High-level languages for small devices: A case study

In this paper we study, through a concrete case, the feasibility of using a high-level, general-purpose logic language in the design and implementation of applications targeting wearable computers. The case study is a "sound spatializer" which, given real-time signáis for monaural audio and heading, generates stereo sound which appears to come from a position in space. The use of advanced compile-time transformations and optimizations made it possible to execute code written in a clear style without efñciency or architectural concerns on the target device, while meeting strict existing time and memory constraints. The final executable compares favorably with a similar implementation written in C. We believe that this case is representative of a wider class of common pervasive computing applications, and that the techniques we show here can be put to good use in a range of scenarios. This points to the possibility of applying high-level languages, with their associated flexibility, conciseness, ability to be automatically parallelized, sophisticated compile-time tools for analysis and verification, etc., to the embedded systems field without paying an unnecessary performance penalty.

Towards a high-level implementation of flexible parallelism primitives for symbolic languages

An abstract is not available.

High-level characteristics of or-and independent and-parallelism in prolog

Although studies of a number of parallel implementations of logic programming languages are now available, their results are difficult to interpret due to the multiplicity of factors involved, the effect of each of which is difficult to sepárate. In this paper we present the results of a high-level simulation study of or- and independent and-parallelism with a wide selection of Prolog programs that aims to determine the intrinsic amount of parallelism, independently of implementation factors, thus facilitating this separation. We expect this study will be instrumental in better understanding and comparing results from actual implementations, as shown by some examples provided in the paper. In addition, the paper examines some of the issues and tradeoffs associated with the combination of and- and or-parallelism and proposes reasonable solutions based on the simulation data obtained.

Towards high-level execution primitives for and-parallelism: preliminary results

Most implementations of parallel logic programming rely on complex low-level machinery which is arguably difflcult to implement and modify. We explore an alternative approach aimed at taming that complexity by raising core parts of the implementation to the source language level for the particular case of and-parallelism. Therefore, we handle a signiflcant portion of the parallel implementation mechanism at the Prolog level with the help of a comparatively small number of concurrency-related primitives which take care of lower-level tasks such as locking, thread management, stack set management, etc. The approach does not eliminate altogether modiflcations to the abstract machine, but it does greatly simplify them and it also facilitates experimenting with different alternatives. We show how this approach allows implementing both restricted and unrestricted (i.e., non fork-join) parallelism. Preliminary experiments show that the amount of performance sacriflced is reasonable, although granularity control is required in some cases. Also, we observe that the availability of unrestricted parallelism contributes to better observed speedups.

The Learning of the Mathematical Models to Aid Decision Making in the High Level Engineering Schools?

At present, in the University curricula in most countries, the decision theory and the mathematical models to aid decision making is not included, as in the graduate program like in Doctored and Master´s programs. In the Technical School of High Level Agronomic Engineers of the Technical University of Madrid (ETSIA-UPM), the need to offer to the future engineers training in a subject that could help them to take decisions in their profession was felt. Along the life, they will have to take a lot of decisions. Ones, will be important and others no. In the personal level, they will have to take several very important decisions, like the election of a career, professional work, or a couple, but in the professional field, the decision making is the main role of the Managers, Politicians and Leaders. They should be decision makers and will be paid for it. Therefore, nobody can understand that such a professional that is called to practice management responsibilities in the companies, does not take training in such an important matter. For it, in the year 2000, it was requested to the University Board to introduce in the curricula an optional qualified subject of the second cycle with 4,5 credits titled " Mathematical Methods for Making Decisions ". A program was elaborated, the didactic material prepared and programs as Maple, Lingo, Math Cad, etc. installed in several IT classrooms, where the course will be taught. In the course 2000-2001 this subject was offered with a great acceptance that exceeded the forecasts of capacity and had to be prepared more classrooms. This course in graduate program took place in the Department of Applied Mathematics to the Agronomic Engineering, as an extension of the credits dedicated to Mathematics in the career of Engineering.

Eccentric Exercise in Treatment of Patellar Tendinopathy in High Level Basketball Players. A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Chronic patellar tendinopathy is a common pathology in sporting population. To date, there is no agreed upon protocol as election treatment. Eccentric exercises have been used with satisfactory outcomes (3). The purpose of this trial was to compare the effects of two eccentric exercise protocols.

Eccentric exercise in treatment of patellar tendinopathy in high level basketball players. A randomized clinical trial

Chronic patellar tendinopathy is a common pathology in sporting population. To date, there is no agreed upon protocol as election treatment. Eccentric exercises have been used with satisfactory outcomes.

MIA - a free and open source software for gray scale medical image analysis

Background Gray scale images make the bulk of data in bio-medical image analysis, and hence, the main focus of many image processing tasks lies in the processing of these monochrome images. With ever improving acquisition devices, spatial and temporal image resolution increases, and data sets become very large. Various image processing frameworks exists that make the development of new algorithms easy by using high level programming languages or visual programming. These frameworks are also accessable to researchers that have no background or little in software development because they take care of otherwise complex tasks. Specifically, the management of working memory is taken care of automatically, usually at the price of requiring more it. As a result, processing large data sets with these tools becomes increasingly difficult on work station class computers. One alternative to using these high level processing tools is the development of new algorithms in a languages like C++, that gives the developer full control over how memory is handled, but the resulting workflow for the prototyping of new algorithms is rather time intensive, and also not appropriate for a researcher with little or no knowledge in software development. Another alternative is in using command line tools that run image processing tasks, use the hard disk to store intermediate results, and provide automation by using shell scripts. Although not as convenient as, e.g. visual programming, this approach is still accessable to researchers without a background in computer science. However, only few tools exist that provide this kind of processing interface, they are usually quite task specific, and don’t provide an clear approach when one wants to shape a new command line tool from a prototype shell script. Results The proposed framework, MIA, provides a combination of command line tools, plug-ins, and libraries that make it possible to run image processing tasks interactively in a command shell and to prototype by using the according shell scripting language. Since the hard disk becomes the temporal storage memory management is usually a non-issue in the prototyping phase. By using string-based descriptions for filters, optimizers, and the likes, the transition from shell scripts to full fledged programs implemented in C++ is also made easy. In addition, its design based on atomic plug-ins and single tasks command line tools makes it easy to extend MIA, usually without the requirement to touch or recompile existing code. Conclusion In this article, we describe the general design of MIA, a general purpouse framework for gray scale image processing. We demonstrated the applicability of the software with example applications from three different research scenarios, namely motion compensation in myocardial perfusion imaging, the processing of high resolution image data that arises in virtual anthropology, and retrospective analysis of treatment outcome in orthognathic surgery. With MIA prototyping algorithms by using shell scripts that combine small, single-task command line tools is a viable alternative to the use of high level languages, an approach that is especially useful when large data sets need to be processed.

Applications of Formal Languages to Management of Manned and Unmanned Aircraft

En el futuro, la gestión del tráfico aéreo (ATM, del inglés air traffic management) requerirá un cambio de paradigma, de la gestión principalmente táctica de hoy, a las denominadas operaciones basadas en trayectoria. Un incremento en el nivel de automatización liberará al personal de ATM —controladores, tripulación, etc.— de muchas de las tareas que realizan hoy. Las personas seguirán siendo el elemento central en la gestión del tráfico aéreo del futuro, pero lo serán mediante la gestión y toma de decisiones. Se espera que estas dos mejoras traigan un incremento en la eficiencia de la gestión del tráfico aéreo que permita hacer frente al incremento previsto en la demanda de transporte aéreo. Para aplicar el concepto de operaciones basadas en trayectoria, el usuario del espacio aéreo (la aerolínea, piloto, u operador) y el proveedor del servicio de navegación aérea deben negociar las trayectorias mediante un proceso de toma de decisiones colaborativo. En esta negociación, es necesaria una forma adecuada de compartir dichas trayectorias. Compartir la trayectoria completa requeriría un gran ancho de banda, y la trayectoria compartida podría invalidarse si cambiase la predicción meteorológica. En su lugar, podría compartirse una descripción de la trayectoria independiente de las condiciones meteorológicas, de manera que la trayectoria real se pudiese calcular a partir de dicha descripción. Esta descripción de la trayectoria debería ser fácil de procesar usando un programa de ordenador —ya que parte del proceso de toma de decisiones estará automatizado—, pero también fácil de entender para un operador humano —que será el que supervise el proceso y tome las decisiones oportunas—. Esta tesis presenta una serie de lenguajes formales que pueden usarse para este propósito. Estos lenguajes proporcionan los medios para describir trayectorias de aviones durante todas las fases de vuelo, desde la maniobra de push-back (remolcado hasta la calle de rodaje), hasta la llegada a la terminal del aeropuerto de destino. También permiten describir trayectorias tanto de aeronaves tripuladas como no tripuladas, incluyendo aviones de ala fija y cuadricópteros. Algunos de estos lenguajes están estrechamente relacionados entre sí, y organizados en una jerarquía. Uno de los lenguajes fundamentales de esta jerarquía, llamado aircraft intent description language (AIDL), ya había sido desarrollado con anterioridad a esta tesis. Este lenguaje fue derivado de las ecuaciones del movimiento de los aviones de ala fija, y puede utilizarse para describir sin ambigüedad trayectorias de este tipo de aeronaves. Una variante de este lenguaje, denominada quadrotor AIDL (QR-AIDL), ha sido desarrollada en esta tesis para permitir describir trayectorias de cuadricópteros con el mismo nivel de detalle. Seguidamente, otro lenguaje, denominado intent composite description language (ICDL), se apoya en los dos lenguajes anteriores, ofreciendo más flexibilidad para describir algunas partes de la trayectoria y dejar otras sin especificar. El ICDL se usa para proporcionar descripciones genéricas de maniobras comunes, que después se particularizan y combinan para formar descripciones complejas de un vuelo. Otro lenguaje puede construirse a partir del ICDL, denominado flight intent description language (FIDL). El FIDL especifica requisitos de alto nivel sobre las trayectorias —incluyendo restricciones y objetivos—, pero puede utilizar características del ICDL para proporcionar niveles de detalle arbitrarios en las distintas partes de un vuelo. Tanto el ICDL como el FIDL han sido desarrollados en colaboración con Boeing Research & Technology Europe (BR&TE). También se ha desarrollado un lenguaje para definir misiones en las que interactúan varias aeronaves, el mission intent description language (MIDL). Este lenguaje se basa en el FIDL y mantiene todo su poder expresivo, a la vez que proporciona nuevas semánticas para describir tareas, restricciones y objetivos relacionados con la misión. En ATM, los movimientos de un avión en la superficie de aeropuerto también tienen que ser monitorizados y gestionados. Otro lenguaje formal ha sido diseñado con este propósito, llamado surface movement description language (SMDL). Este lenguaje no pertenece a la jerarquía de lenguajes descrita en el párrafo anterior, y se basa en las clearances (autorizaciones del controlador) utilizadas durante las operaciones en superficie de aeropuerto. También proporciona medios para expresar incertidumbre y posibilidad de cambios en las distintas partes de la trayectoria. Finalmente, esta tesis explora las aplicaciones de estos lenguajes a la predicción de trayectorias y a la planificación de misiones. El concepto de trajectory language processing engine (TLPE) se usa en ambas aplicaciones. Un TLPE es una función de ATM cuya principal entrada y salida se expresan en cualquiera de los lenguajes incluidos en la jerarquía descrita en esta tesis. El proceso de predicción de trayectorias puede definirse como una combinación de TLPEs, cada uno de los cuales realiza una pequeña sub-tarea. Se le ha dado especial importancia a uno de estos TLPEs, que se encarga de generar el perfil horizontal, vertical y de configuración de la trayectoria. En particular, esta tesis presenta un método novedoso para la generación del perfil vertical. El proceso de planificar una misión también se puede ver como un TLPE donde la entrada se expresa en MIDL y la salida consiste en cierto número de trayectorias —una por cada aeronave disponible— descritas utilizando FIDL. Se ha formulado este problema utilizando programación entera mixta. Además, dado que encontrar caminos óptimos entre distintos puntos es un problema fundamental en la planificación de misiones, también se propone un algoritmo de búsqueda de caminos. Este algoritmo permite calcular rápidamente caminos cuasi-óptimos que esquivan todos los obstáculos en un entorno urbano. Los diferentes lenguajes formales definidos en esta tesis pueden utilizarse como una especificación estándar para la difusión de información entre distintos actores de la gestión del tráfico aéreo. En conjunto, estos lenguajes permiten describir trayectorias con el nivel de detalle necesario en cada aplicación, y se pueden utilizar para aumentar el nivel de automatización explotando esta información utilizando sistemas de soporte a la toma de decisiones. La aplicación de estos lenguajes a algunas funciones básicas de estos sistemas, como la predicción de trayectorias, han sido analizadas. ABSTRACT Future air traffic management (ATM) will require a paradigm shift from today’s mainly tactical ATM to trajectory-based operations (TBOs). An increase in the level of automation will also relieve humans —air traffic control officers (ATCOs), flight crew, etc.— from many of the tasks they perform today. Humans will still be central in this future ATM, as decision-makers and managers. These two improvements (TBOs and increased automation) are expected to provide the increase in ATM performance that will allow coping with the expected increase in air transport demand. Under TBOs, trajectories are negotiated between the airspace user (an airline, pilot, or operator) and the air navigation service provider (ANSP) using a collaborative decision making (CDM) process. A suitable method for sharing aircraft trajectories is necessary for this negotiation. Sharing a whole trajectory would require a high amount of bandwidth, and the shared trajectory might become invalid if the weather forecast changed. Instead, a description of the trajectory, decoupled from the weather conditions, could be shared, so that the actual trajectory could be computed from this trajectory description. This trajectory description should be easy to process using a computing program —as some of the CDM processes will be automated— but also easy to understand for a human operator —who will be supervising the process and making decisions. This thesis presents a series of formal languages that can be used for this purpose. These languages provide the means to describe aircraft trajectories during all phases of flight, from push back to arrival at the gate. They can also describe trajectories of both manned and unmanned aircraft, including fixedwing and some rotary-wing aircraft (quadrotors). Some of these languages are tightly interrelated and organized in a language hierarchy. One of the key languages in this hierarchy, the aircraft intent description language (AIDL), had already been developed prior to this thesis. This language was derived from the equations of motion of fixed-wing aircraft, and can provide an unambiguous description of fixed-wing aircraft trajectories. A variant of this language, the quadrotor AIDL (QR-AIDL), is developed in this thesis to allow describing a quadrotor aircraft trajectory with the same level of detail. Then, the intent composite description language (ICDL) is built on top of these two languages, providing more flexibility to describe some parts of the trajectory while leaving others unspecified. The ICDL is used to provide generic descriptions of common aircraft manoeuvres, which can be particularized and combined to form complex descriptions of flight. Another language is built on top of the ICDL, the flight intent description language (FIDL). The FIDL specifies high-level requirements on trajectories —including constraints and objectives—, but can use features of the ICDL to provide arbitrary levels of detail in different parts of the flight. The ICDL and FIDL have been developed in collaboration with Boeing Research & Technology Europe (BR&TE). Also, the mission intent description language (MIDL) has been developed to allow describing missions involving multiple aircraft. This language is based on the FIDL and keeps all its expressive power, while it also provides new semantics for describing mission tasks, mission objectives, and constraints involving several aircraft. In ATM, the movement of aircraft while on the airport surface also has to be monitored and managed. Another formal language has been designed for this purpose, denoted surface movement description language (SMDL). This language does not belong to the language hierarchy described above, and it is based on the clearances used in airport surface operations. Means to express uncertainty and mutability of different parts of the trajectory are also provided. Finally, the applications of these languages to trajectory prediction and mission planning are explored in this thesis. The concept of trajectory language processing engine (TLPE) is used in these two applications. A TLPE is an ATM function whose main input and output are expressed in any of the languages in the hierarchy described in this thesis. A modular trajectory predictor is defined as a combination of multiple TLPEs, each of them performing a small subtask. Special attention is given to the TLPE that builds the horizontal, vertical, and configuration profiles of the trajectory. In particular, a novel method for the generation of the vertical profile is presented. The process of planning a mission can also be seen as a TLPE, where the main input is expressed in the MIDL and the output consists of a number of trajectory descriptions —one for each aircraft available in the mission— expressed in the FIDL. A mixed integer linear programming (MILP) formulation for the problem of assigning mission tasks to the available aircraft is provided. In addition, since finding optimal paths between locations is a key problem to mission planning, a novel path finding algorithm is presented. This algorithm can compute near-shortest paths avoiding all obstacles in an urban environment in very short times. The several formal languages described in this thesis can serve as a standard specification to share trajectory information among different actors in ATM. In combination, these languages can describe trajectories with the necessary level of detail for any application, and can be used to increase automation by exploiting this information using decision support tools (DSTs). Their applications to some basic functions of DSTs, such as trajectory prediction, have been analized.

Parallel execution of Prolog programs: a survey

Since the early days of logic programming, researchers in the field realized the potential for exploitation of parallelism present in the execution of logic programs. Their high-level nature, the presence of nondeterminism, and their referential transparency, among other characteristics, make logic programs interesting candidates for obtaining speedups through parallel execution. At the same time, the fact that the typical applications of logic programming frequently involve irregular computations, make heavy use of dynamic data structures with logical variables, and involve search and speculation, makes the techniques used in the corresponding parallelizing compilers and run-time systems potentially interesting even outside the field. The objective of this article is to provide a comprehensive survey of the issues arising in parallel execution of logic programming languages along with the most relevant approaches explored to date in the field. Focus is mostly given to the challenges emerging from the parallel execution of Prolog programs. The article describes the major techniques used for shared memory implementation of Or-parallelism, And-parallelism, and combinations of the two. We also explore some related issues, such as memory management, compile-time analysis, and execution visualization.

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).

Towards description and optimization of abstract machines in an extension of prolog

Competitive abstract machines for Prolog are usually large, intricate, and incorpórate sophisticated optimizations. This makes them difñcult to code, optimize, and, especially, maintain and extend. This is partly due to the fact that efñciency considerations make it necessary to use low-level languages in their implementation. Writing the abstract machine (and ancillary code) in a higher-level language can help harness this inherent complexity. In this paper we show how the semantics of basic components of an efficient virtual machine for Prolog can be described using (a variant of) Prolog which retains much of its semantics. These descriptions are then compiled to C and assembled to build a complete bytecode emulator. Thanks to the high level of the language used and its closeness to Prolog the abstract machine descriptions can be manipulated using standard Prolog compilation and optimization techniques with relative ease. We also show how, by applying program transformations selectively, we obtain abstract machine implementations whose performance can match and even exceed that of highly-tuned, hand-crafted emulators.

Improving the compilation of prolog to C using moded types and determinism information

We describe the current status of and provide performance results for a prototype compiler of Prolog to C, ciaocc. ciaocc is novel in that it is designed to accept different kinds of high-level information, typically obtained via an automatic analysis of the initial Prolog program and expressed in a standardized language of assertions. This information is used to optimize the resulting C code, which is then processed by an off-the-shelf C compiler. The basic translation process essentially mimics the unfolding of a bytecode emulator with respect to the particular bytecode corresponding to the Prolog program. This is facilitated by a flexible design of the instructions and their lower-level components. This approach allows reusing a sizable amount of the machinery of the bytecode emulator: predicates already written in C, data definitions, memory management routines and áreas, etc., as well as mixing emulated bytecode with native code in a relatively straightforward way. We report on the performance of programs compiled by the current versión of the system, both with and without analysis information.

Programming with global analysis

Global data-flow analysis of (constraint) logic programs, which is generally based on abstract interpretation [7], is reaching a comparatively high level of maturity. A natural question is whether it is time for its routine incorporation in standard compilers, something which, beyond a few experimental systems, has not happened to date. Such incorporation arguably makes good sense only if: • the range of applications of global analysis is large enough to justify the additional complication in the compiler, and • global analysis technology can deal with all the features of "practical" languages (e.g., the ISO-Prolog built-ins) and "scales up" for large programs. We present a tutorial overview of a number of concepts and techniques directly related to the issues above, with special emphasis on the first one. In particular, we concéntrate on novel uses of global analysis during program development and debugging, rather than on the more traditional application área of program optimization. The idea of using abstract interpretation for validation and diagnosis has been studied in the context of imperative programming [2] and also of logic programming. The latter work includes issues such as using approximations to reduce the burden posed on programmers by declarative debuggers [6, 3] and automatically generating and checking assertions [4, 5] (which includes the more traditional type checking of strongly typed languages, such as Gódel or Mercury [1, 8, 9]) We also review some solutions for scalability including modular analysis, incremental analysis, and widening. Finally, we discuss solutions for dealing with meta-predicates, side-effects, delay declarations, constraints, dynamic predicates, and other such features which may appear in practical languages. In the discussion we will draw both from the literature and from our experience and that of others in the development and use of the CIAO system analyzer. In order to emphasize the practical aspects of the solutions discussed, the presentation of several concepts will be illustrated by examples run on the CIAO system, which makes extensive use of global analysis and assertions.

Contribución a la automatización de sistemas de respuesta frente a intrusiones mediante ontologías

La seguridad en redes informáticas es un área que ha sido ampliamente estudiada y objeto de una extensa investigación en los últimos años. Debido al continuo incremento en la complejidad y sofisticación de los ataques informáticos, el aumento de su velocidad de difusión, y la lentitud de reacción frente a las intrusiones existente en la actualidad, se hace patente la necesidad de mecanismos de detección y respuesta a intrusiones, que detecten y además sean capaces de bloquear el ataque, y mitiguen su impacto en la medida de lo posible. Los Sistemas de Detección de Intrusiones o IDSs son tecnologías bastante maduras cuyo objetivo es detectar cualquier comportamiento malicioso que ocurra en las redes. Estos sistemas han evolucionado rápidamente en los últimos años convirtiéndose en herramientas muy maduras basadas en diferentes paradigmas, que mejoran su capacidad de detección y le otorgan un alto nivel de fiabilidad. Por otra parte, un Sistema de Respuesta a Intrusiones (IRS) es un componente de seguridad que puede estar presente en la arquitectura de una red informática, capaz de reaccionar frente a los incidentes detectados por un Sistema de Detección de Intrusiones (IDS). Por desgracia, esta tecnología no ha evolucionado al mismo ritmo que los IDSs, y la reacción contra los ataques detectados es lenta y básica, y los sistemas presentan problemas para ejecutar respuestas de forma automática. Esta tesis doctoral trata de hacer frente al problema existente en la reacción automática frente a intrusiones, mediante el uso de ontologías, lenguajes formales de especificación de comportamiento y razonadores semánticos como base de la arquitectura del sistema de un sistema de respuesta automática frente a intrusiones o AIRS. El objetivo de la aproximación es aprovechar las ventajas de las ontologías en entornos heterogéneos, además de su capacidad para especificar comportamiento sobre los objetos que representan los elementos del dominio modelado. Esta capacidad para especificar comportamiento será de gran utilidad para que el AIRS infiera la respuesta óptima frente a una intrusión en el menor tiempo posible. Abstract Security in networks is an area that has been widely studied and has been the focus of extensive research over the past few years. The number of security events is increasing, and they are each time more sophisticated, and quickly spread, and slow reaction against intrusions, there is a need for intrusion detection and response systems to dynamically adapt so as to better detect and respond to attacks in order to mitigate them or reduce their impact. Intrusion Detection Systems (IDSs) are mature technologies whose aim is detecting malicious behavior in the networks. These systems have quickly evolved and there are now very mature tools based on different paradigms (statistic anomaly-based, signature-based and hybrids) with a high level of reliability. On the other hand, Intrusion Response System (IRS) is a security technology able to react against the intrusions detected by IDS. Unfortunately, the state of the art in IRSs is not as mature as with IDSs. The reaction against intrusions is slow and simple, and these systems have difficulty detecting intrusions in real time and triggering automated responses. This dissertation is to address the existing problem in automated reactions against intrusions using ontologies, formal behaviour languages and semantic reasoners as the basis of the architecture of an automated intrusion response systems or AIRS. The aim is to take advantage of ontologies in heterogeneous environments, in addition to its ability to specify behavior of objects representing the elements of the modeling domain. This ability to specify behavior will be useful for the AIRS in the inference process of the optimum response against an intrusion, as quickly as possible.