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).

Evaluación de los procesos software de una organización enfocando en la disminución de la resistencia al cambio

En este artículo se describe un método para la evaluación del rendimiento de los procesos software de una organización de desarrollo de software utilizando técnicas alternativas a los cuestionarios (utilizados actualmente como técnica principal para evaluar el rendimiento de los procesos software en las organizaciones de desarrollo software). La importancia de la evaluación de procesos de una organización radica en qué, si es realizada de manera correcta, esta actividad permite identificar las oportunidades de mejora y dirigir el esfuerzo de la mejora hacia los procesos software que necesitan ser mejorados para alcanzar los objetivos del negocio establecidos por la alta dirección con la finalidad de generar ventajas competitivas respecto de sus competidores y garantizar su permanencia en el mercado.

A survey on service quality description

Quality of service (QoS) can be a critical element for achieving the business goals of a service provider, for the acceptance of a service by the user, or for guaranteeing service characteristics in a composition of services, where a service is defined as either a software or a software-support (i.e., infrastructural) service which is available on any type of network or electronic channel. The goal of this article is to compare the approaches to QoS description in the literature, where several models and metamodels are included. consider a large spectrum of models and metamodels to describe service quality, ranging from ontological approaches to define quality measures, metrics, and dimensions, to metamodels enabling the specification of quality-based service requirements and capabilities as well as of SLAs (Service-Level Agreements) and SLA templates for service provisioning. Our survey is performed by inspecting the characteristics of the available approaches to reveal which are the consolidated ones and which are the ones specific to given aspects and to analyze where the need for further research and investigation lies. The approaches here illustrated have been selected based on a systematic review of conference proceedings and journals spanning various research areas in computer science and engineering, including: distributed, information, and telecommunication systems, networks and security, and service-oriented and grid computing.

Visualizador de programas Java concurrentes

El presente trabajo fin de grado, que, a partir de ahora, denominaré TFG, consiste en elaborar una monitorización de programas concurrentes en lenguaje Java, para que se visualicen los eventos ocurridos durante la ejecución de los dichos programas. Este trabajo surge en el marco de la asignatura “Concurrencia” de la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Informática de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, impartida por D. Julio Mariño y D. Ángel Herranz. El objetivo principal de este proyecto es crear una herramienta para el aprendizaje de la asignatura de concurrencia, facilitando la comprensión de los conceptos teóricos, de modo que puedan corregir los posibles errores que haya en sus prácticas. en este proyecto se expone el desarrollo de una librería de visualización de programas concurrentes programados en Java usando un formalismo gráfico similar al empleado en la asignatura. Además esta librería da soporte a los mecanismos de sincronización usados en las prácticas de la asignatura: la librería Monitor (desarrollada por los profesores de la asignatura, D. Ángel Herranz y D. Julio Mariño) y la librería JCSP (Universidad de Kent). ---ABSTRACT---This Bachelor Thesis addresses the problem of monitoring a Java program in order to trace and visualize a certain set of events produced during the execution of concurrent Java programs. This work originates in the subject "Concurrency" of the Computer Science and Engineering degree of our University. The main goal of this work is to have a tool that helps students learning the subject, so they can better understand the core concepts and correct common mistakes in the course practical work. We have implemented a library for visualizing concurrent Java programsusing a graphical notation similar to the one used in class, which supports the design of concurrent programs whose synchronization mechanisms are either monitors(using the Monitor package) or CSP(as implemented in the JCSP library from Kent University).

Teamwork competence and academic motivation in computer science engineering studies.

The present work is focused on studying two issues: the “teamwork” generic competence and the “academic motivation”. Currently the professional profile of engineers has a strong component of teamwork. On the other hand, motivational profile of students determines their tendencies when they come to work in team, as well as their performance at work. In this context we suggest four hypotheses: (H1) students improve their teamwork capacity by specific training and carrying out a set of activities integrated into an active learning process; (H2) students with higher mastery motivation have better attitude towards team working; (H3) students with higher mastery motivation obtain better results in academic performance; and (H4) students show different motivation profiles in different circumstances: type of courses, teaching methodologies, different times of the learning process. This study was carried out with computer science engineering students from two Spanish universities. The first results point to an improvement in teamwork competence of students if they have previously received specific training in facets of that competence. Other results indicate that there is a correlation between the motivational profiles of students and their perception about teamwork competence. Finally, and contrary to the initial hypothesis, these profiles appear to not influence significantly the academic performance of students.

Teamwork, motivational profiles and academic performance in computer science engineering

The present work is aimed at discussing several issues related to the teamwork generic competence, motivational profiles and academic performance. In particular, we study the improvement of teamwork attitude, the predominant types of motivation in different contexts and some correlations among these three components of the learning process. The above-mentioned aspects are of great importance. Currently, the professional profile of engineers has a strong teamwork component and the motivational profile of students determines both their tendencies when they come to work as part of a team, as well as their performance at work. Taking these issues into consideration, we suggest four hypotheses: (H1) students improve their teamwork capacity through specific training and carrying out of a set of activities integrated into an active learning process; (H2) students with higher mastery motivation have a better attitude towards teamwork; (H3) students with different types of motivations reach different levels of academic performance; and (H4) students show different motivation profiles in different circumstances: type of courses, teaching methodologies, different times of the learning process. This study was carried out with Computer Science Engineering students from two Spanish universities. The first results point to an improvement in teamwork competence of students if they have previously received specific training in facets of that competence. Other results indicate that there is a correlation between the motivational profiles of students and their perception of teamwork competence. Finally, results point to a clear relationship between some kind of motivation and academic performance. In particular, four kinds of motivation are analyzed and students are classified into two groups according to them. After analyzing several marks obtained in compulsory courses, we perceive that those students that show higher motivation for avoiding failure obtain, in general, worse academic performance.

Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations. A case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000-2009.

This paper analyzes the relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations of computer science research activity. It analyzes the number of documents and citations and how they vary by number of authors. They are also analyzed (according to author set cardinality) under different circumstances, that is, when documents are written in different types of collaboration, when documents are published in different document types, when documents are published in different computer science subdisciplines, and, finally, when documents are published by journals with different impact factor quartiles. To investigate the above relationships, this paper analyzes the publications listed in the Web of Science and produced by active Spanish university professors between 2000 and 2009, working in the computer science field. Analyzing all documents, we show that the highest percentage of documents are published by three authors, whereas single-authored documents account for the lowest percentage. By number of citations, there is no positive association between the author cardinality and citation impact. Statistical tests show that documents written by two authors receive more citations per document and year than documents published by more authors. In contrast, results do not show statistically significant differences between documents published by two authors and one author. The research findings suggest that international collaboration results on average in publications with higher citation rates than national and institutional collaborations. We also find differences regarding citation rates between journals and conferences, across different computer science subdisciplines and journal quartiles as expected. Finally, our impression is that the collaborative level (number of authors per document) will increase in the coming years, and documents published by three or four authors will be the trend in computer science literature.

Comparative study of auxetic geometrics by means of computer-aided design and engineering

Auxetic materials (or metamaterials) are those with a negative Poisson ratio (NPR) and display the unexpected property of lateral expansion when stretched, as well as an equal and opposing densification when compressed. Such geometries are being progressively employed in the development of novel products, especially in the fields of intelligent expandable actuators, shape morphing structures and minimally invasive implantable devices. Although several auxetic and potentially auxetic geometries have been summarized in previous reviews and research, precise information regarding relevant properties for design tasks is not always provided. In this study we present a comparative study of two-dimensional and three-dimensional auxetic geometries carried out by means of computer-aided design and engineering tools (from now on CAD–CAE). The first part of the study is focused on the development of a CAD library of auxetics. Once the library is developed we simulate the behavior of the different auxetic geometries and elaborate a systematic comparison, considering relevant properties of these geometries, such as Poisson ratio(s), maximum volume or area reductions attainable and equivalent Young's modulus, hoping it may provide useful information for future designs of devices based on these interesting structures.

Discernment of bee pollen loads using computer vision and one-class classification techniques

In this paper, we propose a system for authenticating local bee pollen against fraudulent samples using image processing and classification techniques. Our system is based on the colour properties of bee pollen loads and the use of one-class classifiers to reject unknown pollen samples. The latter classification techniques allow us to tackle the major difficulty of the problem, the existence of many possible fraudulent pollen types. Also presented is a multi-classifier model with an ambiguity discovery process to fuse the output of the one-class classifiers. The method is validated by authenticating Spanish bee pollen types, the overall accuracy of the final system of being 94%. Therefore, the system is able to rapidly reject the non-local pollen samples with inexpensive hardware and without the need to send the product to the laboratory.

Motivating Young Students to Start a Career in Nuclear: The Basic Course of Science and Nuclear Technology, An Educational Activity of Spanish Young Generation in Nuclear (JÓVENES NUCLEARES)

The main objective of this course, conducted by Jóvenes Nucleares (Spanish Young Generation in Nuclear, JJNN), a non-profit organization that depends on the Spanish Nuclear Society (SNE) is to pass on basic knowledge about Science and Nuclear Technology to the general public, mostly students and introduce them to its most relevant points. The purposes of this course are to provide general information, to answer the most common questions about Nuclear Energy and to motivate the young students to start a career in nuclear. Therefore, it is directed mainly to high school and university students, but also to general people that wants to learn about the key issues of such an important matter in our society. Anybody could attend the course, as no specific scientific education is required. The course is done at least once a year, during the Annual Meeting of the Spanish Nuclear Society, which takes place in a different Spanish city each time. The course is done also to whichever university or institution that asks for it to JJNN, with the only limit of the presenter´s availability. The course is divided into the following chapters: Physical nuclear and radiation principles, Nuclear power plants, Nuclear safety, Nuclear fuel, Radioactive waste, Decommission of nuclear facilities, Future nuclear power plants, Other uses of nuclear technology, Nuclear energy, climate change and sustainable development. The course is divided into 15 minutes lessons on the above topics, imparted by young professionals, experts in the field that belongs either to the Spanish Young Generation in Nuclear, either to companies and institutions related with nuclear energy. At the end of the course, a 200 pages book with the contents of the course is handed to every member of the audience. This book is also distributed in other course editions at high schools and universities in order to promote the scientific dissemination of the Nuclear Technology. As an extra motivation, JJNN delivers a course certificate to the assistants. At the end of the last edition course, in Santiago de Compostela, the assistants were asked to provide a feedback about it. Some really interesting lessons were learned, that will be very useful to improve next editions of the course. As a general conclusion of the courses it can be said that many of the students that have assisted to the course have increased their motivation in the nuclear field, and hopefully it will help the young talents to choose the nuclear field to develop their careers

Initiatives and facilities for E&T in the nuclear science and technology master at UPM

The present Master/Doctorate in Nuclear Science and Technology programme implemented in the Department of Nuclear Engineering of the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (NED-UPM) has the excellence qualification by the Spanish Ministry of Education. One of the main of this programme is the training for the development of methodologies of simulation, design and advanced analysis, including experimental tools, necessary in research and in professional work in the nuclear field.

Ontology driven description and engineering of autonomous systems: application to process system engineering

Autonomous systems refer to systems capable of operating in a real world environment without any form of external control for extended periods of time. Autonomy is a desired goal for every system as it improves its performance, safety and profit. Ontologies are a way to conceptualize the knowledge of a specific domain. In this paper an ontology for the description of autonomous systems as well as for its development (engineering) is presented and applied to a process. This ontology is intended to be applied and used to generate final applications following a model driven methodology.

DERIVE and Linear Algebra

This work describes an experience with a methodology for learning based on competences in Linear Algebra for engineering students. The experience has been based in autonomous team work of students. DERIVE tutorials for Linear Algebra topics are provided to the students. They have to work with the tutorials as their homework. After, worksheets with exercises have been prepared to be solved by the students organized in teams, using DERIVE function previously defined in the tutorials. The students send to the instructor the solution of the proposed exercises and they fill a survey with their impressions about the following items: ease of use of the files, usefulness of the tutorials for understanding the mathematical topics and the time spent in the experience. As a final work, we have designed an activity directed to the interested students. They have to prepare a project, related with a real problem in Science and Engineering. The students are free to choose the topic and to develop it but they have to use DERIVE in the solution. Obviously they are guided by the instructor. Some examples of activities related with Orthogonal Transformations will be presented.