Information Management and Mediation in a Digital Reference Service Focused in Social Sciences

This paper investigates the current relationship between information management and information mediation along with the digital reference service through a case study which took place in an academic library. The concept of information mediation is herein analyzed, since a conceptual examination provides elements that will help people to comprehend and evaluate the concerned service. The information professional plays a very important role in the mediation aforementioned, which may be directly or indirectly; consciously or unconsciously; by himself/herself or plurally; individually or inserted into a group ? in all such manners that mediator facilitates the acquisition of information, fully or partially satisfying a user?s need of all sorts of knowledge. Meanwhile, we here approach information management from a scope that points out a description over performed activities concerned to policies and procedures put into effect until the service evaluation by proposing a criterion for such point. Finally, we outline a few actions to be implemented in long-term perspective, which goal is to continually ameliorate such assistance, taking in account the human factor

Los usos de la red social Facebook por parte de bibliotecas universitarias argentinas : Reflexiones en torno a las dinámicas comunicativas en la Web 2.0

El presente artículo analiza la adopción y los principales usos de la plataforma Facebook por parte de las bibliotecas de tres universidades en Argentina. Luego de una revisión bibliográfica sobre la temática, se exponen los procedimientos metodológicos empleados para identificar, en primer lugar, las instituciones que cuentan con esta herramienta de comunicación en la actualidad y, en segundo término, los usos que se hace de ella a partir de una serie de variables, entre las que caben consignar: el momento de inicio, los vínculos con otros medios de comunicación administrados por la institución (webs y redes sociales), el número de seguidores, el empleo de las imágenes, la frecuencia y el tipo de posteos y, por último, la cantidad y la calidad de los comentarios. En los resultados se trabaja la información recabada procurando un análisis cuantitativo y otro cualitativo en la construcción de un panorama global. En las conclusiones se destaca la paulatina adopción de la plataforma por parte de las bibliotecas universitarias, aunque con usos limitados respecto de su potencial. Se sugieren otras posibilidades

A user-centric approach to service creation and delivery over next generation networks

Next Generation Networks (NGN) provide Telecommunications operators with the possibility to share their resources and infrastructure, facilitate the interoperability with other networks, and simplify and unify the management, operation and maintenance of service offerings, thus enabling the fast and cost-effective creation of new personal, broadband ubiquitous services. Unfortunately, service creation over NGN is far from the success of service creation in the Web, especially when it comes to Web 2.0. This paper presents a novel approach to service creation and delivery, with a platform that opens to non-technically skilled users the possibility to create, manage and share their own convergent (NGN-based and Web-based) services. To this end, the business approach to user-generated services is analyzed and the technological bases supporting the proposal are explained.

Domain-Specific Multi-Modeling of Security Concerns in Service-Oriented Architectures

As a common reference for many in-development standards and execution frameworks, special attention is being paid to Service-Oriented Architectures. SOAs modeling, however, is an area in which a consensus has not being achieved. Currently, standardization organizations are defining proposals to offer a solution to this problem. Nevertheless, until very recently, non-functional aspects of services have not been considered for standardization processes. In particular, there exists a lack of a design solution that permits an independent development of the functional and non-functional concerns of SOAs, allowing that each concern be addressed in a convenient manner in early stages of the development, in a way that could guarantee the quality of this type of systems. This paper, leveraging on previous work, presents an approach to integrate security-related non-functional aspects (such as confidentiality, integrity, and access control) in the development of services.

Multi Domain-Specific Modeling of the Security Concerns of Service-Oriented Architectures

Service-Oriented Architectures (SOA), and Web Services (WS), the technology generally used to implement them, achieve the integration of heterogeneous technologies, providing interoperability, and yielding the reutilization of pre-existent systems. Model-driven development methodologies provide inherent benefits such as increased productivity, greater reuse, and better maintainability, to name a few. Efforts on achieving model-driven development of SOAs already exist, but there is currently no standard solution that addresses non-functional aspects of these services as well. This paper presents an approach to integrate these non-functional aspects in the development of web services, with an emphasis on security.

End-User Development Success Factors and their Application to Composite Web Development Environments

The Future Internet is expected to be composed of a mesh of interoperable Web services accessed from all over the Web. This approach has not yet caught on since global user-service interaction is still an open issue. Successful composite applications rely on heavyweight service orchestration technologies that raise the bar far above end-user skills. The weakness lies in the abstraction of the underlying service front-end architecture rather than the infrastructure technologies themselves. In our opinion, the best approach is to offer end-to-end composition from user interface to service invocation, as well as an understandable abstraction of both building blocks and a visual composition technique. In this paper we formalize our vision with regard to the next-generation front-end Web technology that will enable integrated access to services, contents and things in the Future Internet. We present a novel reference architecture designed to empower non-technical end users to create and share their own self-service composite applications. A tool implementing this architecture has been developed as part of the European FP7 FAST Project and EzWeb Project, allowing us to validate the rationale behind our 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).

Análisis bibliométrico de las publicaciones científicas españolas en la categoría Construction & Building Technology de la base de datos Web of Science (1997-2008)

En este trabajo se analizan las publicaciones procedentes de instituciones españolas recogidas en las revistas de la categoría Construction & Building Technology de la base de datos Web of Science para el periodo 1997-2008. El número de revistas incluidas es de 35 y el número de artículos publicados ha sido de 760 (Article o Review). Se ha realizado una evaluación bibliométrica con dos nuevos parámetros: Factor de Impacto Ponderado y Factor de Impacto Relativo; asimismo se incluyen el número de citas y el número de documentos a nivel institucional. Entre los centros con una mayor producción científica destaca, como era de prever, el Instituto de Ciencias de la Construcción Eduardo Torroja (CSIC), mientras que atendiendo al Factor de Impacto Ponderado ocupa el primer lugar la Universidad de Vigo. Por otro lado, sólo dos revistas Cement and Concrete Research y Materiales de Construcción aglutinan el 45.26% de toda la producción científica española, con 172 trabajos cada una de ellas. En cuanto a la colaboración internacional, destacan países como Inglaterra, México, Estados Unidos, Italia, Argentina y Francia

A Description Framework and Event-Driven Architecture for the Semantic Web and Semantic Grid

In this introductory chapter we put in context and give a brief outline of the work that we thoroughly present in the rest of the dissertation. We consider this work divided in two main parts. The first part is the Firenze Framework, a knowledge level description framework rich enough to express the semantics required for describing both semantic Web services and semantic Grid services. We start by defining what the Semantic Grid is and its relation with the Semantic Web; and the possibility of their convergence since both initiatives have become mainly service-oriented. We also introduce the main motivators of the creation of this framework, one is to provide a valid description framework that works at knowledge level; the other to provide a description framework that takes into account the characteristics of Grid services in order to be able to describe them properly. The other part of the dissertation is devoted to Vega, an event-driven architecture that, by means of proposed knowledge level description framework, is able to achieve high scale provisioning of knowledge-intensive services. In this introductory chapter we portrait the anatomy of a generic event-driven architecture, and we briefly enumerate their main characteristics, which are the reason that make them our choice.

A Metadirectory of Web Components for Mashup Composition

Because of the growing availability of third-party APIs, services, widgets and any other reusable web component, mashup developers now face a vast amount of candidate components for their developments. Moreover, these components quite often are scattered in many different repositories and web sites, which makes difficult their selection or discovery. In this paper, we discuss the problem of component selection in Service-Oriented Architectures (SOA) and Mashup-Driven Development, and introduce the Linked Mashups Ontology (LiMOn), a model that allows describing mashups and their components for integrating and sharing mashup information such as categorization or dependencies. The model has allowed the building of an integrated, centralized metadirectory of web components for query and selection, which has served to evaluate the model. The metadirectory allows accessing various heterogeneous repositories of mashups and web components while using external information from the Linked Data cloud, helping mashup development.

Developing front-end Web 2.0 technologies to access services, content and things in the future Internet

The future Internet is expected to be composed of a mesh of interoperable web services accessible from all over the web. This approach has not yet caught on since global user?service interaction is still an open issue. This paper states one vision with regard to next-generation front-end Web 2.0 technology that will enable integrated access to services, contents and things in the future Internet. In this paper, we illustrate how front-ends that wrap traditional services and resources can be tailored to the needs of end users, converting end users into prosumers (creators and consumers of service-based applications). To do this, we propose an architecture that end users without programming skills can use to create front-ends, consult catalogues of resources tailored to their needs, easily integrate and coordinate front-ends and create composite applications to orchestrate services in their back-end. The paper includes a case study illustrating that current user-centred web development tools are at a very early stage of evolution. We provide statistical data on how the proposed architecture improves these tools. This paper is based on research conducted by the Service Front End (SFE) Open Alliance initiative.

CumuloNimbo: A highly-scalable transaction processing platform as a service.

One of the main challenges facing next generation Cloud platform services is the need to simultaneously achieve ease of programming, consistency, and high scalability. Big Data applications have so far focused on batch processing. The next step for Big Data is to move to the online world. This shift will raise the requirements for transactional guarantees. CumuloNimbo is a new EC-funded project led by Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) that addresses these issues via a highly scalable multi-tier transactional platform as a service (PaaS) that bridges the gap between OLTP and Big Data applications.

Prototipo para la Creación de un Sistema de Información Geográfica web, para la Gestión de Elementos Universitarios Localizados Espacialmente

RESUMEN Este trabajo nace con la necesidad de ofrecer un Sistema de Información Geográfico implantado en un entorno Web, para una comunidad de usuarios,que proporcione información sobre recursos, instalaciones y servicios que se ofrecen localizados espacialmente. Se trata de estudiar y seleccionar ciertos objetos de interés relevantes para una Comunidad universitaria, en concreto se ha utilizado el Campus Sur de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Estos objetos serán representados en su localización geográfica, sobre el mapa de los exteriores del Campus o sobre planos digitalizados de los interiores de algunos de los edificios que lo componen. La Escuela Universitaria de Informática es la utilizada para el prototipo presentado en este trabajo. Además los objetos de interés llevarán asociada información temática con distintos formatos. Este sistema podrá aplicarse en la planificación de futuras obras, tanto nuevas como de remodelación, de los elementos que constituyen el Campus como, edificios,caminos, aparcamientos, etc. SUMMARY: This work comes with the need to provide a Geographic Information System,implanted in a web environment, for a user community, which gives information on resources, facilities and services offered at a university spatially located. That consists in to study and select some objects of interest, relevant for a University community; in particular the South Campus of the Polytechnic University of Madrid where it has been used. These objects will be represented in their geographic location, over the outside map of the Campus or over digitized maps which represent the interiors of some Campus buildings. The Computer Science University School is used in the prototype shown in this paper. Also, the interest objects will have associated thematic information in different formats. This system may be applied in the planning of future works, both new and remodeling, of the elements that constitute the Campus such as buildings,roads, car parks, etc.

Improving the competitiveness of the Spanish port system by optimising the cargo handling service

Port services, and in particular the cargo handling service, are responsible for the greatest share of costs incurred during the passage of cargo through a port. The provision of these services reliably and efficiently is crucial in a sector in which there is great opacity. This study has provided the responsible administration ? the Port Authority ? with a tool enabling objective decision making both when it comes to issuing the corresponding licenses and during the period of service provision. Furthermore, we have proposed a series of measures whose application would improve the conditions of service provision and reduce the costs incurred by the passage of cargo through the port.

La evaluación de competencias en la web

En el actual marco del Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior (EEES) la mejora de la calidad de la enseñanza y el aprendizaje es una cuestión clave, en ella, la evaluación de competencias se convierte en una cuestión central. La máxima accesibilidad a cualquier tipo de información o herramienta está hoy en Internet, y ese medio es también muy adecuado para la evaluación, especialmente en el contexto universitario. Por ello el objetivo de este trabajo es realizar una revisión de portales web dedicados a evaluación de competencias genéricas, haciendo hincapié en aquellos que ofrezcan herramientas de evaluación disponibles online. Se ha realizado una búsqueda en Google a partir de palabras clave en inglés y en español, y se han consultado las páginas de las primeras universidades según el ranking Webometrics. Los resultados obtenidos permiten afirmar una tendencia a la constitución de plataformas colaborativas procedentes de iniciativas en las que participan amplias redes de profesores universitarios y diversas instituciones, que ofrecen herramientas con aplicación práctica y de acceso abierto.