Advertisement

GeoInformatica

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 55–90 | Cite as

An Ontology-Based Approach to Personalized Situation-Aware Mobile Service Supply

  • Norbert Weißenberg
  • Rüdiger Gartmann
  • Agnès Voisard
Article

Abstract

Mobile devices such as personal digital assistants (PDAs) and mobile phones are in widespread use already today and converging to mobile smart phones. They enable users to access a wide range of services and information without guidance through their actual demands. Especially during mass events like the Olympic Games 2008 in Beijing—which was initially the context of our work—a large service space is expected to support all mobile visitors, being athletes, journalists, or spectators. Current approaches tackling such problems are location based, meaning that a user's location is central to service provision, and even context-aware, meaning that, beyond location, characteristics of a user's environment are taken into account. Such information obviously helps to deliver relevant information at the right time to the mobile users. Going one step further, a situation-aware system abstracts from the context dimensions by translating specific contexts into logical situations. Knowing the situation end users are in allows the system to better identify the information to be delivered to them and to choose the appropriate services with regard to their scope, which is referred to as service roaming. Even though many context frameworks have been introduced in the past few years, what is usually missing is the notion of characteristic features of contexts that are invariant during certain time intervals. This paper presents these concepts in the context of a platform development, namely FLAME2008, which is able to support its mobile users with personalized situation-aware services in push and pull mode.

Keywords

mobile application ontology user profile context service roaming 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexandria Digital Library Project. “ADL feature type thesaurus,” in http://www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/gazetteer/FeatureTypes/, 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M.-A. Aufaure, S. Yu, S. Spaccapietra, and N. Cullot. “User profiles in location-based services: Make humans more nomadic and personalized,” in Proc. IASTED International Conference on Databases and Applications, ACTA Press, Calgary, AB, Canada, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beijing Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games. “Beijing olympic action plan,” in http://en.beijing-2008.org/76/29/column211612976.shtml.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Borst. Construction of Engineering Ontologies for Knowledge Sharing and Reuse, Ph.D. Thesis. Twente University, 1997, in http://www.ub.utwente.nl/webdocs/inf/1/t0000004.pdf.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Coutaz, J. Crowley, S. Dobson, and D. Garlan. “Context is key,” Communications of the ACM, Special Issue: The Disappearing Computer, 48(3):49–53, March 2005.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cycorp, Inc. “OpenCyc selected vocabulary and upper ontology,” in http://www.cyc.com/cycdoc/vocab/vocab-toc.html, 2002.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Das, E.I. Chong, G. Eadon, and J. Srinivasan. “Supporting ontology-based semantic matching in RDBMS,” in Proc. 30th VLDB Conference, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2004.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. Deiters, T. Löffeler, and S. Pfennigschmidt. “The information logistics approach toward a user demand-driven information supply,” in D. Spinellis (Ed.), Cross-Media Service Delivery, Boston, 37–48, 2003.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Dey. “Understanding and using context,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Journal, Vol. 5(1):4–7, 2001.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. “Dublin core metadata element set, reference description,” Version 1.1, 12/2004, in http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    European Research Consortium for Mathematics and Informatics (ERCIM). “Special Theme: Applications and Service Platforms for the Mobile User,” ERCIM News No.54, 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    European Telecommunications Standards Institute. “TS 100 521 V7.0.0. Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Network functions”. (GSM 03.01 version 7.0.0 Release 1998), 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Fink and A. Kobsa. “User modeling in personalized city tours,” Artificial Intelligence Review, Vol. 18(1):33–74, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. Fonseca, M. Egenhofer, C. Davis, and K. Borges. “Ontologies and Knowledge Sharing in Urban GIS,” Computer, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 24(3):251–272, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Fu, A. Abdelmoty, and C. Jones. “Design of a Geographical Ontology,” SPIRIT deliverable D5 3101, 1/2003 in http://www.geo-spirit.org/.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Gartmann. “Service roaming,” in Proc 1st GI/ITG KuVS Workshop on Location-based Applications and Services, Technical Report No. 317, Fernuniversität Hagen, 2004.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. Gartmann, B. Holtkamp, N. Weißenberg, and G. Li. “Service roaming in mobile applications,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Service Computing (SCC), IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2005. Vol. 1, 121–128, July 2005.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J.P. Getty Trust. “Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names,” http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/tgn/, 2004.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    T. Gu, X.H. Wang, H.K. Pung, and D.Q. Zhang. “A middleware for context-aware mobile services,” in IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VT)C, IEEE Computer Society Press: Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2004.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    N. Guarino. “Formal ontology and information systems,” in Proc. FOIS'98, pp. 3–15, IOS Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1998.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Haseloff. “Context gathering—an enabler for information logistics,” in P. Chamoni, P. Loos, W. Deiters, R.-D. Kutsche, K. Sandkuhl, N. Gronau, H. Müller-Merbach, and B. Rieger (Eds.), Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik (MKWI) 2004, Volume 2. Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft: Berlin, 204–216, 2004.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    K. Hiramatsu and F. Reitsma. “GeoReferencing the semantic web: Ontology-based markup of geographically referenced information,” in Joint EuroSDR/EuroGeographics Workshop on Ontologies and Schema Translation Services, Paris, France, April 2004, http://www.mindswap.org/2004/geo/geoOntologies.shtml, 2004.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J. Hobbs and J. Pustejovsky. “Annotating and reasoning about time and events,” in P. Doherty, J. McCarthy, and M. Williams. (Eds), Working Papers of the 2003 AAAI Spring Symposium on Logical Formalization of Commonsense Reasoning. AAAI Press: Menlo Park, CA, USA, 74–82, 2003.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    B. Holtkamp, R. Gartmann and Y. Han. “FLAME2008—Personalized Web Services for the Olympic Games 2008 in Beijing,” in Proc. eChallenges, e-2003, 2003.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    ISO19115:2003. “Geographic information—Metadata,” ISO/TC 211, May 2003.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    ISO19119:2005. “Geographic information—Services,” ISO/TC 211, Feb. 2005.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Kifer, G. Lausen, and J. Wu. “Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages,” Journal of the ACM, Vol. 42(4):741–843, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    S. Kokkelink and R. Schwänzl. “Expressing qualified dublin core in RDF/XML,” in http://dublincore.org/documents/dcq-rdf-xml, 2002.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    U. Meissen, S. Pfennigschmidt, A. Voisard, and T. Wahnfried. “Context- and situation-awareness in information logistics,” in Proc. of EDBT Workshop on Pervasive Information Management (PIM), Lecture Notes in Computer Science No. 3268, Springer Verlag: Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, 2004.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    I. Niles and A. Pease. “Towards a standard upper ontology,” Teknowledge corporation, in http://projects.teknowledge.com/HPKB/Publications/FOIS.pdf, 2001.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    OGC. “Gazetteer service profile of the web feature service implementation specification,” Open Geospatial Consortium, Document: 02-076r3, in http://www.opengeospatial.org/docs/02-076r3.pdf, Sep. 2002.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ontoprise GmbH. “How to write f-logic programs,” Ontoprise Tutorial Series, in http://www.ontoprise.com, Mar. 2005.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ontoprise GmbH. “White paper—ontobroker,” Ontoprise Tutorial Series, in http://www.ontoprise.com, Mar. 2005.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    OWL-S Coalition. “OWL-S: Semantic markup for web services,” W3C Member Submission, in http://www.w3.org/Submission/OWL-S, Nov. 2004.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    OWL-S Coalition. “OWL-S 1.1 Release,” in http://www.daml.org/services/owl-s/1.1/, 2005.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    J. Schiller and A. Voisard. Location-Based Services, Morgan Kaufmann/Elsevier, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2004.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Semantic Web Services Initiative: Semantic Web Services Ontology (SWSO), draft version 1.1, http://www.daml.org/services/swsf/1.1/swso/.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    SiGSIT home page. “Sino-German Joint Laboratory of Software Integration Technologies,” 2005, http://www.sigsit.org.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    S. Toivonen, J. Kolari, and T. Laakko. “Facilitating mobile users with contextualized content,” in Proc. Workshop Artificial Intelligence in Mobile System, 2003.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    E. Tomai and M. Kavouras. “Vagueness in geographic categories: A setback to semantic interoperability,” in Proc. 5th AGILE Conf. on Geographic Information Science, 2002.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    UDDI.Org. “UDDI Version 3.0 Specification,” Open Draft 2002, http://www.uddi.org/pubs/uddi_v3.htm.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Versit Consortium. “VCard—the electronic business card, specification,” in http://www.imc.org/pdi/vcard-21.doc, Sep. 1996.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    W. Wahlster. “SmartWeb: Mobile applications of the semantic web,” in Proc. 27th Annual German Conference on AI, KI 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science No.3238, Springer Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, 2004.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    N. Weißenberg and R. Gartmann. “Ontology architecture for semantic geo services for Olympia 2008,” in Proc. GI-Tage, 2003.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    N. Weißenberg, A. Voisard, and R. Gartmann. “Using ontologies in personalized mobile applications,” in D. Pfoser and I. Cruz (Eds.), Proc. of the Intl. ACM GIS Symposium, ACM Press: New York, 2004.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    World Wide Web Consortium. “OWL web ontology language reference,” in http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref, Mar. 2003.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    World Wide Web Consortium. “The platform for privacy preferences, specification,” W3C Recommendation, in http://www.w3.org/TR/P3P, April 2002.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    WSMO.Org. “Web service modeling ontology,” W3C Member Submission, in http://www.w3.org/Submission/WSMO/, 6/2005.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    WSMO.Org. “A conceptual comparison between WSMO and OWL-S,” WSMO Working Draft, 1/2005 in http://www.wsmo.org/2004/d4/d4.1/v0.1/20050106/.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    V. M. Zurita. “Semantic-based approach to spatial data sources integration,” PhD Thesis, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, http://www.lsi.upc.es/events/sitsd/presentation/Cap1-2.web.pdf, 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norbert Weißenberg
    • 1
  • Rüdiger Gartmann
    • 1
  • Agnès Voisard
    • 2
  1. 1.Fraunhofer ISSTDortmundGermany
  2. 2.Fraunhofer ISST and FU BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations