Applied Intelligence

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 285–307 | Cite as

Multi-layer ontology based information fusion for situation awareness

  • Fang-Ping Pai
  • Lee-Jang Yang
  • Yeh-Ching Chung


Originated from the military domain, Situation Awareness (SAW) is proposed with the aim to obtain information superiority through information fusion and thus to achieve decision superiority. It requires not only the perception of the environment, but also the reasoning of the implicit or implicated meaning under the explicit phenomenon. The principal goal of this paper is to exploit the semantic web technologies to enhance the situation awareness through autonomous information fusion and inference. Recently, ontology has played a significant role in the representation and integration of domain knowledge for high-level reasoning. The multi-level ontology merging paradigm is followed in this work for the conceptual modeling and knowledge representation. Firstly, Military Scenario Ontology (MSO) and Battle Management Ontology (BMO) are defined according to corresponding reputable standards as the domain ontology. We propose the Situation Awareness Ontology (SAO) as the core ontology to integrate MSO, BMO and even other publicly defined ontology for higher-level information fusion. The SAO is composed of objects representations, relations and events that are necessary to capture the information for further cognition, reasoning and decision-making about the situation evolving over time. Military doctrines and domain knowledge are expressed as Horn clause type rules for reasoning and inference. Multi-layered semantic information fusion that integrates ontologies, semantic web technologies and rule-based reasoning can therefore be conducted. An experimental scenario is presented to demonstrate the feasibility of this architecture.


Situation awareness Information fusion Ontology MSDL BML 


  1. 1.
    Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37.1Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Steinberg AN, Bowman CL, White FE (1999) Revisions to the JDL data fusion model. In: AeroSense’99. International Society for Optics and PhotonicsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, andLassila O (2001) The Semantic Web – A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Sci Am 284(5):34–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Javier B et al (2012) VEACON: A Vehicular Accident Ontology designed to improve safety on the roads. J Netw Comput Appl 35.6:1891–1900Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dongli Y, Suihua W, Ailing Z Traffic accidents knowledge management based on ontology. In: Sixth international conference on fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery, 2009. FSKD’09. Vol. 7. IEEE, p 2009Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baumgartner N, Gottesheim W, Mitsch S, Retschitzegger W, Schwinger W (2010) BeAware!, - Situation Awareness, the Ontology-Driven Way. Data Knowl Eng 69:1183–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baumgartner N et al (2014) A tour of BeAware–A situation awareness framework for control centers. Information Fusion 20:155–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Amit S, Henson C, Sahoo SS (2008) Semantic sensor web. Internet Computing IEEE 12.4:78–83Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adida B et al (2008) RDFa in XHTML: Syntax and processing. Recommendation W3CGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roda F, Musulin E (2014) An ontology-based framework to support intelligent data analysis of sensor measurements. Expert Systems with Applications 41.17:7914–7926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Little EG, Rogova GL (2009) Designing ontologies for higher level fusion. Information Fusion 10.1:70–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smith B (2002) Basic Formal Ontology.
  13. 13.
    Laclavik M et al (2012) Agentowl: Semantic knowledge model and agent architecture. Comput Inf 25.5:421–439zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Balaji BS, Prabhu TN, Karthikeyan NK (2012) SACoSS-semantic Agent Based System for Cloud Service Suggestion Using Cloud Service Ontology. Jmynal Comput Inf Syst 8.21:8763–8773Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lewis L, Buford J, Jakobson G (2009) Inferring threats in urban environments with uncertain and approximate data: an agent-based approach. Appl Intell 30.3:220–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kokar MM, Matheus CJ, Baclawski K (2009) Ontology-based situation awareness. Inf fusion 10.1:83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barwise J, Perry J (1983) Situations and Attitudes. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matheus CJ, Kokar MM, Baclawski K (2003) A core ontology for situation awareness. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information Fusion. Vol. 1Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Matheus CJ et al (2005) Using SWRL and OWL to capture domain knowledge for a situation awareness application applied to a supply logistics scenario. Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web. Springer Berlin Heidelberg:130–144Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matheus CJ et al (2005) SAWA: An assistant for higher-level fusion and situation awareness. Defense and Security. International Society for Optics and PhotonicsGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Matheus CJ et al (2005) Lessons learned from developing SAWA: A situation awareness assistant. In: 2005 8th International Conference on Information Fusion, Vol. 2. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bowman M, Lopez A, Tecuci G (2001) Ontology development for military applications. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-ninth Annual ACM Southeast Conference. ACM Press. Vol. 36Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boury-Brisset A-C Ontology-based approach for information fusion. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of Information Fusion, 2003. Vol. 1. IEEE, p 2003Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smart PR et al (2005) Knowledge-based information fusion for improved situational awareness. In: 2005 8th International Conference on Information Fusion, Vol. 2. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gómez-Romero J et al (2015) Context-based multi-level information fusion for harbor surveillance. Inf Fusion 21:173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Farinelli A et al (2012) Cooperative situation assessment in a maritime scenario. Int J Intell Syst 27.5:477–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Migueláńez E et al (2011) Semantic knowledge-based framework to improve the situation awareness of autonomous underwater vehicles. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 23.5:759–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chen H et al (2004) Soupa: Standard ontology for ubiquitous and pervasive applications. In: The First Annual International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking and Services, 2004. MOBIQUITOUS 2004. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang XH et al (2004) Ontology based context modeling and reasoning using OWL. In: Proceedings of the Second IEEE Annual Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops, 2004. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yau SS, Liu J (2006) Hierarchical situation modeling and reasoning for pervasive computing. In: The Fourth IEEE Workshop on Software Technologies for Future Embedded and Ubiquitous Systems, 2006 and the 2006 Second International Workshop on Collaborative Computing, Integration, and Assurance. SEUS 2006/WCCIA 2006. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen H, Finin T, Joshi A (2003) An ontology for context-aware pervasive computing environments. Knowl Eng Rev 18.03:197–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chen H, Finin T, Joshi A (2003) An intelligent broker architecture for context-aware systems. PhD proposal in computer science, University of Maryland. USA, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Scherp A et al (2012) A core ontology on events for representing occurrences in the real world. Multi Tools Appl 58.2:293–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Norbert B, Retschitzegger W (2006) A survey of upper ontologies for situation awareness. In: Proc. of the 4th IASTED International Conference on Knowledge Sharing and Collaborative Engineering, St. Thomas, US VIGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Snidaro L, Visentini I, Bryan K (2015) Fusing uncertain knowledge and evidence for maritime situational awareness via Markov Logic Networks. Inf Fusion 21:159–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Snidaro L, Garcia J, Corchado JM (2015) Context-based information fusion: A survey and discussion. Inf Fusion 25:16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bermejo–Alonso J, Sanz R., López I (2006) A Survey on Ontologies for Agents. From Theory to Practice. ASLab-ICEA-R-2006, vol 2Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    MSDL MSDL - Military Scenario Definition Language, 2010. Available from:
  39. 39.
    Blais C, Galvin K, Hieb M (2005) Coalition Battle Management Language (C-BML) Study Group Report. IEEE Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop, Orlando FLGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Blais C et al (2009) Coalition Battle Management Language (C-BML) Phase 1 Specification Development: An Update to the M&S Community. Fall Simulation Interoperability WorkshopGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Blais C, Galvin K, Hieb M (2011) Coalition Battle Management Language (C-BML) Study Group ReportGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Blais C, Turnitsa C, Gustavsson P (2006) A strategy for ontology research for the coalition battle management language (C-BML) product development group. Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    JC3IEDM Joint C3 Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM), 2010; Available from:
  44. 44.
    María-Cruz V et al (2011) An ontology-based integrated approach to situation awareness for high-level information fusion in C4ISR. Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops. Springer Berlin HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pullen M et al (2012) MSDL and C-BML Working Together for NATO MSG-085. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Spring Simulation Interoperability WorkshopGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    JENA (2007) Jena – A Semantic Web Framework for JavaGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sycara K et al (2009) An integrated approach to high-level information fusion. Inf Fusion 10.1:25–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Prud’Hommeaux E, Seaborne A (2008) SPARQL query language for RDF. W3C recommendationGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bizer C et al (2009) DBpedia-A crystallization point for the Web of Data. Web Semantics: science, services and agents on the world wide web 7.3Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pai F-P, Hsu I-C, Chung Y-C (2016) Semantic web technology for agent interoperability: a proposed infrastructure. Appl Intell 44.1:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bellifemine F, Poggi A, Rimassa G (1999) JADE–A FIPA-compliant agent framework. In: Proceedings of PAAM. Vol. 99. No. 97-108Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wang M-H et al (2010) Ontology-based multi-agents for intelligent healthcare applications. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 1.2:111–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lee C-S, Wang M-H (2011) A fuzzy expert system for diabetes decision support application. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B Cybern 41. 1:139–153. CyberneticsGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Yeh J-F, Wu C-H, Chen M-J (2008) Ontology-based speech act identification in a bilingual dialog system using partial pattern trees. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59.5:684–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yeh J-F et al (2008) Extended probabilistic HAL with close temporal association for psychiatric query document retrieval. ACM Trans Inf Syst 27.1:4Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science,National Tsing Hua UniversityHsinchu CityTaiwan
  2. 2.Aeronautical Systems Research DivisionNational Chung-Shan Institute of Science and TechnologyTaichungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations