Advertisement

Linked data and semantic web technologies to model context information for policy-making

  • Antonella CarbonaroEmail author
Original Research
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

Currently, several datasets released in a Linked Open Data format are available at a national and international level, but the lack of shared strategies on the representation and meaning of knowledge related to the publishing community makes it difficult to compare and use them. The paper proposes the use of semantic technologies and linked open data in order to ensure standardized frameworks for the representation of concepts in policy-making. The low-level data can thus be transformed into an enriched information model that allows its reuse and a logical reasoning on the knowledge representation.

Keywords

Linked Open Data Semantic technologies Open Government Data RDFS OWL 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Nicola Giancecchi for the implementation and publication of the RDFS and OWL ontologies described in https://nicorsm.github.io/cgg-ontology/.

References

  1. AlmaLaurea (2018) Indagini e ricerche. http://www.almalaurea.it/universita/statistiche. Accessed 12 Mar 2018
  2. Aslam MA, Aljohani NR (2018) SPedia: a central hub for the linked open data of scientific publications. IJSWIS 13.1(2017):128–147 (Web) Google Scholar
  3. Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuiness D, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider P (2003) The description logic handbook: theory, implementation and applications. Cambridge University, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Bischof S, Harth A, Kämpgen B, Polleres A, Schneider P (2018) Enriching integrated statistical open city data by combining equational knowledge and missing value imputation. J Web Semant 48:22–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bizer C, Heath T, Berners-Lee T (2011) Linked data: the story so far. Semantic services, interoperability and web applications: emerging concepts. IGI Glob 2011:205–227Google Scholar
  6. Brickley D, Guha RV (2014) RDF schema—W3C recommendation. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/. Accessed 16 Aug 2018
  7. Carbonaro A (2010a) Improving web search and navigation using summarization process. Commun Comput Inf Sci 111(PART 1):131–138Google Scholar
  8. Carbonaro A (2010b) WordNet-based summarization to enhance learning interaction tutoring. J e-Learn Knowl Soc 6(2):67–74Google Scholar
  9. Carbonaro A (2012) Interlinking e-learning resources and the web of data for improving student experience. J e-Learn Knowl Soc 8(2):33–44Google Scholar
  10. Carbonaro A, Ferrini R (2007) Ontology-based video annotation in multimedia entertainment. In: Consumer communications and networking conference, 2007. 4th IEEE. Citeseer, pp 1087–1091Google Scholar
  11. Carbonaro A, Ferrini R (2008) Personalized information retrieval in a semantic-based learning environment, social information retrieval systems: emerging technologies and applications for searching the web effectively, pp 270–288Google Scholar
  12. Carbonaro A, Ravaioli M (2017) Peer assessment to promote deep learning and to reduce a gender gap in the traditional introductory programming course. J e-Learn Knowl Soc 3:13Google Scholar
  13. Carbonaro A, Santandrea L (2018) A general semantic web approach for data analysis on graduates statistics. In: IEEE conference of open innovation association, FRUCT, pp 99–104Google Scholar
  14. Cyganiak R, Reynolds D (2018) The RDF data cube vocabulary. https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/. Accessed 9 June 2018
  15. Cyganiak R, Wood D, Lanthaler M (2014) RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax—W3C recommendation. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/. Accessed 16 Aug 2018
  16. European Data Portal, Education: Open Data in Schools (2018) https://www.europeandataportal.eu/highlights/open-data-schools. Accessed 12 Aug 2018
  17. Horrocks I, Patel-Schneider PF, Boley H, Tabet S, Grosof B, Dean M et al (2004) SWRL: a semantic web rule language combining OWL and RuleML. W3C Member submission 21, p 79Google Scholar
  18. Ishida R (2008) An introduction to multilingual web addresses. https://www.w3.org/International/articles/idn-and-iri/. Accessed 16 Aug 2018
  19. Kalampokis E, Tambouris E, Tarabanis K (2013) Linked open government data analytics. In: Wimmer MA, Janssen M, Scholl HJ (eds) EGOV2013, LNCS, 8074. Springer, 2013, pp 99–110Google Scholar
  20. Kalampokis E, Karamanou A, Nikolov A, Haase P, Cyganiak R, Roberts B, Hermans P, Tambouris E, Tarabanis K (2014) Creating and utilizing linked open statistical data for the development of advanced analytics services. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Workshop on Semantic Statistics (Sem-Stats2014) in conjunction with the 13th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2014), CEUR-WS proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  21. Kubler S, Robert J, Neumaier S, Umbrich J, Le Traon Y (2018) Comparison of metadata quality in open data portals using the analytic hierarchy process. Gov Inf Q Elsevier 35(1):13–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leone A, Cancellieri L, Guerriero A, Cammelli A (2010) Using microsoft analysis service to analyze graduates’ performances and working conditions, European University Information Systems, EUNIS, Warsaw (PL)Google Scholar
  23. Lytras MD, Raghavan V, Damiani Ernesto (2018) Big data and data analytics research: from metaphors to value space for collective wisdom in human decision making and smart machines. IJSWIS 13(1):1–10Google Scholar
  24. McBride K, Matheus R, Toots M, Kalvet T, Krimmer R (2018) The role of linked open statistical data in public service co-creation. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on theory and practice of electronic governance (ICEGOV ‘18), Atreyi Kankanhalli, Adegboyega Ojo, and Delfina Soares (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 679–681Google Scholar
  25. Open Data Barometer, 4th edition (2017) Data World wide web foundation, datasets and report, [online]. http://opendatabarometer.org/4thedition/report/. Accessed 10 June 2019
  26. Pereira CK, Siqueira S, Nunes BP, Dietze S (2017) Linked data in Education: a survey and a synthesis of actual research and future challenges. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 11:400–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reda R, Piccinini F, Carbonaro A (2018) Towards consistent data representation in the IoT healthcare landscape. In: ACM DH’18: International Digital Health Conference, April 23–26, Lyon, FranceGoogle Scholar
  28. Riccucci S, Carbonaro A, Casadei G (2007) Knowledge acquisition in intelligent tutoring system: a data mining approach. In: Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Springer, pp 1195–1205Google Scholar
  29. Ristoski P, Paulheim H (2016) Semantic web in data mining and knowledge discovery: a comprehensive survey, web semantics: science, services and agents on the world wide web, vol 36, pp 1–22Google Scholar
  30. Salas PER, Martin M, Da Mota FM, Auer S, Breitman K, Casanova MA (2012) Publishing statistical data on the web. In: International Conference on Semantic Computing, 6th ed, pp 285–292Google Scholar
  31. Scheider S, Ostermann FO, Adams B (2017) Why good data analysts need to be critical synthesists. Determining the role of semantics in data analysis. Future Gener Comput Syst 72:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. W3C OWL Working Group (2012) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language—W3C Recommendation. https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/. Accessed 16 Aug 2018
  33. W3C OWLWorking Group (2013) SPARQL 1.1Overview—W3C recommendation. https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/. Accessed 16 Aug 2018

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations