Nanoinformatics knowledge infrastructures: bringing efficient information management to nanomedical research

Nanotechnology represents an area of particular promise and significant opportunity across multiple scientific disciplines. Ongoing nanotechnology research ranges from the characterization of nanoparticles and nanomaterials to the analysis and processing of experimental data seeking correlations between nanoparticles and their functionalities and side effects. Due to their special properties, nanoparticles are suitable for cellular-level diagnostics and therapy, offering numerous applications in medicine, e.g. development of biomedical devices, tissue repair, drug delivery systems and biosensors. In nanomedicine, recent studies are producing large amounts of structural and property data, highlighting the role for computational approaches in information management. While in vitro and in vivo assays are expensive, the cost of computing is falling. Furthermore, improvements in the accuracy of computational methods (e.g. data mining, knowledge discovery, modeling and simulation) have enabled effective tools to automate the extraction, management and storage of these vast data volumes. Since this information is widely distributed, one major issue is how to locate and access data where it resides (which also poses data-sharing limitations). The novel discipline of nanoinformatics addresses the information challenges related to nanotechnology research. In this paper, we summarize the needs and challenges in the field and present an overview of extant initiatives and efforts.

Aeronautical Information Geoservices

Aeronautical charts underlie the representation of aeronautic geographic information that supports pilots in flight. Nevertheless, charts become complex due to the high density of data and the different kinds that support each phase of flight. These features make difficult using them on board. After conducting a study that aims to understand and to evaluate pilot’s needs related to Geographic Information, it is proposed a solution to implement a platform based on geographic information standards (OGC, ISO) and supported by a distributed Web architecture. This platform facilitates the use, retrieval, updating of information and its exchange among different institutions through private and public users. As a first element to ensure interoperability and the harmonisation of information, we propose an aeronautical metadata profile that sets guidelines and elements for its description. This profile meets the standards set by ICAO, Eurocontrol and ISO. The platform offers three levels of access to data through different types of devices and user profiles. This paper suggests an alternative and reliable way for distributing aeronautical geoinformation, focusing on specific functions or displaying and querying.

Multipedia: Enriching DBpedia with Multimedia Information

Enriching knowledge bases with multimedia information makes it possible to complement textual descriptions with visual and audio information. Such complementary information can help users to understand the meaning of assertions, and in general improve the user experience with the knowledge base. In this paper we address the problem of how to enrich ontology instances with candidate images retrieved from existing Web search engines. DBpedia has evolved into a major hub in the Linked Data cloud, interconnecting millions of entities organized under a consistent ontology. Our approach taps into the Wikipedia corpus to gather context information for DBpedia instances and takes advantage of image tagging information when this is available to calculate semantic relatedness between instances and candidate images. We performed experiments with focus on the particularly challenging problem of highly ambiguous names. Both methods presented in this work outperformed the baseline. Our best method leveraged context words from Wikipedia, tags from Flickr and type information from DBpedia to achieve an average precision of 80%.

Geoservices for Aeronautical Navigation

Aeronautical charts underlie the representation of aeronautic geographic information that supports pilots in flight. Nevertheless, the charts become complex due to the high density of data and the different kinds of charts that support each phase of flight. These features make difficult using them on board. After conducting a study, with civil Spaniard pilots, that aims to understand and to evaluate their needs related to Geographic Information, it is proposed a solution to implement a platform based on geographic information standards (OGC, ISO) and supported by a distributed Web architecture. This platform facilitates the use, retrieval, updating of information and its exchange among different institutions through private and public users. As a first element to ensure interoperability of information, we suggest an aeronautical metadata profile that sets guidelines and elements for its description. The metadata profile meets the standards set by ICAO, Eurocontrol and ISO. The platform offers three levels of access to data through different types of devices and user profiles. Thus, aeronautical institutions could edit data while pilot is on board accessing digital aeronautical charts through a laptop or Table PC. This paper suggests an alternative and reliable way for distributing aeronautical geoinformation, focusing on specific functions or displaying and querying.

Arquitectura y modelo de referencia para un ecosistema de intercambio de datos personales centrado en el usuario

Los servicios telemáticos han transformando la mayoría de nuestras actividades cotidianas y ofrecen oportunidades sin precedentes con características como, por ejemplo, el acceso ubicuo, la disponibilidad permanente, la independencia del dispositivo utilizado, la multimodalidad o la gratuidad, entre otros. No obstante, los beneficios que destacan en cuanto se reflexiona sobre estos servicios, tienen como contrapartida una serie de riesgos y amenazas no tan obvios, ya que éstos se nutren de y tratan con datos personales, lo cual suscita dudas respecto a la privacidad de las personas. Actualmente, las personas que asumen el rol de usuarios de servicios telemáticos generan constantemente datos digitales en distintos proveedores. Estos datos reflejan parte de su intimidad, de sus características particulares, preferencias, intereses, relaciones sociales, hábitos de consumo, etc. y lo que es más controvertido, toda esta información se encuentra bajo la custodia de distintos proveedores que pueden utilizarla más allá de las necesidades y el control del usuario. Los datos personales y, en particular, el conocimiento sobre los usuarios que se puede extraer a partir de éstos (modelos de usuario) se han convertido en un nuevo activo económico para los proveedores de servicios. De este modo, estos recursos se pueden utilizar para ofrecer servicios centrados en el usuario basados, por ejemplo, en la recomendación de contenidos, la personalización de productos o la predicción de su comportamiento, lo cual permite a los proveedores conectar con los usuarios, mantenerlos, involucrarlos y en definitiva, fidelizarlos para garantizar el éxito de un modelo de negocio. Sin embargo, dichos recursos también pueden utilizarse para establecer otros modelos de negocio que van más allá de su procesamiento y aplicación individual por parte de un proveedor y que se basan en su comercialización y compartición con otras entidades. Bajo esta perspectiva, los usuarios sufren una falta de control sobre los datos que les refieren, ya que esto depende de la voluntad y las condiciones impuestas por los proveedores de servicios, lo cual implica que habitualmente deban enfrentarse ante la disyuntiva de ceder sus datos personales o no acceder a los servicios telemáticos ofrecidos. Desde el sector público se trata de tomar medidas que protejan a los usuarios con iniciativas y legislaciones que velen por su privacidad y que aumenten el control sobre sus datos personales, a la vez que debe favorecer el desarrollo económico propiciado por estos proveedores de servicios. En este contexto, esta tesis doctoral propone una arquitectura y modelo de referencia para un ecosistema de intercambio de datos personales centrado en el usuario que promueve la creación, compartición y utilización de datos personales y modelos de usuario entre distintos proveedores, al mismo tiempo que ofrece a los usuarios las herramientas necesarias para ejercer su control en cuanto a la cesión y uso de sus recursos personales y obtener, en su caso, distintos incentivos o contraprestaciones económicas. Las contribuciones originales de la tesis son la especificación y diseño de una arquitectura que se apoya en un proceso de modelado distribuido que se ha definido en el marco de esta investigación. Éste se basa en el aprovechamiento de recursos que distintas entidades (fuentes de datos) ofrecen para generar modelos de usuario enriquecidos que cubren las necesidades específicas de terceras entidades, considerando la participación del usuario y el control sobre sus recursos personales (datos y modelos de usuario). Lo anterior ha requerido identificar y caracterizar las fuentes de datos con potencial de abastecer al ecosistema, determinar distintos patrones para la generación de modelos de usuario a partir de datos personales distribuidos y heterogéneos y establecer una infraestructura para la gestión de identidad y privacidad que permita a los usuarios expresar sus preferencias e intereses respecto al uso y compartición de sus recursos personales. Además, se ha definido un modelo de negocio de referencia que sustenta las investigaciones realizadas y que ha sido particularizado en dos ámbitos de aplicación principales, en concreto, el sector de publicidad en redes sociales y el sector financiero para la implantación de nuevos servicios. Finalmente, cabe destacar que las contribuciones de esta tesis han sido validadas en el contexto de distintos proyectos de investigación industrial aplicada y también en el marco de proyectos fin de carrera que la autora ha tutelado o en los que ha colaborado. Los resultados obtenidos han originado distintos méritos de investigación como dos patentes en explotación, la publicación de un artículo en una revista con índice de impacto y diversos artículos en congresos internacionales de relevancia. Algunos de éstos han sido galardonados con premios de distintas instituciones, así como en las conferencias donde han sido presentados. ABSTRACT Information society services have changed most of our daily activities, offering unprecedented opportunities with certain characteristics, such as: ubiquitous access, permanent availability, device independence, multimodality and free-of-charge services, among others. However, all the positive aspects that emerge when thinking about these services have as counterpart not-so-obvious threats and risks, because they feed from and use personal data, thus creating concerns about peoples’ privacy. Nowadays, people that play the role of user of services are constantly generating digital data in different service providers. These data reflect part of their intimacy, particular characteristics, preferences, interests, relationships, consumer behavior, etc. Controversy arises because this personal information is stored and kept by the mentioned providers that can use it beyond the user needs and control. Personal data and, in particular, the knowledge about the user that can be obtained from them (user models) have turned into a new economic asset for the service providers. In this way, these data and models can be used to offer user centric services based, for example, in content recommendation, tailored-products or user behavior, all of which allows connecting with the users, keeping them more engaged and involved with the provider, finally reaching customer loyalty in order to guarantee the success of a business model. However, these resources can be used to establish a different kind of business model; one that does not only processes and individually applies personal data, but also shares and trades these data with other entities. From that perspective, the users lack control over their referred data, because it depends from the conditions imposed by the service providers. The consequence is that the users often face the following dilemma: either giving up their personal data or not using the offered services. The Public Sector takes actions in order to protect the users approving, for example, laws and legal initiatives that reinforce privacy and increase control over personal data, while at the same time the authorities are also key players in the economy development that derives from the information society services. In this context, this PhD Dissertation proposes an architecture and reference model to achieve a user-centric personal data ecosystem that promotes the creation, sharing and use of personal data and user models among different providers, while offering users the tools to control who can access which data and why and if applicable, to obtain different incentives. The original contributions obtained are the specification and design of an architecture that supports a distributed user modelling process defined by this research. This process is based on leveraging scattered resources of heterogeneous entities (data sources) to generate on-demand enriched user models that fulfill individual business needs of third entities, considering the involvement of users and the control over their personal resources (data and user models). This has required identifying and characterizing data sources with potential for supplying resources, defining different generation patterns to produce user models from scattered and heterogeneous data, and establishing identity and privacy management infrastructures that allow users to set their privacy preferences regarding the use and sharing of their resources. Moreover, it has also been proposed a reference business model that supports the aforementioned architecture and this has been studied for two application fields: social networks advertising and new financial services. Finally, it has to be emphasized that the contributions obtained in this dissertation have been validated in the context of several national research projects and master thesis that the author has directed or has collaborated with. Furthermore, these contributions have produced different scientific results such as two patents and different publications in relevant international conferences and one magazine. Some of them have been awarded with different prizes.

Ontology-based access to sensor data streams

Sensor networks are increasingly becoming one of the main sources of Big Data on the Web. However, the observations that they produce are made available with heterogeneous schemas, vocabularies and data formats, making it difficult to share and reuse these data for other purposes than those for which they were originally set up. In this thesis we address these challenges, considering how we can transform streaming raw data to rich ontology-based information that is accessible through continuous queries for streaming data. Our main contribution is an ontology-based approach for providing data access and query capabilities to streaming data sources, allowing users to express their needs at a conceptual level, independent of implementation and language-specific details. We introduce novel query rewriting and data translation techniques that rely on mapping definitions relating streaming data models to ontological concepts. Specific contributions include: • The syntax and semantics of the SPARQLStream query language for ontologybased data access, and a query rewriting approach for transforming SPARQLStream queries into streaming algebra expressions. • The design of an ontology-based streaming data access engine that can internally reuse an existing data stream engine, complex event processor or sensor middleware, using R2RML mappings for defining relationships between streaming data models and ontology concepts. Concerning the sensor metadata of such streaming data sources, we have investigated how we can use raw measurements to characterize streaming data, producing enriched data descriptions in terms of ontological models. Our specific contributions are: • A representation of sensor data time series that captures gradient information that is useful to characterize types of sensor data. • A method for classifying sensor data time series and determining the type of data, using data mining techniques, and a method for extracting semantic sensor metadata features from the time series.

A scalable approach for content based image retrieval in cloud datacenter

The emergence of cloud datacenters enhances the capability of online data storage. Since massive data is stored in datacenters, it is necessary to effectively locate and access interest data in such a distributed system. However, traditional search techniques only allow users to search images over exact-match keywords through a centralized index. These techniques cannot satisfy the requirements of content based image retrieval (CBIR). In this paper, we propose a scalable image retrieval framework which can efficiently support content similarity search and semantic search in the distributed environment. Its key idea is to integrate image feature vectors into distributed hash tables (DHTs) by exploiting the property of locality sensitive hashing (LSH). Thus, images with similar content are most likely gathered into the same node without the knowledge of any global information. For searching semantically close images, the relevance feedback is adopted in our system to overcome the gap between low-level features and high-level features. We show that our approach yields high recall rate with good load balance and only requires a few number of hops.

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).

Trust and Privacy Solutions Based on Holistic Service Requirements

The products and services designed for Smart Cities provide the necessary tools to improve the management of modern cities in a more efficient way. These tools need to gather citizens’ information about their activity, preferences, habits, etc. opening up the possibility of tracking them. Thus, privacy and security policies must be developed in order to satisfy and manage the legislative heterogeneity surrounding the services provided and comply with the laws of the country where they are provided. This paper presents one of the possible solutions to manage this heterogeneity, bearing in mind these types of networks, such as Wireless Sensor Networks, have important resource limitations. A knowledge and ontology management system is proposed to facilitate the collaboration between the business, legal and technological areas. This will ease the implementation of adequate specific security and privacy policies for a given service. All these security and privacy policies are based on the information provided by the deployed platforms and by expert system processing.

Style Guidelines for Naming and Labeling Ontologies in the Multilingual Web

In the context of the Semantic Web, natural language descriptions associated with ontologies have proven to be of major importance not only to support ontology developers and adopters, but also to assist in tasks such as ontology mapping, information extraction, or natural language generation. In the state-of-the-art we find some attempts to provide guidelines for URI local names in English, and also some disagreement on the use of URIs for describing ontology elements. When trying to extrapolate these ideas to a multilingual scenario, some of these approaches fail to provide a valid solution. On the basis of some real experiences in the translation of ontologies from English into Spanish, we provide a preliminary set of guidelines for naming and labeling ontologies in a multilingual scenario.

A review of the distribution of particulate trace elements in urban terrestrial environments and its application to considerations of risk

We review the evolution, state of the art and future lines of research on the sources, transport pathways, and sinks of particulate trace elements in urban terrestrial environments to include the atmosphere, soils, and street and indoor dusts. Such studies reveal reductions in the emissions of some elements of historical concern such as Pb, with interest consequently focusing on other toxic trace elements such as As, Cd, Hg, Zn, and Cu. While establishment of levels of these elements is important in assessing the potential impacts of human society on the urban environment, it is also necessary to apply this knowledge in conjunction with information on the toxicity of those trace elements and the degree of exposure of human receptors to an assessment of whether such contamination represents a real risk to the city’s inhabitants and therefore how this risk can be addressed.

Challenges for the Multilingual Web of Data

The Web has witnessed an enormous growth in the amount of semantic information published in recent years. This growth has been stimulated to a large extent by the emergence of Linked Data. Although this brings us a big step closer to the vision of a Semantic Web, it also raises new issues such as the need for dealing with information expressed in different natural languages. Indeed, although the Web of Data can contain any kind of information in any language, it still lacks explicit mechanisms to automatically reconcile such information when it is expressed in different languages. This leads to situations in which data expressed in a certain language is not easily accessible to speakers of other languages. The Web of Data shows the potential for being extended to a truly multilingual web as vocabularies and data can be published in a language-independent fashion, while associated language-dependent (linguistic) information supporting the access across languages can be stored separately. In this sense, the multilingual Web of Data can be realized in our view as a layer of services and resources on top of the existing Linked Data infrastructure adding i) linguistic information for data and vocabularies in different languages, ii) mappings between data with labels in different languages, and iii) services to dynamically access and traverse Linked Data across different languages. In this article we present this vision of a multilingual Web of Data. We discuss challenges that need to be addressed to make this vision come true and discuss the role that techniques such as ontology localization, ontology mapping, and cross-lingual ontology-based information access and presentation will play in achieving this. Further, we propose an initial architecture and describe a roadmap that can provide a basis for the implementation of this vision.

Integration of Virtual Map Rooms as a support tool in historical and social research

At the present time almost all map libraries on the Internet are image collections generated by the digitization of early maps. This type of graphics files provides researchers with the possibility of accessing and visualizing historical cartographic information keeping in mind that this information has a degree of quality that depends upon elements such as the accuracy of the digitization process and proprietary constraints (e.g. visualization, resolution downloading options, copyright, use constraints). In most cases, access to these map libraries is useful only as a first approach and it is not possible to use those maps for scientific work due to the sparse tools available to measure, match, analyze and/or combine those resources with different kinds of cartography. This paper presents a method to enrich virtual map rooms and provide historians and other professional with a tool that let them to make the most of libraries in the digital era.

Networks of Polarized Evolutionary Processors as Problem Solvers.

In this paper, we propose a solution to an NP-complete problem, namely the "3-colorability problem", based on a network of polarized processors. Our solution is uniform and time efficient.

Anabolic drugs consumption of high school students participating in school championships of physical education

This paper aims to analyse the use of anabolic drugs among Greek students participating in school championships of physical education (PE). In order to do it, a survey was conducted during the 2008 to 2009 academic year in suburban, urban and metropolitan areas in Greece. The sample was 2,535 high school students from the 10 to 12th grade, participating in the school physical education championships. The results showed that 9.6% of boys and 3.7% of girls reported that they had used anabolic drugs sometime in the past whereas 11.2% boys and 4.8% girls reported that they would intend to use them in the future. This confirms that anabolic steroids are an important problem among adolescents, and educational programs should increase their knowledge about these drugs. Information should come not only from the state, but also from coaches, teachers, trainers and parents.