Validation of a Spatially Continuous EDEN Water-Surface Model for the Everglades, Florida

The Everglades Depth Estimation Network (EDEN) is an integrated network of realtime water-level monitoring, ground-elevation modeling, and water-surface modeling that provides scientists and managers with current (2000-present), online water-stage and water-depth information for the entire freshwater portion of the Greater Everglades. Continuous daily spatial interpolations of the EDEN network stage data are presented on grid with 400-square-meter spacing. EDEN offers a consistent and documented dataset that can be used by scientists and managers to: (1) guide large-scale field operations, (2) integrate hydrologic and ecological responses, and (3) support biological and ecological assessments that measure ecosystem responses to the implementation of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1999). The target users are biologists and ecologists examining trophic level responses to hydrodynamic changes in the Everglades. The first objective of this report is to validate the spatially continuous EDEN water-surface model for the Everglades, Florida developed by Pearlstine et al. (2007) by using an independent field-measured data-set. The second objective is to demonstrate two applications of the EDEN water-surface model: to estimate site-specific ground elevation by using the validated EDEN water-surface model and observed water depth data; and to create water-depth hydrographs for tree islands. We found that there are no statistically significant differences between model-predicted and field-observed water-stage data in both southern Water Conservation Area (WCA) 3A and WCA 3B. Tree island elevations were derived by subtracting field water-depth measurements from the predicted EDEN water-surface. Water-depth hydrographs were then computed by subtracting tree island elevations from the EDEN water stage. Overall, the model is reliable by a root mean square error (RMSE) of 3.31 cm. By region, the RMSE is 2.49 cm and 7.77 cm in WCA 3A and 3B, respectively. This new landscape-scale hydrological model has wide applications for ongoing research and management efforts that are vital to restoration of the Florida Everglades. The accurate, high-resolution hydrological data, generated over broad spatial and temporal scales by the EDEN model, provides a previously missing key to understanding the habitat requirements and linkages among native and invasive populations, including fish, wildlife, wading birds, and plants. The EDEN model is a powerful tool that could be adapted for other ecosystem-scale restoration and management programs worldwide.

The Making of Optimal and Consistent Policy: An Implementation Theory Framework for Monetary Policy

This paper shows that optimal policy and consistent policy outcomes require the use of control-theory and game-theory solution techniques. While optimal policy and consistent policy often produce different outcomes even in a one-period model, we analyze consistent policy and its outcome in a simple model, finding that the cause of the inconsistency with optimal policy traces to inconsistent targets in the social loss function. As a result, the social loss function cannot serve as a direct loss function for the central bank. Accordingly, we employ implementation theory to design a central bank loss function (mechanism design) with consistent targets, while the social loss function serves as a social welfare criterion. That is, with the correct mechanism design for the central bank loss function, optimal policy and consistent policy become identical. In other words, optimal policy proves implementable (consistent).

A model for use by local public health departments to evaluate pandemic influenza plans

The events of the 1990's and early 2000's demonstrated the need for effective planning and response to natural and man-made disasters. One of those potential natural disasters is pandemic flu. Once defined, the CDC stated that program, or plan, effectiveness is improved through the process of program evaluation. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999) Program evaluation should be accomplished not only periodically, but in the course of routine administration of the program. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999) Accomplishing this task for a "rare, but significant event" is challenging. (Herbold, John R., PhD., 2008) To address this challenge, the RAND Corporation (under contract to the CDC) developed the "Facilitated Look-Backs" approach that was tested and validated at the state level. (Aledort et al., 2006).^ Nevertheless, no comprehensive and generally applicable pandemic influenza program evaluation tool or model is readily found for use at the local public health department level. This project developed such a model based on the "Facilitated Look-Backs" approach developed by RAND Corporation. (Aledort et al., 2006) Modifications to the RAND model included stakeholder additions, inclusion of all six CDC program evaluation steps, and suggestions for incorporating pandemic flu response plans in seasonal flu management implementation. Feedback on the model was then obtained from three LPHD's—one rural, one suburban, and one urban. These recommendations were incorporated into the final model. Feedback from the sites also supported the assumption that this model promotes the effective and efficient evaluation of both pandemic flu and seasonal flu response by reducing redundant evaluations of pandemic flu plans, seasonal flu plans, and funding requirement accountability. Site feedback also demonstrated that the model is comprehensive and flexible, so it can be adapted and applied to different LPHD needs and settings. It also stimulates evaluation of the major issues associated with pandemic flu planning. ^ The next phase in evaluating this model should be to apply it in a program evaluation of one or more LPHD's seasonal flu response that incorporates pandemic flu response plans.^

STRATEGIES FOR THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY TO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE IMPLEMENTATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS IN TUNISIA

This dissertation focuses on Project HOPE, an American medical aid agency, and its work in Tunisia. More specifically this is a study of the implementation strategies of those HOPE sponsored projects and programs designed to solve the problems of high morbidity and infant mortality rates due to environmentally related diarrheal and enteric diseases. Several environmental health programs and projects developed in cooperation with Tunisian counterparts are described and analyzed. These include (1) a paramedical manpower training program; (2) a national hospital sanitation and infection control program; (3) a community sewage disposal project; (4) a well reconstruction project; and (5) a solid-waste disposal project for a hospital.^ After independence, Tunisia, like many developing countries, encountered several difficulties which hindered progress toward solving basic environmental health problems and prompted a request for aid. This study discusses the need for all who work in development programs to recognize and assess those difficulties or constraints which affect the program planning process, including those latent cultural and political constraints which not only exist within the host country but within the aid agency as well. For example, failure to recognize cultural differences may adversely affect the attitudes of the host staff towards their work and towards the aid agency and its task. These factors, therefore, play a significant role in influencing program development decisions and must be taken into account in order to maximize the probability of successful outcomes.^ In 1969 Project HOPE was asked by the Tunisian government to assist the Ministry of Health in solving its health manpower problems. HOPE responded with several programs, one of which concerned the training of public health nurses, sanitary technicians, and aids at Tunisia's school of public health in Nabeul. The outcome of that program as well as the strategies used in its development are analyzed. Also, certain questions are addressed such as, what should the indicators of success be, and when is the time right to phase out?^ Another HOPE program analyzed involved hospital sanitation and infection control. Certain generic aspects of basic hospital sanitation procedures were documented and presented in the form of a process model which was later used as a "microplan" in setting up similar programs in other Tunisian hospitals. In this study the details of the "microplan" are discussed. The development of a nation-wide program without any further need of external assistance illustrated the success of HOPE's implementation strategies.^ Finally, although it is known that the high incidence of enteric disease in developing countries is due to poor environmental sanitation and poor hygiene practices, efforts by aid agencies to correct these conditions have often resulted in failure. Project HOPE's strategy was to maximize limited resources by using a systems approach to program development and by becoming actively involved in the design and implementation of environmental health projects utilizing "appropriate" technology. Three innovative projects and their implementation strategies (including technical specifications) are described.^ It is advocated that if aid agencies are to make any progress in helping developing countries basic sanitation problems, they must take an interdisciplinary approach to progrm development and play an active role in helping counterparts seek and identify appropriate technologies which are socially and economically acceptable. ^

Improving care of women at risk of unsafe abortion: implementing a risk-reduction model at the Uruguayan-Brazilian border

OBJECTIVE: To describe the initial stages of the implementation of a risk-reduction model designed by Iniciativas Sanitarias to shield women from unsafe abortion in a traditional community on the Uruguay-Brazil border. METHODS: This mixed-design study was conducted first between 22 and 26 March 2010, and then between 2 and 7 May 2011, in Rivera, Uruguay, to gather information from women seen at health centers, healthcare providers, and local policy makers before the project started and midway through the project. RESULTS: At baseline most women and providers considered abortion justifiable only on narrow grounds, yet favored the implementation of a risk-reduction model that would include preabortion as well as postabortion counseling, the former providing information on different abortion methods and their risks. By the midterm assessment, the counseling service had assisted 87 women with unwanted pregnancies. Of the 52 who came for a postabortion visit, 50 had self-administered misoprostol, with no complications. Women were highly satisfied with the counseling. At baseline, misoprostol seemed to be available from both pharmacists and informal sellers. At midterm, it was still available from informal vendors but pharmacists said they did not provide misoprostol. The risk-reduction initiative heightened public attention to the abortion issue but the controversy it generated did not seriously impede its implementation. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to implement the proposed risk-reduction model in a traditional community such as Rivera, not only in Uruguay but in any country irrespective of its abortion laws.

Medem Channel profiles based on stand-alone model simulation and corrections with nudging

State-of-the-art process-based models have shown to be applicable to the simulation and prediction of coastal morphodynamics. On annual to decadal temporal scales, these models may show limitations in reproducing complex natural morphological evolution patterns, such as the movement of bars and tidal channels, e.g. the observed decadal migration of the Medem Channel in the Elbe Estuary, German Bight. Here a morphodynamic model is shown to simulate the hydrodynamics and sediment budgets of the domain to some extent, but fails to adequately reproduce the pronounced channel migration, due to the insufficient implementation of bank erosion processes. In order to allow for long-term simulations of the domain, a nudging method has been introduced to update the model-predicted bathymetries with observations. The model-predicted bathymetry is nudged towards true states in annual time steps. Sensitivity analysis of a user-defined correlation length scale, for the definition of the background error covariance matrix during the nudging procedure, suggests that the optimal error correlation length is similar to the grid cell size, here 80-90 m. Additionally, spatially heterogeneous correlation lengths produce more realistic channel depths than do spatially homogeneous correlation lengths. Consecutive application of the nudging method compensates for the (stand-alone) model prediction errors and corrects the channel migration pattern, with a Brier skill score of 0.78. The proposed nudging method in this study serves as an analytical approach to update model predictions towards a predefined 'true' state for the spatiotemporal interpolation of incomplete morphological data in long-term simulations.

Is FTA/EPA effective for a developing country to attract FDI? : simulation analysis based on an extended knowledge-capital model

To prepare an answer to the question of how a developing country can attract FDI, this paper explored the factors and policies that may help bring FDI into a developing country by utilizing an extended version of the knowledge-capital model. With a special focus on the effects of FTAs/EPAs between market countries and developing countries, simulations with the model revealed the following: (1) Although FTA/EPA generally ends to increase FDI to a developing country, the possibility of improving welfare through increased demand for skilled and unskilled labor becomes higher as the size of the country declines; (2) Because the additional implementation of cost-saving policies to reduce firm-type/trade-link specific fixed costs ends to depreciate the price of skilled labor by saving its input, a developing country, which is extremely scarce in skilled labor, is better off avoiding the additional option; (3) If a country hopes to enjoy larger welfare gains with EPA, efforts to increase skilled labor in the country, such as investing in education, may be beneficial.

A Semantic Scraping Model for Web Resources - Applying Linked Data to Web Page Screen Scraping

In spite of the increasing presence of Semantic Web Facilities, only a limited amount of the available resources in the Internet provide a semantic access. Recent initiatives such as the emerging Linked Data Web are providing semantic access to available data by porting existing resources to the semantic web using different technologies, such as database-semantic mapping and scraping. Nevertheless, existing scraping solutions are based on ad-hoc solutions complemented with graphical interfaces for speeding up the scraper development. This article proposes a generic framework for web scraping based on semantic technologies. This framework is structured in three levels: scraping services, semantic scraping model and syntactic scraping. The first level provides an interface to generic applications or intelligent agents for gathering information from the web at a high level. The second level defines a semantic RDF model of the scraping process, in order to provide a declarative approach to the scraping task. Finally, the third level provides an implementation of the RDF scraping model for specific technologies. The work has been validated in a scenario that illustrates its application to mashup technologies

Inner-Hair Cells Parameterized-Hardware Implementation for Personalized Auditory Nerve Stimulation

In this paper the hardware implementation of an inner hair cell model is presented. Main features of the design are the use of Meddis’ transduction structure and the methodology for Design with Reusability. Which allows future migration to new hardware and design refinements for speech processing and custom-made hearing aids

Artificial cognitive control system based on the shared circuits model of sociocognitive capacities. A first approach

sharedcircuitmodels is presented in this work. The sharedcircuitsmodelapproach of sociocognitivecapacities recently proposed by Hurley in The sharedcircuitsmodel (SCM): how control, mirroring, and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31(1) (2008) 1–22 is enriched and improved in this work. A five-layer computational architecture for designing artificialcognitivecontrolsystems is proposed on the basis of a modified sharedcircuitsmodel for emulating sociocognitive experiences such as imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. In order to show the enormous potential of this approach, a simplified implementation is applied to a case study. An artificialcognitivecontrolsystem is applied for controlling force in a manufacturing process that demonstrates the suitability of the suggested approach

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).

A generic persistence model for CLP systems (and two useful implementations)

This paper describes a model of persistence in (C)LP languages and two different and practically very useful ways to implement this model in current systems. The fundamental idea is that persistence is a characteristic of certain dynamic predicates (Le., those which encapsulate state). The main effect of declaring a predicate persistent is that the dynamic changes made to such predicates persist from one execution to the next one. After proposing a syntax for declaring persistent predicates, a simple, file-based implementation of the concept is presented and some examples shown. An additional implementation is presented which stores persistent predicates in an external datábase. The abstraction of the concept of persistence from its implementation allows developing applications which can store their persistent predicates alternatively in files or databases with only a few simple changes to a declaration stating the location and modality used for persistent storage. The paper presents the model, the implementation approach in both the cases of using files and relational databases, a number of optimizations of the process (using information obtained from static global analysis and goal clustering), and performance results from an implementation of these ideas.

A generic persistence model for CLP systems

This paper describes a model of persistence in (C)LP languages and two different and practically very useful ways to implement this model in current systems. The fundamental idea is that persistence is a characteristic of certain dynamic predicates (i.e., those which encapsulate state). The main effect of declaring a predicate persistent is that the dynamic changes made to such predicates persist from one execution to the next one. After proposing a syntax for declaring persistent predicates, a simple, file-based implementation of the concept is presented and some examples shown. An additional implementation is presented which stores persistent predicates in an external database. The abstraction of the concept of persistence from its implementation allows developing applications which can store their persistent predicates alternatively in files or databases with only a few simple changes to a declaration stating the location and modality used for persistent storage. The paper presents the model, the implementation approach in both the cases of using files and relational databases, a number of optimizations of the process (using information obtained from static global analysis and goal clustering), and performance results from an implementation of these ideas.

A model for inter-module analysis and optimizing compilation

Recent research into the implementation of logic programming languages has demonstrated that global program analysis can be used to speed up execution by an order of magnitude. However, currently such global program analysis requires the program to be analysed as a whole: sepárate compilation of modules is not supported. We describe and empirically evalúate a simple model for extending global program analysis to support sepárate compilation of modules. Importantly, our model supports context-sensitive program analysis and multi-variant specialization of procedures in the modules.

Automatic exploitation of non-determinate independent and-parallelism in the basic andorra model

Andorra-I is the first implementation of a language based on the Andorra Principie, which states that determinate goals can (and shonld) be run before other goals, and even in a parallel fashion. This principie has materialized in a framework called the Basic Andorra model, which allows or-parallelism as well as (dependent) and-parallelism for determinate goals. In this report we show that it is possible to further extend this model in order to allow general independent and-parallelism for nondeterminate goals, withont greatly modifying the underlying implementation machinery. A simple an easy way to realize such an extensión is to make each (nondeterminate) independent goal determinate, by using a special "bagof" constract. We also show that this can be achieved antomatically by compile-time translation from original Prolog programs. A transformation that fulfüls this objective and which can be easily antomated is presented in this report.