Semantic Web pp 153-172 | Cite as

Reliable Semantic Systems for Decision Making: Defining a Business Rules Ontology for a Survey Decision System

  • Pavani AkundiEmail author


Concepts like “decision analysis” and “data mining” refer to knowledge engineering techniques used by researchers to gather statistics and influence decisions about requirements. These concepts are also relevant when defining meaningful business rules as evaluation criteria for decision making. In this chapter, a decision domain is modeled for community health outreach survey. The basic semantic framework is stated in terms of inference statements, facts, and business rules. The semantic web, web ontologies, and linked data models are referenced in architecting a desirable system. A sample survey dataset is also reviewed to explicitly understand the business rules influencing the design of decision criteria, categories, and variables. For this reason, evaluating the size of the sample, decision criteria, and typical survey structures is important to establish a baseline semantic decision domain. Business users can derive constraints and conditions pertaining to empirical outcomes appearing in data analysis by reviewing semantic design patterns. Data mining constructs are also applied to the data to learn about patterns within the sample size and introduce new evaluation criteria to clarify survey questions. This discussion identifies the best practices of applying business rules to drive planning decisions.


Decision Support System Unify Modeling Language Decision Criterion Requirement Engineering Resource Description Framework 
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. Al-Salem, L. S., & Abu-Samaha, A. (2007). Eliciting web application requirements—an industrial case study. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(3), 294–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cambridge Semantics. (2014). Data management design patterns. Retrieved June 2014
  3. Carroll J., Bizer C., Hayes, P., Stickler P. (2005). Named graphs. In Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web. (Vol 3, pp247-267)Google Scholar
  4. Cook Children’s. (2009). Cook Children’s Health Care System Community-wide Children’s Health Assessment and Survey (CCHAPS)Technical Appendix (p.7) Retrieved April 2014.
  5. Cook Children’s. (2014). Center for children’s health community-wide children’s health assessment & planning survey (CCHAPS).
  6. Corby, O., Dieng-Kuntz, R., Gandon, F., & Faron-Zucker, C. (2006). Searching the semantic web: Approximate query processing based on ontologies. Intelligent Systems, IEEE, 21(1), 20–27. doi:10.1109/MIS.2006.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ducharme, B. (2011). Learning SPARQL: Querying and Updating with Sparql 1.1. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly.Google Scholar
  8. Fowler, F. J. (1988). Survey research methods (Applied Social Research, Vol. 1). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  9. Fürber, C., & Hepp, M. (2010). Using SPARQL and SPIN for data quality management on the semantic web. In W. Abramowicz & R. Tolksdorf (Eds.), Business information systems (Vol. 47, pp. 35–46). Springer: Berlin Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hartig, O. (2012). An introduction to SPARQL and queries over linked data. ICWE.Google Scholar
  11. Holt, J. (2006). SysML: Describing the system. Information Professional, 3(4), 35.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim, G. (2005). Requirements engineering and storyboarding designing virtual reality systems the structured approach (pp. 14–26). Springer: London.Google Scholar
  13. Knublauch, H. (2014). SPIN - Modeling Vocabulary. W3C Member Submission.
  14. Kramer, J. K. A. M. (2011). Nonprofit management collective impact (Vol. 63). Standford Social Innovation Review.
  15. Kreuter, F., Presser, S., & Tourangeau, R. (2008). Social desirability bias in CATI, IVR, and web surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 847–865. doi:citeulike-article-id:10551970; 10.1093/poq/nfn063CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Lawrynowicz, A., & Potoniec, J. (2014). Pattern Based Feature Construction in Semantic Data Mining. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), 10(1), 27–65. doi:10.4018/ijswis.2014010102Google Scholar
  17. Mack, N., C. Woodsong, K. MacQueen, G. Guest, and E. Namey. (2005). Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide. Research Triangle Park, NC: Family Health International.Google Scholar
  18. Muoz, S., & Gutierrez, C. (2005, 31 Oct–2 Nov 2005). Interpretations between RDF and the logical data model. Paper presented at the Web Congress, 2005. LA-WEB 2005. Third Latin American.Google Scholar
  19. Ober, I., Ober, I., Dragomir, I., & Aboussoror, E. A. (2011). UML/SysML semantic tunings. Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering, 7(4), 257–264. doi:10.1007/s11334-011-0163-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Power, D. J. (2003). A brief history of decision support systems. doi:citeulike-article-id:2032414.Google Scholar
  21. Sackett, S., Burdine, J. N. & Wendel, M. L. (2008). Secondary data report: Texas A & M Health Science Center School of Rural Public Health.Google Scholar
  22. Smirnov, A., & Chiueh, T. (2004). A portable implementation framework for intrusion-resilient database management systems. Paper presented at the Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004 International Conference on 28 June–1 July 2004.Google Scholar
  23. Wrycza, S., Marcinkowski, B. (2011). SysML requirement diagrams: Banking transactional platform case study. Research in systems analysis and design: Models and methods (Vol. 93, pp. 15–22): Springer: Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  24. Yanwu, Y., Fen, X., Wensheng, Z., Xian, X., Yiqun, L., & Xuhui, L. (2008). Towards semantic requirement engineering. Paper presented at the Semantic Computing and Systems, 2008. WSCS ’08. IEEE International Workshop on 14–15 July 2008.Google Scholar
  25. Deshpande, Y. S. M., & Ginige, A. (2002). Web engineering. Journal of Web Engineering, 1(1), 4–14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSouthern Methodist UniversityDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations