures for text recognition enable the extraction of structured information from texts. However, the expressiveness of the current structures is limited as they have been designed with a strict order in their phrases, limiting their applicability to other languages and making them more sensible to grammatical errors. To overcome these limitations, in this paper we present a linguistic structure named ?linguistic schema?, with a richer expressiveness that introduces less implicit constraints over annotations.

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which  Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO;  Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually performed by humans or else by machine learning systems. Both of them leave much to be desired: the former, with respect to their annotation rate; the latter, with respect to their (average) precision and recall. In this work, we showed how linguistic tools can be wrapped in order to annotate automatically Semantic Web pages using ontologies. This entails their fast, robust and accurate semantic annotation. As a way of example, as mentioned in Sub-goal 5.5, we developed a particular OntoTagger module for the recognition, classification and labelling of named entities, according to the MUC and ACE tagsets (Chinchor, 1997; Doddington et al., 2004). These tagsets were further specified by means of a domain ontology, namely the Cinema Named Entities Ontology (CNEO). This module was applied to the automatic annotation of ten different web pages containing cinema reviews (that is, around 5000 words). In addition, the named entities annotated with this module were also labelled as instances (or individuals) of the classes included in the CNEO and, then, were used to populate this domain ontology. • The statistical results obtained from the evaluation of this particular module of OntoTagger can be summarised as follows. On the one hand, as far as recall (R) is concerned, (R.1) the lowest value was 76,40% (for file 7); (R.2) the highest value was 97, 50% (for file 3); and (R.3) the average value was 88,73%. On the other hand, as far as the precision rate (P) is concerned, (P.1) its minimum was 93,75% (for file 4); (R.2) its maximum was 100% (for files 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10); and (R.3) its average value was 98,99%. • These results, which apply to the tasks of named entity annotation and ontology population, are extraordinary good for both of them. They can be explained on the basis of the high accuracy of the annotations provided by OntoTagger at the lower levels (mainly at the morphosyntactic level). However, they should be conveniently qualified, since they might be too domain- and/or language-dependent. It should be further experimented how our approach works in a different domain or a different language, such as French, English, or German. • In any case, the results of this application of Human Language Technologies to Ontology Population (and, accordingly, to Ontological Engineering) seem very promising and encouraging in order for these two areas to collaborate and complement each other in the area of semantic annotation. Fifth, as shown in the State of the Art of this work, there are different approaches and models for the semantic annotation of texts, but all of them focus on a particular view of the semantic level. Clearly, all these approaches and models should be integrated in order to bear a coherent and joint semantic annotation level. OntoTag shows how (i) these semantic annotation layers could be integrated together; and (ii) they could be integrated with the annotations associated to other annotation levels. Sixth, we identified some recommendations, best practices and lessons learned for annotation standardisation, interoperation and merge. They show how standardisation (via ontologies, in this case) enables the combination, integration and interoperation of different linguistic tools and their annotations into a multilayered (or multileveled) linguistic annotation, which is one of the hot topics in the area of Linguistic Annotation. And last but not least, OntoTag’s annotation scheme and OntoTagger’s annotation schemas show a way to formalise and annotate coherently and uniformly the different units and features associated to the different levels and layers of linguistic annotation. This is a great scientific step ahead towards the global standardisation of this area, which is the aim of ISO/TC 37 (in particular, Subcommittee 4, dealing with the standardisation of linguistic annotations and resources).

Project-based learning experience on Data Structures course

This paper presents the innovations in the practical work of the Data Structures subject carried out in the last five years, including a transition period and a first year of implantation of the European Higher Education Area. The practical coursework is inspired by a project-based methodology and from 2008/2009 additional laboratory sessions are included in the subject schedule. We will present the academic results and ratios of the mentioned time period which imply a significant improvement on students' performance.

The online case study development for the teaching of building structures reinforcement

The Reinforcement of Building Structures is one of the topics of the Master in Building Innovation Technology (MBIT) of Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM). Since the beginning of the delivery of this master, case studies have been chosen as the teaching methodology. For the 2011-2012 course the online education of this subject was implemented, instead of the classical learning based on attendance. Through ICT’s (Information and Communication Technologies) students are provided with much more and more selective information than through the classical learning. ICT’s can be used for search, enquiries and reporting. Using the online tools has been proved, through the results obtained and based on the surveys made amongst students, to be a successful experience.

The Future of the Technologies of Shell and spatial Structures. Bridges

The objective of this lecture is try to predict the future of this important type of spatial structures. In this way the activities of the different IASS Technical Working Groups can be stimulated and coordinated in order to play a more relevant role in this future. To grasp a possible evolution of bridges it is convenient a reflection on the bridge history and on their present situation, particularly in relation to the different existing achievements.

Formal Verification of Temporal Properties for Parametrized Concurrent Programs and Concurrent Data Structures

Los tipos de datos concurrentes son implementaciones concurrentes de las abstracciones de datos clásicas, con la diferencia de que han sido específicamente diseñados para aprovechar el gran paralelismo disponible en las modernas arquitecturas multiprocesador y multinúcleo. La correcta manipulación de los tipos de datos concurrentes resulta esencial para demostrar la completa corrección de los sistemas de software que los utilizan. Una de las mayores dificultades a la hora de diseñar y verificar tipos de datos concurrentes surge de la necesidad de tener que razonar acerca de un número arbitrario de procesos que invocan estos tipos de datos de manera concurrente. Esto requiere considerar sistemas parametrizados. En este trabajo estudiamos la verificación formal de propiedades temporales de sistemas concurrentes parametrizados, poniendo especial énfasis en programas que manipulan estructuras de datos concurrentes. La principal dificultad a la hora de razonar acerca de sistemas concurrentes parametrizados proviene de la interacción entre el gran nivel de concurrencia que éstos poseen y la necesidad de razonar al mismo tiempo acerca de la memoria dinámica. La verificación de sistemas parametrizados resulta en sí un problema desafiante debido a que requiere razonar acerca de estructuras de datos complejas que son accedidas y modificadas por un numero ilimitado de procesos que manipulan de manera simultánea el contenido de la memoria dinámica empleando métodos de sincronización poco estructurados. En este trabajo, presentamos un marco formal basado en métodos deductivos capaz de ocuparse de la verificación de propiedades de safety y liveness de sistemas concurrentes parametrizados que manejan estructuras de datos complejas. Nuestro marco formal incluye reglas de prueba y técnicas especialmente adaptadas para sistemas parametrizados, las cuales trabajan en colaboración con procedimientos de decisión especialmente diseñados para analizar complejas estructuras de datos concurrentes. Un aspecto novedoso de nuestro marco formal es que efectúa una clara diferenciación entre el análisis del flujo de control del programa y el análisis de los datos que se manejan. El flujo de control del programa se analiza utilizando reglas de prueba y técnicas de verificación deductivas especialmente diseñadas para lidiar con sistemas parametrizados. Comenzando a partir de un programa concurrente y la especificación de una propiedad temporal, nuestras técnicas deductivas son capaces de generar un conjunto finito de condiciones de verificación cuya validez implican la satisfacción de dicha especificación temporal por parte de cualquier sistema, sin importar el número de procesos que formen parte del sistema. Las condiciones de verificación generadas se corresponden con los datos manipulados. Estudiamos el diseño de procedimientos de decisión especializados capaces de lidiar con estas condiciones de verificación de manera completamente automática. Investigamos teorías decidibles capaces de describir propiedades de tipos de datos complejos que manipulan punteros, tales como implementaciones imperativas de pilas, colas, listas y skiplists. Para cada una de estas teorías presentamos un procedimiento de decisión y una implementación práctica construida sobre SMT solvers. Estos procedimientos de decisión son finalmente utilizados para verificar de manera automática las condiciones de verificación generadas por nuestras técnicas de verificación parametrizada. Para concluir, demostramos como utilizando nuestro marco formal es posible probar no solo propiedades de safety sino además de liveness en algunas versiones de protocolos de exclusión mutua y programas que manipulan estructuras de datos concurrentes. El enfoque que presentamos en este trabajo resulta ser muy general y puede ser aplicado para verificar un amplio rango de tipos de datos concurrentes similares. Abstract Concurrent data types are concurrent implementations of classical data abstractions, specifically designed to exploit the great deal of parallelism available in modern multiprocessor and multi-core architectures. The correct manipulation of concurrent data types is essential for the overall correctness of the software system built using them. A major difficulty in designing and verifying concurrent data types arises by the need to reason about any number of threads invoking the data type simultaneously, which requires considering parametrized systems. In this work we study the formal verification of temporal properties of parametrized concurrent systems, with a special focus on programs that manipulate concurrent data structures. The main difficulty to reason about concurrent parametrized systems comes from the combination of their inherently high concurrency and the manipulation of dynamic memory. This parametrized verification problem is very challenging, because it requires to reason about complex concurrent data structures being accessed and modified by threads which simultaneously manipulate the heap using unstructured synchronization methods. In this work, we present a formal framework based on deductive methods which is capable of dealing with the verification of safety and liveness properties of concurrent parametrized systems that manipulate complex data structures. Our framework includes special proof rules and techniques adapted for parametrized systems which work in collaboration with specialized decision procedures for complex data structures. A novel aspect of our framework is that it cleanly differentiates the analysis of the program control flow from the analysis of the data being manipulated. The program control flow is analyzed using deductive proof rules and verification techniques specifically designed for coping with parametrized systems. Starting from a concurrent program and a temporal specification, our techniques generate a finite collection of verification conditions whose validity entails the satisfaction of the temporal specification by any client system, in spite of the number of threads. The verification conditions correspond to the data manipulation. We study the design of specialized decision procedures to deal with these verification conditions fully automatically. We investigate decidable theories capable of describing rich properties of complex pointer based data types such as stacks, queues, lists and skiplists. For each of these theories we present a decision procedure, and its practical implementation on top of existing SMT solvers. These decision procedures are ultimately used for automatically verifying the verification conditions generated by our specialized parametrized verification techniques. Finally, we show how using our framework it is possible to prove not only safety but also liveness properties of concurrent versions of some mutual exclusion protocols and programs that manipulate concurrent data structures. The approach we present in this work is very general, and can be applied to verify a wide range of similar concurrent data types.

Automated wordlength optimization framework for multi-source statistical interval-based analysis of nonlinear systems with control-flow structures

El uso de aritmética de punto fijo es una opción de diseño muy extendida en sistemas con fuertes restricciones de área, consumo o rendimiento. Para producir implementaciones donde los costes se minimicen sin impactar negativamente en la precisión de los resultados debemos llevar a cabo una asignación cuidadosa de anchuras de palabra. Encontrar la combinación óptima de anchuras de palabra en coma fija para un sistema dado es un problema combinatorio NP-hard al que los diseñadores dedican entre el 25 y el 50 % del ciclo de diseño. Las plataformas hardware reconfigurables, como son las FPGAs, también se benefician de las ventajas que ofrece la aritmética de coma fija, ya que éstas compensan las frecuencias de reloj más bajas y el uso más ineficiente del hardware que hacen estas plataformas respecto a los ASICs. A medida que las FPGAs se popularizan para su uso en computación científica los diseños aumentan de tamaño y complejidad hasta llegar al punto en que no pueden ser manejados eficientemente por las técnicas actuales de modelado de señal y ruido de cuantificación y de optimización de anchura de palabra. En esta Tesis Doctoral exploramos distintos aspectos del problema de la cuantificación y presentamos nuevas metodologías para cada uno de ellos: Las técnicas basadas en extensiones de intervalos han permitido obtener modelos de propagación de señal y ruido de cuantificación muy precisos en sistemas con operaciones no lineales. Nosotros llevamos esta aproximación un paso más allá introduciendo elementos de Multi-Element Generalized Polynomial Chaos (ME-gPC) y combinándolos con una técnica moderna basada en Modified Affine Arithmetic (MAA) estadístico para así modelar sistemas que contienen estructuras de control de flujo. Nuestra metodología genera los distintos caminos de ejecución automáticamente, determina las regiones del dominio de entrada que ejercitarán cada uno de ellos y extrae los momentos estadísticos del sistema a partir de dichas soluciones parciales. Utilizamos esta técnica para estimar tanto el rango dinámico como el ruido de redondeo en sistemas con las ya mencionadas estructuras de control de flujo y mostramos la precisión de nuestra aproximación, que en determinados casos de uso con operadores no lineales llega a tener tan solo una desviación del 0.04% con respecto a los valores de referencia obtenidos mediante simulación. Un inconveniente conocido de las técnicas basadas en extensiones de intervalos es la explosión combinacional de términos a medida que el tamaño de los sistemas a estudiar crece, lo cual conlleva problemas de escalabilidad. Para afrontar este problema presen tamos una técnica de inyección de ruidos agrupados que hace grupos con las señales del sistema, introduce las fuentes de ruido para cada uno de los grupos por separado y finalmente combina los resultados de cada uno de ellos. De esta forma, el número de fuentes de ruido queda controlado en cada momento y, debido a ello, la explosión combinatoria se minimiza. También presentamos un algoritmo de particionado multi-vía destinado a minimizar la desviación de los resultados a causa de la pérdida de correlación entre términos de ruido con el objetivo de mantener los resultados tan precisos como sea posible. La presente Tesis Doctoral también aborda el desarrollo de metodologías de optimización de anchura de palabra basadas en simulaciones de Monte-Cario que se ejecuten en tiempos razonables. Para ello presentamos dos nuevas técnicas que exploran la reducción del tiempo de ejecución desde distintos ángulos: En primer lugar, el método interpolativo aplica un interpolador sencillo pero preciso para estimar la sensibilidad de cada señal, y que es usado después durante la etapa de optimización. En segundo lugar, el método incremental gira en torno al hecho de que, aunque es estrictamente necesario mantener un intervalo de confianza dado para los resultados finales de nuestra búsqueda, podemos emplear niveles de confianza más relajados, lo cual deriva en un menor número de pruebas por simulación, en las etapas iniciales de la búsqueda, cuando todavía estamos lejos de las soluciones optimizadas. Mediante estas dos aproximaciones demostramos que podemos acelerar el tiempo de ejecución de los algoritmos clásicos de búsqueda voraz en factores de hasta x240 para problemas de tamaño pequeño/mediano. Finalmente, este libro presenta HOPLITE, una infraestructura de cuantificación automatizada, flexible y modular que incluye la implementación de las técnicas anteriores y se proporciona de forma pública. Su objetivo es ofrecer a desabolladores e investigadores un entorno común para prototipar y verificar nuevas metodologías de cuantificación de forma sencilla. Describimos el flujo de trabajo, justificamos las decisiones de diseño tomadas, explicamos su API pública y hacemos una demostración paso a paso de su funcionamiento. Además mostramos, a través de un ejemplo sencillo, la forma en que conectar nuevas extensiones a la herramienta con las interfaces ya existentes para poder así expandir y mejorar las capacidades de HOPLITE. ABSTRACT Using fixed-point arithmetic is one of the most common design choices for systems where area, power or throughput are heavily constrained. In order to produce implementations where the cost is minimized without negatively impacting the accuracy of the results, a careful assignment of word-lengths is required. The problem of finding the optimal combination of fixed-point word-lengths for a given system is a combinatorial NP-hard problem to which developers devote between 25 and 50% of the design-cycle time. Reconfigurable hardware platforms such as FPGAs also benefit of the advantages of fixed-point arithmetic, as it compensates for the slower clock frequencies and less efficient area utilization of the hardware platform with respect to ASICs. As FPGAs become commonly used for scientific computation, designs constantly grow larger and more complex, up to the point where they cannot be handled efficiently by current signal and quantization noise modelling and word-length optimization methodologies. In this Ph.D. Thesis we explore different aspects of the quantization problem and we present new methodologies for each of them: The techniques based on extensions of intervals have allowed to obtain accurate models of the signal and quantization noise propagation in systems with non-linear operations. We take this approach a step further by introducing elements of MultiElement Generalized Polynomial Chaos (ME-gPC) and combining them with an stateof- the-art Statistical Modified Affine Arithmetic (MAA) based methodology in order to model systems that contain control-flow structures. Our methodology produces the different execution paths automatically, determines the regions of the input domain that will exercise them, and extracts the system statistical moments from the partial results. We use this technique to estimate both the dynamic range and the round-off noise in systems with the aforementioned control-flow structures. We show the good accuracy of our approach, which in some case studies with non-linear operators shows a 0.04 % deviation respect to the simulation-based reference values. A known drawback of the techniques based on extensions of intervals is the combinatorial explosion of terms as the size of the targeted systems grows, which leads to scalability problems. To address this issue we present a clustered noise injection technique that groups the signals in the system, introduces the noise terms in each group independently and then combines the results at the end. In this way, the number of noise sources in the system at a given time is controlled and, because of this, the combinato rial explosion is minimized. We also present a multi-way partitioning algorithm aimed at minimizing the deviation of the results due to the loss of correlation between noise terms, in order to keep the results as accurate as possible. This Ph.D. Thesis also covers the development of methodologies for word-length optimization based on Monte-Carlo simulations in reasonable times. We do so by presenting two novel techniques that explore the reduction of the execution times approaching the problem in two different ways: First, the interpolative method applies a simple but precise interpolator to estimate the sensitivity of each signal, which is later used to guide the optimization effort. Second, the incremental method revolves on the fact that, although we strictly need to guarantee a certain confidence level in the simulations for the final results of the optimization process, we can do it with more relaxed levels, which in turn implies using a considerably smaller amount of samples, in the initial stages of the process, when we are still far from the optimized solution. Through these two approaches we demonstrate that the execution time of classical greedy techniques can be accelerated by factors of up to ×240 for small/medium sized problems. Finally, this book introduces HOPLITE, an automated, flexible and modular framework for quantization that includes the implementation of the previous techniques and is provided for public access. The aim is to offer a common ground for developers and researches for prototyping and verifying new techniques for system modelling and word-length optimization easily. We describe its work flow, justifying the taken design decisions, explain its public API and we do a step-by-step demonstration of its execution. We also show, through an example, the way new extensions to the flow should be connected to the existing interfaces in order to expand and improve the capabilities of HOPLITE.

Auto-Emergencia de Comunicación Sintáctica en Entornos Estáticos y Dinámicos para Grupos de Robots mediante Evolución Gramatical y Aprendizaje por Refuerzo

La idea de dotar a un grupo de robots o agentes artificiales de un lenguaje ha sido objeto de intenso estudio en las ultimas décadas. Como no podía ser de otra forma los primeros intentos se enfocaron hacia el estudio de la emergencia de vocabularios compartidos convencionalmente por el grupo de robots. Las ventajas que puede ofrecer un léxico común son evidentes, como también lo es que un lenguaje con una estructura más compleja, en la que se pudieran combinar palabras, sería todavía más beneficioso. Surgen así algunas propuestas enfocadas hacia la emergencia de un lenguaje consensuado que muestre una estructura sintáctica similar al lenguaje humano, entre las que se encuentra este trabajo. Tomar el lenguaje humano como modelo supone adoptar algunas de las hipótesis y teorías que disciplinas como la filosofía, la psicología o la lingüística entre otras se han encargado de proponer. Según estas aproximaciones teóricas el lenguaje presenta una doble dimension formal y funcional. En base a su dimensión formal parece claro que el lenguaje sigue unas reglas, por lo que el uso de una gramática se ha considerado esencial para su representación, pero también porque las gramáticas son un dispositivo muy sencillo y potente que permite generar fácilmente estructuras simbólicas. En cuanto a la dimension funcional se ha tenido en cuenta la teoría quizá más influyente de los últimos tiempos, que no es otra que la Teoría de los Actos del Habla. Esta teoría se basa en la idea de Wittgenstein por la que el significado reside en el uso del lenguaje, hasta el punto de que éste se entiende como una manera de actuar y de comportarse, en definitiva como una forma de vida. Teniendo presentes estas premisas en esta tesis se pretende experimentar con modelos computacionales que permitan a un grupo de robots alcanzar un lenguaje común de manera autónoma, simplemente mediante interacciones individuales entre los robots, en forma de juegos de lenguaje. Para ello se proponen tres modelos distintos de lenguaje: • Un modelo basado en gramáticas probabilísticas y aprendizaje por refuerzo en el que las interacciones y el uso del lenguaje son claves para su emergencia y que emplea una gramática generativa estática y diseñada de antemano. Este modelo se aplica a dos grupos distintos: uno formado exclusivamente por robots y otro que combina robots y un humano, de manera que en este segundo caso se plantea un aprendizaje supervisado por humanos. • Un modelo basado en evolución gramatical que permite estudiar no solo el consenso sintáctico, sino también cuestiones relativas a la génesis del lenguaje y que emplea una gramática universal a partir de la cual los robots pueden evolucionar por sí mismos la gramática más apropiada según la situación lingüística que traten en cada momento. • Un modelo basado en evolución gramatical y aprendizaje por refuerzo que toma aspectos de los anteriores y amplia las posibilidades de los robots al permitir desarrollar un lenguaje que se adapta a situaciones lingüísticas dinámicas que pueden cambiar en el tiempo y también posibilita la imposición de restricciones de orden muy frecuentes en las estructuras sintácticas complejas. Todos los modelos implican un planteamiento descentralizado y auto-organizado, de manera que ninguno de los robots es el dueño del lenguaje y todos deben cooperar y colaborar de forma coordinada para lograr el consenso sintáctico. En cada caso se plantean experimentos que tienen como objetivo validar los modelos propuestos, tanto en lo relativo al éxito en la emergencia del lenguaje como en lo relacionado con cuestiones paralelas de importancia, como la interacción hombre-máquina o la propia génesis del lenguaje. ABSTRACT The idea of giving a language to a group of robots or artificial agents has been the subject of intense study in recent decades. The first attempts have focused on the development and emergence of a conventionally shared vocabulary. The advantages that can provide a common vocabulary are evident and therefore a more complex language that combines words would be even more beneficial. Thus some proposals are put forward towards the emergence of a consensual language with a sintactical structure in similar terms to the human language. This work follows this trend. Taking the human language as a model means taking some of the assumptions and theories that disciplines such as philosophy, psychology or linguistics among others have provided. According to these theoretical positions language has a double formal and functional dimension. Based on its formal dimension it seems clear that language follows rules, so that the use of a grammar has been considered essential for representation, but also because grammars are a very simple and powerful device that easily generates these symbolic structures. As for the functional dimension perhaps the most influential theory of recent times, the Theory of Speech Acts has been taken into account. This theory is based on the Wittgenstein’s idea about that the meaning lies in the use of language, to the extent that it is understood as a way of acting and behaving. Having into account these issues this work implements some computational models in order to test if they allow a group of robots to reach in an autonomous way a shared language by means of individual interaction among them, that is by means of language games. Specifically, three different models of language for robots are proposed: • A reinforcement learning based model in which interactions and language use are key to its emergence. This model uses a static probabilistic generative grammar which is designed beforehand. The model is applied to two different groups: one formed exclusively by robots and other combining robots and a human. Therefore, in the second case the learning process is supervised by the human. • A model based on grammatical evolution that allows us to study not only the syntactic consensus, but also the very genesis of language. This model uses a universal grammar that allows robots to evolve for themselves the most appropriate grammar according to the current linguistic situation they deal with. • A model based on grammatical evolution and reinforcement learning that takes aspects of the previous models and increases their possibilities. This model allows robots to develop a language in order to adapt to dynamic language situations that can change over time and also allows the imposition of syntactical order restrictions which are very common in complex syntactic structures. All models involve a decentralized and self-organized approach so that none of the robots is the language’s owner and everyone must cooperate and work together in a coordinated manner to achieve syntactic consensus. In each case experiments are presented in order to validate the proposed models, both in terms of success about the emergence of language and it relates to the study of important parallel issues, such as human-computer interaction or the very genesis of language.