Efficient Semantic Event Processing: Lessons Learned in User Interface Integration

  • Heiko Paulheim
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6089)


Most approaches to application integration require an unambiguous exchange of events. Ontologies can be used to annotate the events exchanged and thus ensure a common understanding of those events. The domain knowledge formalized in ontologies can also be employed to facilitate more intelligent, semantic event processing, but at the cost of higher processing efforts.

When application integration and event processing are implemented on the user interface layer, performance is an important issue to ensure acceptable reactivity of the integrated system. In this paper, we analyze different architecture variants of implementing such an event exchange, and present an evaluation with regard to performance. An example of an integrated emergency management system is used to demonstrate those variants.


Event Processing Integration Rule Application Integration Interaction Rule Rule Engine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Linthicum, D.S.: Enterprise Application Integration. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daniel, F., Yu, J., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Matera, M., Saint-Paul, R.: Understanding UI Integration: A Survey of Problems, Technologies, and Opportunities. IEEE Internet Computing 11(3), 59–66 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Paulheim, H.: Ontologies for User Interface Integration. In: [30], pp. 973–981Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Myers, B.A., Rosson, M.B.: Survey on user interface programming. In: CHI 1992: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 195–202. ACM, New York (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Westermann, U., Jain, R.: Toward a Common Event Model for Multimedia Applications. IEEE MultiMedia 14(1), 19–29 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Teymouriana, K., Paschke, A.: Towards semantic event processing. In: DEBS 2009: Proceedings of the Third ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems, pp. 1–2. ACM, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller, R.B.: Response time in man-computer conversational transactions. In: AFIPS 1968 (Fall, part I): Proceedings of the fall joint computer conference, part I, December 9-11, pp. 267–277. ACM, New York (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shneiderman, B.: Response Time and Display Rate in Human Performance with Computers. ACM Computing Surveys 16(3), 265–285 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schmidt, K.U., Anicic, D., Stühmer, R.: Event-driven Reactivity: A Survey and Requirements Analysis. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang, J., Jin, B., Li, J.: An ontology-based publish/subscribe system. In: Jacobsen, H.-A. (ed.) Middleware 2004. LNCS, vol. 3231, pp. 232–253. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Skovronski, J., Chiu, K.: An Ontology-Based Publish Subscribe Framework. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services, iiWAS 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murth, M., Kühn, E.: Knowledge-based coordination with a reliable semantic subscription mechanism. In: SAC 2009: Proceedings of the 2009 ACM symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1374–1380. ACM, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Anicic, D., Stojanovic, N.: Towards Creation of Logical Framework for Event-Driven Information Systems. In: Cordeiro, J., Filipe, J. (eds.) ICEIS 2008 - Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Barcelona, Spain, June 12-16, vol. ISAS-2, pp. 394–401 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paschke, A., Kozlenkov, A., Boley, H.: A Homogenous Reaction Rules Language for Complex Event Processing. In: International Workshop on Event Drive Architecture for Complex Event Process (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Angele, J., Lausen, G.: 2. International Handbooks on Information Systems. In: Ontologies in F-Logic, pp. 29–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wege, C.: Portal Server Technology. IEEE Internet Computing 6(3), 73–77 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu, J., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Daniel, F.: Understanding Mashup Development. IEEE Internet Computing 12(5), 44–52 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Decker, S., Erdmann, M., Fensel, D., Studer, R.: Ontobroker: Ontology Based Access to Distributed and Semi-Structured Information. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Stevens, S.M. (eds.) Database Semantics - Semantic Issues in Multimedia Systems, IFIP TC2/WG2.6 Eighth Working Conference on Database Semantics (DS-8), Rotorua, New Zealand, January 4-8. IFIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 138, pp. 351–369. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Software, V.: JFlashPlayer Web Page (2009),
  20. 20.
    Yu, J., Benatallah, B., Saint-Paul, R., Casati, F., Daniel, F., Matera, M.: A framework for rapid integration of presentation components. In: WWW 2007: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 923–932. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paulheim, H., Döweling, S., Tso-Sutter, K., Probst, F., Ziegert, T.: Improving Usability of Integrated Emergency Response Systems: The SoKNOS Approach. In: Proceedings 39. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V (GI) - Informatik 2009. LNI, vol. 154, pp. 1435–1449 (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Babitski, G., Probst, F., Hoffmann, J., Oberle, D.: Ontology Design for Information Integration in Catastrophy Management. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Applications of Semantic Technologies, AST 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eick, S.G., Wills, G.J.: High Interaction Graphics. European Journal of Operational Research 84, 445–459 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Alferes, J.J., Eckert, M., May, W.: Evolution and Reactivity in the Semantic Web. In: Bry, F., Maluszynski, J. (eds.) Semantic Techniques for the Web. LNCS, vol. 5500, pp. 161–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Behrends, E., Fritzen, O., May, W., Schenk, F.: Combining ECA Rules with Process Algebras for the Semantic Web. In: RULEML 2006: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 29–38. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aasman, J.: Unification of Geospatial Reasoning, Temporal Logic, & Social Network Analysis in Event-Based Systems. In: DEBS 2008: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems, pp. 139–145. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rafatirad, S., Gupta, A., Jain, R.: Event composition operators: ECO. In: EiMM 2009: Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Workshop on Events in Multimedia, pp. 65–72. ACM, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stühmer, R., Anicic, D., Sen, S., Ma, J., Schmidt, K.U., Stojanovic, N.: Lifting Events in RDF from Interactions with Annotated Web Pages. In: [30], pp. 893–908Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schmidt, K.U., Dörflinger, J., Rahmani, T., Sahbi, M., Thomas, L.S.S.M.: An User Interface Adaptation Architecture for Rich Internet Applications. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 736–750. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.): ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heiko Paulheim
    • 1
  1. 1.SAP Research 

Personalised recommendations