Doppler Orbit Determination of Deep Space Probes by the Bernese GNSS Software: First Results of the Combined Orbit Determination from DSN and Inter-Satellite Ka-Band Data from the Grail Mission

Navigation of deep space probes is most commonly operated using the spacecraft Doppler tracking technique. Orbital parameters are determined from a series of repeated measurements of the frequency shift of a microwave carrier over a given integration time. Currently, both ESA and NASA operate antennas at several sites around the world to ensure the tracking of deep space probes. Just a small number of software packages are nowadays used to process Doppler observations. The Astronomical Institute of the University of Bern (AIUB) has recently started the development of Doppler data processing capabilities within the Bernese GNSS Software. This software has been extensively used for Precise Orbit Determination of Earth orbiting satellites using GPS data collected by on-board receivers and for subsequent determination of the Earth gravity field. In this paper, we present the currently achieved status of the Doppler data modeling and orbit determination capabilities in the Bernese GNSS Software using GRAIL data. In particular we will focus on the implemented orbit determination procedure used for the combined analysis of Doppler and intersatellite Ka-band data. We show that even at this earlier stage of the development we can achieve an accuracy of few mHz on two-way S-band Doppler observation and of 2 µm/s on KBRR data from the GRAIL primary mission phase.

Impact of Software Settings on Multiple-Breath Washout Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Multiple-breath washout (MBW) is an attractive test to assess ventilation inhomogeneity, a marker of peripheral lung disease. Standardization of MBW is hampered as little data exists on possible measurement bias. We aimed to identify potential sources of measurement bias based on MBW software settings. METHODS We used unprocessed data from nitrogen (N2) MBW (Exhalyzer D, Eco Medics AG) applied in 30 children aged 5-18 years: 10 with CF, 10 formerly preterm, and 10 healthy controls. This setup calculates the tracer gas N2 mainly from measured O2 and CO2concentrations. The following software settings for MBW signal processing were changed by at least 5 units or >10% in both directions or completely switched off: (i) environmental conditions, (ii) apparatus dead space, (iii) O2 and CO2 signal correction, and (iv) signal alignment (delay time). Primary outcome was the change in lung clearance index (LCI) compared to LCI calculated with the settings as recommended. A change in LCI exceeding 10% was considered relevant. RESULTS Changes in both environmental and dead space settings resulted in uniform but modest LCI changes and exceeded >10% in only two measurements. Changes in signal alignment and O2 signal correction had the most relevant impact on LCI. Decrease of O2 delay time by 40 ms (7%) lead to a mean LCI increase of 12%, with >10% LCI change in 60% of the children. Increase of O2 delay time by 40 ms resulted in mean LCI decrease of 9% with LCI changing >10% in 43% of the children. CONCLUSIONS Accurate LCI results depend crucially on signal processing settings in MBW software. Especially correct signal delay times are possible sources of incorrect LCI measurements. Algorithms of signal processing and signal alignment should thus be optimized to avoid susceptibility of MBW measurements to this significant measurement bias.

NOVEL PHANTOMS AND POST-PROCESSING FOR DIFFUSION SPECTRUM IMAGING

High Angular Resolution Diffusion Imaging (HARDI) techniques, including Diffusion Spectrum Imaging (DSI), have been proposed to resolve crossing and other complex fiber architecture in the human brain white matter. In these methods, directional information of diffusion is inferred from the peaks in the orientation distribution function (ODF). Extensive studies using histology on macaque brain, cat cerebellum, rat hippocampus and optic tracts, and bovine tongue are qualitatively in agreement with the DSI-derived ODFs and tractography. However, there are only two studies in the literature which validated the DSI results using physical phantoms and both these studies were not performed on a clinical MRI scanner. Also, the limited studies which optimized DSI in a clinical setting, did not involve a comparison against physical phantoms. Finally, there is lack of consensus on the necessary pre- and post-processing steps in DSI; and ground truth diffusion fiber phantoms are not yet standardized. Therefore, the aims of this dissertation were to design and construct novel diffusion phantoms, employ post-processing techniques in order to systematically validate and optimize (DSI)-derived fiber ODFs in the crossing regions on a clinical 3T MR scanner, and develop user-friendly software for DSI data reconstruction and analysis. Phantoms with a fixed crossing fiber configuration of two crossing fibers at 90° and 45° respectively along with a phantom with three crossing fibers at 60°, using novel hollow plastic capillaries and novel placeholders, were constructed. T2-weighted MRI results on these phantoms demonstrated high SNR, homogeneous signal, and absence of air bubbles. Also, a technique to deconvolve the response function of an individual peak from the overall ODF was implemented, in addition to other DSI post-processing steps. This technique greatly improved the angular resolution of the otherwise unresolvable peaks in a crossing fiber ODF. The effects of DSI acquisition parameters and SNR on the resultant angular accuracy of DSI on the clinical scanner were studied and quantified using the developed phantoms. With a high angular direction sampling and reasonable levels of SNR, quantification of a crossing region in the 90°, 45° and 60° phantoms resulted in a successful detection of angular information with mean ± SD of 86.93°±2.65°, 44.61°±1.6° and 60.03°±2.21° respectively, while simultaneously enhancing the ODFs in regions containing single fibers. For the applicability of these validated methodologies in DSI, improvement in ODFs and fiber tracking from known crossing fiber regions in normal human subjects were demonstrated; and an in-house software package in MATLAB which streamlines the data reconstruction and post-processing for DSI, with easy to use graphical user interface was developed. In conclusion, the phantoms developed in this dissertation offer a means of providing ground truth for validation of reconstruction and tractography algorithms of various diffusion models (including DSI). Also, the deconvolution methodology (when applied as an additional DSI post-processing step) significantly improved the angular accuracy of the ODFs obtained from DSI, and should be applicable to ODFs obtained from the other high angular resolution diffusion imaging techniques.

PanPlot - software to visualize profiles and core logs

The program PanPlot was developed as a visualization tool for the information system PANGAEA. It can be used as a stand-alone application to plot data versus depth or time or in a ternary view. Data input format is tab-delimited ASCII (e.g. by export from MS-Excel or from PANGAEA). The default scales and graphic features can individualy be modified. PanPlot graphs can be exported in platform-specific interchange formats (EMF, PICT) which can be imported by graphic software for further processing.

PanPlot 2 - software to visualize profiles and time series

The program PanPlot 2 was developed as a visualization tool for the information system PANGAEA. It can be used as a stand-alone application to plot data versus depth or time. Data input format is tab-delimited ASCII (e.g. by export from MS-Excel or from PANGAEA). The default scales and graphic features can individualy be modified. PanPlot 2 graphs can be exported in several image formats (BMP, PNG, PDF, and SVG) which can be imported by graphic software for further processing.

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).

Data Processing Modeling in Decision Support Systems.

Due to the advancement of both, information technology in general, and databases in particular; data storage devices are becoming cheaper and data processing speed is increasing. As result of this, organizations tend to store large volumes of data holding great potential information. Decision Support Systems, DSS try to use the stored data to obtain valuable information for organizations. In this paper, we use both data models and use cases to represent the functionality of data processing in DSS following Software Engineering processes. We propose a methodology to develop DSS in the Analysis phase, respective of data processing modeling. We have used, as a starting point, a data model adapted to the semantics involved in multidimensional databases or data warehouses, DW. Also, we have taken an algorithm that provides us with all the possible ways to automatically cross check multidimensional model data. Using the aforementioned, we propose diagrams and descriptions of use cases, which can be considered as patterns representing the DSS functionality, in regard to DW data processing, DW on which DSS are based. We highlight the reusability and automation benefits that this can be achieved, and we think this study can serve as a guide in the development of DSS.

Implementation of wireless communication based on Software Defined Radio

In current communication systems, there are many new challenges like various competitive standards, the scarcity of frequency resource, etc., especially the development of personal wireless communication systems result the new system update faster than ever before, the conventional hardware-based wireless communication system is difficult to adapt to this situation. The emergence of SDR enabled the third revolution of wireless communication which from hardware to software and build a flexible, reliable, upgradable, reusable, reconfigurable and low cost platform. The Universal Software Radio Peripheral (USRP) products are commonly used with the GNU Radio software suite to create complex SDR systems. GNU Radio is a toolkit where digital signal processing blocks are written in C++, and connected to each other with Python. This makes it easy to develop more sophisticated signal processing systems, because many blocks already written by others and you can quickly put them together to create a complete system. Although the main function of GNU Radio is not be a simulator, but if there is no RF hardware components,it supports to researching the signal processing algorithm based on pre-stored and generated data by signal generator. This thesis introduced SDR platform from hardware (USRP) and software(GNU Radio), as well as some basic modulation techniques in wireless communication system. Based on the examples provided by GNU Radio, carried out some related experiments, for example GSM scanning and FM radio station receiving on USRP. And make a certain degree of improvement based on the experience of some investigators to observe OFDM spectrum and simulate real-time video transmission. GNU Radio combine with USRP hardware proved to be a valuable lab platform for implementing complex radio system prototypes in a short time. RESUMEN. Software Defined Radio (SDR) es una tecnología emergente que está creando un impacto revolucionario en la tecnología de radio convencional. Un buen ejemplo de radio software son los sistemas de código abierto llamados GNU Radio que emplean un kit de herramientas de desarrollo de software libre. En este trabajo se ha empleado un kit de desarrollo comercial (Ettus Research) que consiste en un módulo de procesado de señal y un hardaware sencillo. El módulo emplea un software de desarrollo basado en Linux sobre el que se pueden implementar aplicaciones de radio software muy variadas. El hardware de desarrollo consta de un microprocesador de propósito general, un dispositivo programable (FPGA) y un interfaz de radiofrecuencia que cubre de 50 a 2200MHz. Este hardware se conecta al PC por medio de un interfaz USB de 8Mb/s de velocidad. Sobre la plataforma de Ettus se pueden ejecutar aplicaciones GNU radio que utilizan principalmente lenguaje de programación Python para implementarse. Sin embargo, su módulo de procesado de señal está construido en C + + y emplea un microprocesador con aritmética de coma flotante. Por lo tanto, los desarrolladores pueden rápida y fácilmente construir aplicaciones en tiempo real sistemas de comunicación inalámbrica de alta capacidad. Aunque su función principal no es ser un simulador, si no puesto que hay componentes de hardware RF, Radio GNU sirve de apoyo a la investigación del algoritmo de procesado de señales basado en pre-almacenados y generados por los datos del generador de señal. En este trabajo fin de máster se ha evaluado la plataforma de hardware de DEG (USRP) y el software (GNU Radio). Para ello se han empleado algunas técnicas de modulación básicas en el sistema de comunicación inalámbrica. A partir de los ejemplos proporcionados por GNU Radio, hemos realizado algunos experimentos relacionados, por ejemplo, escaneado del espectro, demodulación de señales de FM empleando siempre el hardware de USRP. Una vez evaluadas aplicaciones sencillas se ha pasado a realizar un cierto grado de mejora y optimización de aplicaciones complejas descritas en la literatura. Se han empleado aplicaciones como la que consiste en la generación de un espectro de OFDM y la simulación y transmisión de señales de vídeo en tiempo real. Con estos resultados se está ahora en disposición de abordar la elaboración de aplicaciones complejas.

Implementación y configuración de un receptor de radio definido por software (SDR) para estudios de propagación

The constant development of digital systems in radio communications demands the adaptation of the current receiving equipment to the new technologies. In this context, a new Software Defined Radio based receiver is being implemented with the aim of carrying out different experiments to analyze the propagation of signals through the atmosphere from a satellite beacon. The receiver selected for this task is the PERSEUS SDR from the Italian company Microtelecom s.r.l. It is a software defined VLF-LF-MF-HF receiver based on an outstanding direct sampling digital architecture which features a 14 bit 80 MSamples/s analog-to-digital converter, a high-performance FPGA-based digital down-converter and a high-speed 480 Mbit/s USB2.0 PC interface. The main goal is to implement the related software and adapt the new receiver to the current working environment. In this paper, SDR technology guidelines are given and PERSEUS receiver digital signal processing is presented with the most remarkable results.

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

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

KATS: A Knowledge Acquisition Tool Based on Electronic Document Processing

This paper describes a particular knowledge acquisition tool for the construction and maintenance of the knowledge model of an intelligent system for emergency management in the field of hydrology. This tool has been developed following an innovative approach directed to end-users non familiarized in computer oriented terminology. According to this approach, the tool is conceived as a document processor specialized in a particular domain (hydrology) in such a way that the whole knowledge model is viewed by the user as an electronic document. The paper first describes the characteristics of the knowledge model of the intelligent system and summarizes the problems that we found during the development and maintenance of such type of model. Then, the paper describes the KATS tool, a software application that we have designed to help in this task to be used by users who are not experts in computer programming. Finally, the paper shows a comparison between KATS and other approaches for knowledge acquisition.

Análisis del software ImageJ para el análisis científico de imágenes

ImageJ es un programa informático de tratamiento digital de imagen orientado principalmente hacia el ámbito de las ciencias de la salud. Se trata de un software de dominio público y de código abierto desarrollado en lenguaje Java en las instituciones del National Institutes of Health de Estados Unidos. Incluye por defecto potentes herramientas para editar, procesar y analizar imágenes de casi cualquier tipo y formato. Sin embargo, su mayor virtud reside en su extensibilidad: las funcionalidades de ImageJ pueden ampliarse hasta resolver casi cualquier problema de tratamiento digital de imagen mediante macros, scripts y, especialmente, plugins programables en lenguaje Java gracias a la API que ofrece. Además, ImageJ cuenta con repositorios oficiales en los que es posible obtener de forma gratuita macros, scripts y plugins aplicables en multitud de entornos gracias a la labor de la extensa comunidad de desarrolladores de ImageJ, que los depura, mejora y amplia frecuentemente. Este documento es la memoria de un proyecto que consiste en el análisis detallado de las herramientas de tratamiento digital de imagen que ofrece ImageJ. Tiene por objetivo determinar si ImageJ, a pesar de estar más enfocado a las ciencias de la salud, puede resultar útil en el entorno de la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería y Sistemas de Telecomunicación de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, y en tal caso, resaltar las características que pudieran resultar más beneficiosas en este ámbito y servir además como guía introductoria. En las siguientes páginas se examinan una a una las herramientas de ImageJ (versión 1.48q), su funcionamiento y los mecanismos subyacentes. Se sigue el orden marcado por los menús de la interfaz de usuario: el primer capítulo abarca las herramientas destinadas a la manipulación de imágenes en general (menú Image); el segundo, las herramientas de procesado (menú Process); el tercero, las herramientas de análisis (menú Analyze); y el cuarto y último, las herramientas relacionadas con la extensibilidad de ImageJ (menú Plugins). ABSTRACT. ImageJ is a digital image processing computer program which is mainly focused at the health sciences field. It is a public domain, open source software developed in Java language at the National Institutes of Health of the United States of America. It includes powerful built-in tools to edit, process and analyze almost every type of image in nearly every format. However, its main virtue is its extensibility: ImageJ functionalities can be widened to solve nearly every situation found in digital image processing through macros, scripts and, specially, plugins programmed in Java language thanks to the ImageJ API. In addition, ImageJ has official repositories where it is possible to freely get many different macros, scripts and plugins thanks to the work carried out by the ImageJ developers community, which continuously debug, improve and widen them. This document is a report which explains a detailed analysis of all the digital image processing tools offered by ImageJ. Its final goal is to determine if ImageJ can be useful to the environment of Escuela Tecnica Superior de Ingenierfa y Sistemas de Telecomunicacion of Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, in spite of being focused at the health sciences field. In such a case, it also aims to highlight the characteristics which could be more beneficial in this field, and serve as an introductory guide too. In the following pages, all of the ImageJ tools (version 1.48q) are examined one by one, as well as their work and the underlying mechanics. The document follows the order established by the menus in ImageJ: the first chapter covers all the tools destined to manipulate images in general (menu Image); the second one covers all the processing tools (menu Process); the third one includes analyzing tools (menu Analyze); and finally, the fourth one contains all those tools related to ImageJ extensibility (menu Plugins).

Heterogeneous architecture for the optimization of large-scale graph processing data centres

Con el auge del Cloud Computing, las aplicaciones de proceso de datos han sufrido un incremento de demanda, y por ello ha cobrado importancia lograr m�ás eficiencia en los Centros de Proceso de datos. El objetivo de este trabajo es la obtenci�ón de herramientas que permitan analizar la viabilidad y rentabilidad de diseñar Centros de Datos especializados para procesamiento de datos, con una arquitectura, sistemas de refrigeraci�ón, etc. adaptados. Algunas aplicaciones de procesamiento de datos se benefician de las arquitecturas software, mientras que en otras puede ser m�ás eficiente un procesamiento con arquitectura hardware. Debido a que ya hay software con muy buenos resultados en el procesamiento de grafos, como el sistema XPregel, en este proyecto se realizará una arquitectura hardware en VHDL, implementando el algoritmo PageRank de Google de forma escalable. Se ha escogido este algoritmo ya que podr��á ser m�ás eficiente en arquitectura hardware, debido a sus características concretas que se indicaráan m�ás adelante. PageRank sirve para ordenar las p�áginas por su relevancia en la web, utilizando para ello la teorí��a de grafos, siendo cada página web un vértice de un grafo; y los enlaces entre páginas, las aristas del citado grafo. En este proyecto, primero se realizará un an�álisis del estado de la técnica. Se supone que la implementaci�ón en XPregel, un sistema de procesamiento de grafos, es una de las m�ás eficientes. Por ello se estudiará esta �ultima implementaci�ón. Sin embargo, debido a que Xpregel procesa, en general, algoritmos que trabajan con grafos; no tiene en cuenta ciertas caracterí��sticas del algoritmo PageRank, por lo que la implementaci�on no es �optima. Esto es debido a que en PageRank, almacenar todos los datos que manda un mismo v�értice es un gasto innecesario de memoria ya que todos los mensajes que manda un vértice son iguales entre sí e iguales a su PageRank. Se realizará el diseño en VHDL teniendo en cuenta esta caracter��ística del citado algoritmo,evitando almacenar varias veces los mensajes que son iguales. Se ha elegido implementar PageRank en VHDL porque actualmente las arquitecturas de los sistemas operativos no escalan adecuadamente. Se busca evaluar si con otra arquitectura se obtienen mejores resultados. Se realizará un diseño partiendo de cero, utilizando la memoria ROM de IPcore de Xillinx (Software de desarrollo en VHDL), generada autom�áticamente. Se considera hacer cuatro tipos de módulos para que as�� el procesamiento se pueda hacer en paralelo. Se simplificar�á la estructura de XPregel con el fin de intentar aprovechar la particularidad de PageRank mencionada, que hace que XPregel no le saque el m�aximo partido. Despu�és se escribirá el c�ódigo, realizando una estructura escalable, ya que en la computación intervienen millones de páginas web. A continuación, se sintetizar�á y se probará el código en una FPGA. El �ultimo paso será una evaluaci�ón de la implementaci�ón, y de posibles mejoras en cuanto al consumo.

Integration of embedded data processing algorithms inside PAMELA devices

PAMELA (Phased Array Monitoring for Enhanced Life Assessment) SHMTM System is an integrated embedded ultrasonic guided waves based system consisting of several electronic devices and one system manager controller. The data collected by all PAMELA devices in the system must be transmitted to the controller, who will be responsible for carrying out the advanced signal processing to obtain SHM maps. PAMELA devices consist of hardware based on a Virtex 5 FPGA with a PowerPC 440 running an embedded Linux distribution. Therefore, PAMELA devices, in addition to the capability of performing tests and transmitting the collected data to the controller, have the capability of perform local data processing or pre-processing (reduction, normalization, pattern recognition, feature extraction, etc.). Local data processing decreases the data traffic over the network and allows CPU load of the external computer to be reduced. Even it is possible that PAMELA devices are running autonomously performing scheduled tests, and only communicates with the controller in case of detection of structural damages or when programmed. Each PAMELA device integrates a software management application (SMA) that allows to the developer downloading his own algorithm code and adding the new data processing algorithm to the device. The development of the SMA is done in a virtual machine with an Ubuntu Linux distribution including all necessary software tools to perform the entire cycle of development. Eclipse IDE (Integrated Development Environment) is used to develop the SMA project and to write the code of each data processing algorithm. This paper presents the developed software architecture and describes the necessary steps to add new data processing algorithms to SMA in order to increase the processing capabilities of PAMELA devices.An example of basic damage index estimation using delay and sum algorithm is provided.

Building intuition of iron evolution during solar cell processing through analysis of different process models

An important aspect of Process Simulators for photovoltaics is prediction of defect evolution during device fabrication. Over the last twenty years, these tools have accelerated process optimization, and several Process Simulators for iron, a ubiquitous and deleterious impurity in silicon, have been developed. The diversity of these tools can make it difficult to build intuition about the physics governing iron behavior during processing. Thus, in one unified software environment and using self-consistent terminology, we combine and describe three of these Simulators. We vary structural defect distribution and iron precipitation equations to create eight distinct Models, which we then use to simulate different stages of processing. We find that the structural defect distribution influences the final interstitial iron concentration ([Fe-i]) more strongly than the iron precipitation equations. We identify two regimes of iron behavior: (1) diffusivity-limited, in which iron evolution is kinetically limited and bulk [Fe-i] predictions can vary by an order of magnitude or more, and (2) solubility-limited, in which iron evolution is near thermodynamic equilibrium and the Models yield similar results. This rigorous analysis provides new intuition that can inform Process Simulation, material, and process development, and it enables scientists and engineers to choose an appropriate level of Model complexity based on wafer type and quality, processing conditions, and available computation time.