UncertML: an XML schema for exchanging uncertainty

Authors from Burrough (1992) to Heuvelink et al. (2007) have highlighted the importance of GIS frameworks which can handle incomplete knowledge in data inputs, in decision rules and in the geometries and attributes modelled. It is particularly important for this uncertainty to be characterised and quantified when GI data is used for spatial decision making. Despite a substantial and valuable literature on means of representing and encoding uncertainty and its propagation in GI (e.g.,Hunter and Goodchild 1993; Duckham et al. 2001; Couclelis 2003), no framework yet exists to describe and communicate uncertainty in an interoperable way. This limits the usability of Internet resources of geospatial data, which are ever-increasing, based on specifications that provide frameworks for the ‘GeoWeb’ (Botts and Robin 2007; Cox 2006). In this paper we present UncertML, an XML schema which provides a framework for describing uncertainty as it propagates through many applications, including online risk management chains. This uncertainty description ranges from simple summary statistics (e.g., mean and variance) to complex representations such as parametric, multivariate distributions at each point of a regular grid. The philosophy adopted in UncertML is that all data values are inherently uncertain, (i.e., they are random variables, rather than values with defined quality metadata).

Overcoming schema heterogeneity between linked semantic repositories to improve coreference resolution

Schema heterogeneity issues often represent an obstacle for discovering coreference links between individuals in semantic data repositories. In this paper we present an approach, which performs ontology schema matching in order to improve instance coreference resolution performance. A novel feature of the approach is its use of existing instance-level coreference links defined in third-party repositories as background knowledge for schema matching techniques. In our tests of this approach we obtained encouraging results, in particular, a substantial increase in recall in comparison with existing sets of coreference links.

A framework for evaluating semantic metadata

Because poor quality semantic metadata can destroy the effectiveness of semantic web technology by hampering applications from producing accurate results, it is important to have frameworks that support their evaluation. However, there is no such framework developedto date. In this context, we proposed i) an evaluation reference model, SemRef, which sketches some fundamental principles for evaluating semantic metadata, and ii) an evaluation framework, SemEval, which provides a set of instruments to support the detection of quality problems and the collection of quality metrics for these problems. A preliminary case study of SemEval shows encouraging results.

An infrastructure for acquiring high quality semantic metadata

Because metadata that underlies semantic web applications is gathered from distributed and heterogeneous data sources, it is important to ensure its quality (i.e., reduce duplicates, spelling errors, ambiguities). However, current infrastructures that acquire and integrate semantic data have only marginally addressed the issue of metadata quality. In this paper we present our metadata acquisition infrastructure, ASDI, which pays special attention to ensuring that high quality metadata is derived. Central to the architecture of ASDI is a verification engine that relies on several semantic web tools to check the quality of the derived data. We tested our prototype in the context of building a semantic web portal for our lab, KMi. An experimental evaluation comparing the automatically extracted data against manual annotations indicates that the verification engine enhances the quality of the extracted semantic metadata.

GEO Label – quality information interrogation tool for geospatial datasets:towards effective visualization of quality metadata

Although the importance of dataset fitness-for-use evaluation and intercomparison is widely recognised within the GIS community, no practical tools have yet been developed to support such interrogation. GeoViQua aims to develop a GEO label which will visually summarise and allow interrogation of key informational aspects of geospatial datasets upon which users rely when selecting datasets for use. The proposed GEO label will be integrated in the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) and will be used as a value and trust indicator for datasets accessible through the GEO Portal. As envisioned, the GEO label will act as a decision support mechanism for dataset selection and thereby hopefully improve user recognition of the quality of datasets. To date we have conducted 3 user studies to (1) identify the informational aspects of geospatial datasets upon which users rely when assessing dataset quality and trustworthiness, (2) elicit initial user views on a GEO label and its potential role and (3), evaluate prototype label visualisations. Our first study revealed that, when evaluating quality of data, users consider 8 facets: dataset producer information; producer comments on dataset quality; dataset compliance with international standards; community advice; dataset ratings; links to dataset citations; expert value judgements; and quantitative quality information. Our second study confirmed the relevance of these facets in terms of the community-perceived function that a GEO label should fulfil: users and producers of geospatial data supported the concept of a GEO label that provides a drill-down interrogation facility covering all 8 informational aspects. Consequently, we developed three prototype label visualisations and evaluated their comparative effectiveness and user preference via a third user study to arrive at a final graphical GEO label representation. When integrated in the GEOSS, an individual GEO label will be provided for each dataset in the GEOSS clearinghouse (or other data portals and clearinghouses) based on its available quality information. Producer and feedback metadata documents are being used to dynamically assess information availability and generate the GEO labels. The producer metadata document can either be a standard ISO compliant metadata record supplied with the dataset, or an extended version of a GeoViQua-derived metadata record, and is used to assess the availability of a producer profile, producer comments, compliance with standards, citations and quantitative quality information. GeoViQua is also currently developing a feedback server to collect and encode (as metadata records) user and producer feedback on datasets; these metadata records will be used to assess the availability of user comments, ratings, expert reviews and user-supplied citations for a dataset. The GEO label will provide drill-down functionality which will allow a user to navigate to a GEO label page offering detailed quality information for its associated dataset. At this stage, we are developing the GEO label service that will be used to provide GEO labels on demand based on supplied metadata records. In this presentation, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the GEO label development process, with specific emphasis on the GEO label implementation and integration into the GEOSS.

Whether social schema violations help or hurt creativity depends on need for structure

Although people and events that disconfirm observers' expectancies can increase their creativity, sometimes such social schema violations increase observers' rigidity of thought and undermine creative cognition. Here we examined whether individual differences in the extent to which people prefer structure and predictability determine whether social schema violations facilitate or hamper creativity. Participants in Study 1 formed impressions of a schema-inconsistent female mechanic (vs. a schema-consistent male mechanic). Following schema-inconsistent rather than -consistent information, participants low (high) in need for structure showed better (impeded) creative performance. Participants in Study 2 memorized a series of images in which individuals were placed on a schema-inconsistent (vs. consistent) background (e.g., an Eskimo on the desert vs. on a snowy landscape). Following schema-inconsistent imagery, participants low (high) in need for structure increased (decreased) divergent thinking. © 2014 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

To move or not to move, that is the question! Body schema and non-action oriented body representations:an fMRI meta-analytic study

Many studies have attempted to identify the different cognitive components of body representation (BR). Due to methodological issues, the data reported in these studies are often confusing. Here we summarize the fMRI data from previous studies and explore the possibility of a neural segregation between BR supporting actions (body-schema, BS) or not (non-oriented-to-action-body-representation, NA). We performed a general activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of 59 fMRI experiments and two individual meta-analyses to identify the neural substrates of different BR. Body processing involves a wide network of areas in occipital, parietal, frontal and temporal lobes. NA selectively activates the somatosensory primary cortex and the supramarginal gyrus. BS involves the primary motor area and the right extrastriate body area. Our data suggest that motor information and recognition of body parts are fundamental to build BS. Instead, sensory information and processing of the egocentric perspective are more important for NA. In conclusion, our results strongly support the idea that different and segregated neural substrates are involved in body representations orient or not to actions.