Precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained 10-unit computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured frameworks made from zirconium dioxide and titanium: an in vitro study

OBJECTIVE To analyze the precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) zirconium dioxide (ZrO) frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS Computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured ZrO frameworks (NobelProcera) for a screw-retained 10-unit implant-supported reconstruction on six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) were fabricated using a laser (ZrO-L, N = 6) and a mechanical scanner (ZrO-M, N = 5) for digitizing the implant platform and the cuspid-supporting framework resin pattern. Laser-scanned CAD/CAM titanium (TIT-L, N = 6) and cast CoCrW-alloy frameworks (Cast, N = 5) fabricated on the same model and designed similar to the ZrO frameworks were the control. The one-screw test (implant 25 screw-retained) was applied to assess the vertical microgap between implant and framework platform with a scanning electron microscope. The mean microgap was calculated from approximal and buccal values. Statistical comparison was performed with non-parametric tests. RESULTS No statistically significant pairwise difference was observed between the relative effects of vertical microgap between ZrO-L (median 14 μm; 95% CI 10-26 μm), ZrO-M (18 μm; 12-27 μm) and TIT-L (15 μm; 6-18 μm), whereas the values of Cast (236 μm; 181-301 μm) were significantly higher (P < 0.001) than the three CAD/CAM groups. A monotonous trend of increasing values from implant 23 to 15 was observed in all groups (ZrO-L, ZrO-M and Cast P < 0.001, TIT-L P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS Optical and tactile scanners with CAD/CAM technology allow for the fabrication of highly accurate long-span screw-retained ZrO implant-reconstructions. Titanium frameworks showed the most consistent precision. Fit of the cast alloy frameworks was clinically inacceptable.

The Moldable Inspector: a framework for domain-specific object inspection

Answering run-time questions in object-oriented systems involves reasoning about and exploring connections between multiple objects. Developer questions exercise various aspects of an object and require multiple kinds of interactions depending on the relationships between objects, the application domain and the differing developer needs. Nevertheless, traditional object inspectors, the essential tools often used to reason about objects, favor a generic view that focuses on the low-level details of the state of individual objects. This leads to an inefficient effort, increasing the time spent in the inspector. To improve the inspection process, we propose the Moldable Inspector, a novel approach for an extensible object inspector. The Moldable Inspector allows developers to look at objects using multiple interchangeable presentations and supports a workflow in which multiple levels of connecting objects can be seen together. Both these aspects can be tailored to the domain of the objects and the question at hand. We further exemplify how the proposed solution improves the inspection process, introduce a prototype implementation and discuss new directions for extending the Moldable Inspector.

The Moldable Debugger: A Framework for Developing Domain-Specific Debuggers

Debuggers are crucial tools for developing object-oriented software systems as they give developers direct access to the running systems. Nevertheless, traditional debuggers rely on generic mechanisms to explore and exhibit the execution stack and system state, while developers reason about and formulate domain-specific questions using concepts and abstractions from their application domains. This creates an abstraction gap between the debugging needs and the debugging support leading to an inefficient and error-prone debugging effort. To reduce this gap, we propose a framework for developing domain-specific debuggers called the Moldable Debugger. The Moldable Debugger is adapted to a domain by creating and combining domain-specific debugging operations with domain-specific debugging views, and adapts itself to a domain by selecting, at run time, appropriate debugging operations and views. We motivate the need for domain-specific debugging, identify a set of key requirements and show how our approach improves debugging by adapting the debugger to several domains.

Fully Automatic CT Segmentation for Computer-Assisted Pre-operative Planning of Hip Arthroscopy

Extraction of both pelvic and femoral surface models of a hip joint from CT data for computer-assisted pre-operative planning of hip arthroscopy is addressed. We present a method for a fully automatic image segmentation of a hip joint. Our method works by combining fast random forest (RF) regression based landmark detection, atlas-based segmentation, with articulated statistical shape model (aSSM) based hip joint reconstruction. The two fundamental contributions of our method are: (1) An improved fast Gaussian transform (IFGT) is used within the RF regression framework for a fast and accurate landmark detection, which then allows for a fully automatic initialization of the atlas-based segmentation; and (2) aSSM based fitting is used to preserve hip joint structure and to avoid penetration between the pelvic and femoral models. Validation on 30 hip CT images show that our method achieves high performance in segmenting pelvis, left proximal femur, and right proximal femur surfaces with an average accuracy of 0.59 mm, 0.62 mm, and 0.58 mm, respectively.

A complete-pelvis segmentation framework for image-free total hip arthroplasty (THA): methodology and clinical study

Background Complete-pelvis segmentation in antero-posterior pelvic radiographs is required to create a patient-specific three-dimensional pelvis model for surgical planning and postoperative assessment in image-free navigation of total hip arthroplasty. Methods A fast and robust framework for accurately segmenting the complete pelvis is presented, consisting of two consecutive modules. In the first module, a three-stage method was developed to delineate the left hemipelvis based on statistical appearance and shape models. To handle complex pelvic structures, anatomy-specific information processing techniques were employed. As the input to the second module, the delineated left hemi-pelvis was then reflected about an estimated symmetry line of the radiograph to initialize the right hemi-pelvis segmentation. The right hemi-pelvis was segmented by the same three-stage method, Results Two experiments conducted on respectively 143 and 40 AP radiographs demonstrated a mean segmentation accuracy of 1.61±0.68 mm. A clinical study to investigate the postoperative assessment of acetabular cup orientations based on the proposed framework revealed an average accuracy of 1.2°±0.9° and 1.6°±1.4° for anteversion and inclination, respectively. Delineation of each radiograph costs less than one minute. Conclusions Despite further validation needed, the preliminary results implied the underlying clinical applicability of the proposed framework for image-free THA.

A Tutorial of the Mobile Multimedia Wireless Sensor Network (M3WSN) OMNeT++ Framework

In this work, we will give a detailed tutorial instruction about how to use the Mobile Multi-Media Wireless Sensor Networks (M3WSN) simulation framework. The M3WSN framework has been published as a scientific paper in the 6th International Workshop on OMNeT++ (2013) [1]. M3WSN framework enables the multimedia transmission of real video se- quence. Therefore, a set of multimedia algorithms, protocols, and services can be evaluated by using QoE metrics. Moreover, key video-related information, such as frame types, GoP length and intra-frame dependency can be used for creating new assessment and optimization solutions. To support mobility, M3WSN utilizes different mobility traces to enable the understanding of how the network behaves under mobile situations. This tutorial will cover how to install and configure the M3WSN framework, setting and running the experiments, creating mobility and video traces, and how to evaluate the performance of different protocols. The tutorial will be given in an environment of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and OMNeT++ 4.2.

Measuring the promise of open data: Development of the Impact Monitoring Framework

It is a challenge to measure the impact of releasing data to the public since the effects may not be directly linked to particular open data activities or substantial impact may only occur several years after publishing the data. This paper proposes a framework to assess the impact of releasing open data by applying the Social Return on Investment (SROI) approach. SROI was developed for organizations intended to generate social and environmental benefits thus fitting the purpose of most open data initiatives. We link the four steps of SROI (input, output, outcome, impact) with the 14 high-value data categories of the G8 Open Data Charter to create a matrix of open data examples, activities, and impacts in each of the data categories. This Impact Monitoring Framework helps data providers to navigate the impact space of open data laying out the conceptual basis for further research.

A return-on-investment framework to identify conservation priorities in Africa

Environmental conservation activities must continue to become more efficient and effective, especially in Africa where development and population growth pressures continue to escalate. Recently, prioritization of conservation resources has focused on explicitly incorporating the economic costs of conservation along with better defining the outcomes of these expenditures. We demonstrate how new global and continental data that spans social, economic, and ecological sectors creates an opportunity to incorporate return-on-investment (ROI) principles into conservation priority setting for Africa. We suggest that combining conservation priorities that factor in biodiversity value, habitat quality, and conservation management investments across terrestrial, freshwater, and coastal marine environments provides a new lens for setting global conservation priorities. Using this approach we identified seven regions capturing interior and coastal resources that also have high ROI values that support further investment. We illustrate how spatially explicit, yet flexible ROI analysis can help to better address uncertainty, risk, and opportunities for conservation, while making values that guide prioritization more transparent. In one case the results of this prioritization process were used to support new conservation investments. Acknowledging a clear research need to improve cost information, we propose that adopting a flexible ROI framework to set conservation priorities in Africa has multiple potential benefits.

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 mathematical framework for finite strain elastoplastic consolidation. Part 1: Balance laws, variational formulation, and linearization

A mathematical formulation for finite strain elasto plastic consolidation of fully saturated soil media is presented. Strong and weak forms of the boundary-value problem are derived using both the material and spatial descriptions. The algorithmic treatment of finite strain elastoplasticity for the solid phase is based on multiplicative decomposition and is coupled with the algorithm for fluid flow via the Kirchhoff pore water pressure. Balance laws are written for the soil-water mixture following the motion of the soil matrix alone. It is shown that the motion of the fluid phase only affects the Jacobian of the solid phase motion, and therefore can be characterized completely by the motion of the soil matrix. Furthermore, it is shown from energy balance consideration that the effective, or intergranular, stress is the appropriate measure of stress for describing the constitutive response of the soil skeleton since it absorbs all the strain energy generated in the saturated soil-water mixture. Finally, it is shown that the mathematical model is amenable to consistent linearization, and that explicit expressions for the consistent tangent operators can be derived for use in numerical solutions such as those based on the finite element method.

Co-evolutionary and Reinforcement Learning Techniques Applied to Computer Go players

The objective of this thesis is model some processes from the nature as evolution and co-evolution, and proposing some techniques that can ensure that these learning process really happens and useful to solve some complex problems as Go game. The Go game is ancient and very complex game with simple rules which still is a challenge for the Artificial Intelligence. This dissertation cover some approaches that were applied to solve this problem, proposing solve this problem using competitive and cooperative co-evolutionary learning methods and other techniques proposed by the author. To study, implement and prove these methods were used some neural networks structures, a framework free available and coded many programs. The techniques proposed were coded by the author, performed many experiments to find the best configuration to ensure that co-evolution is progressing and discussed the results. Using co-evolutionary learning processes can be observed some pathologies which could impact co-evolution progress. In this dissertation is introduced some techniques to solve pathologies as loss of gradients, cycling dynamics and forgetting. According to some authors, one solution to solve these co-evolution pathologies is introduce more diversity in populations that are evolving. In this thesis is proposed some techniques to introduce more diversity and some diversity measurements for neural networks structures to monitor diversity during co-evolution. The genotype diversity evolved were analyzed in terms of its impact to global fitness of the strategies evolved and their generalization. Additionally, it was introduced a memory mechanism in the network neural structures to reinforce some strategies in the genes of the neurons evolved with the intention that some good strategies learned are not forgotten. In this dissertation is presented some works from other authors in which cooperative and competitive co-evolution has been applied. The Go board size used in this thesis was 9x9, but can be easily escalated to more bigger boards.The author believe that programs coded and techniques introduced in this dissertation can be used for other domains.

GreenDisc: a HW/SW energy optimization framework in globally distributed computation

In recent future, wireless sensor networks (WSNs) will experience a broad high-scale deployment (millions of nodes in the national area) with multiple information sources per node, and with very specific requirements for signal processing. In parallel, the broad range deployment of WSNs facilitates the definition and execution of ambitious studies, with a large input data set and high computational complexity. These computation resources, very often heterogeneous and driven on-demand, can only be satisfied by high-performance Data Centers (DCs). The high economical and environmental impact of the energy consumption in DCs requires aggressive energy optimization policies. These policies have been already detected but not successfully proposed. In this context, this paper shows the following on-going research lines and obtained results. In the field of WSNs: energy optimization in the processing nodes from different abstraction levels, including reconfigurable application specific architectures, efficient customization of the memory hierarchy, energy-aware management of the wireless interface, and design automation for signal processing applications. In the field of DCs: energy-optimal workload assignment policies in heterogeneous DCs, resource management policies with energy consciousness, and efficient cooling mechanisms that will cooperate in the minimization of the electricity bill of the DCs that process the data provided by the WSNs.

An autonomic framework for enhancing the quality of data grid services

Data grid services have been used to deal with the increasing needs of applications in terms of data volume and throughput. The large scale, heterogeneity and dynamism of grid environments often make management and tuning of these data services very complex. Furthermore, current high-performance I/O approaches are characterized by their high complexity and specific features that usually require specialized administrator skills. Autonomic computing can help manage this complexity. The present paper describes an autonomic subsystem intended to provide self-management features aimed at efficiently reducing the I/O problem in a grid environment, thereby enhancing the quality of service (QoS) of data access and storage services in the grid. Our proposal takes into account that data produced in an I/O system is not usually immediately required. Therefore, performance improvements are related not only to current but also to any future I/O access, as the actual data access usually occurs later on. Nevertheless, the exact time of the next I/O operations is unknown. Thus, our approach proposes a long-term prediction designed to forecast the future workload of grid components. This enables the autonomic subsystem to determine the optimal data placement to improve both current and future I/O operations.