Advertisement

The NEPOMUK Semantic Desktop

  • Ansgar BernardiEmail author
  • Gunnar Aastrand Grimnes
  • Tudor Groza
  • Simon Scerri
Chapter

Abstract

Effective support for knowledge work has to center on the activities and needs of the individual knowledge worker. The EU-funded project NEPOMUK realized a comprehensive work environment for improved personal knowledge work: the Social Semantic Desktop. Based on semantic web technology, the NEPOMUK Social Semantic Desktop allows access to information across various applications within a knowledge worker’s personal computer. It facilitates the interconnection, management, and ontology-based conceptual annotation of information items. Thus the knowledge worker is supported in maintaining a personal information model which can be (in whole or in part) shared and exchanged with colleagues and teams. NEPOMUK provides architecture blueprints, fundamental ontologies, and open-source reference implementations. The results have been successfully applied in various applications and are extended and commercialized in products and spin-off enterprises.

Keywords

Resource Description Framework Knowledge Worker Information Item Resource Description Framework Data Resource Description Framework Graph 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the European Union IST fund (Grant FP6-027705, Project NEPOMUK, http://nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org/) and the German BMBF in Project Perspecting (Grant 01IW08002).

References

  1. Aberer K, Cudré-Mauroux P, Datta A, Despotovic Z, Hauswirth M, Punceva M, Schmidt R (2003) P-Grid: a self-organizing structured P2P system. SIGMOD Record 32(3):29–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aberer K, Cudré-Mauroux P, Hauswirth M, Pelt, TV (2004), Gridvine: building internet-scale semantic overlay networks, 3th International Semantic Web Conference ISWC 2004, Springer Verlag, pp 107–121. http://lsirpeople.epfl.ch/aberer/PAPERS/ISWC2004.pdf, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  3. Carroll, JJ, Bizer C, Hayes P, Stickler P (2005) Named graphs, provenance and trust, WWW ’05: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, pp 613–622Google Scholar
  4. Gudjonsdottir R (2010) Personas and Scenarios in Use. Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Human–Computer Interaction, Royal Institute of Technology, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  5. Mylka A, Sauermann L, Sintek M, van Elst L (2007) Nepomuk information element ontology, http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/01/19/nie/, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  6. Papailiou N, Christidis C, Apostolou D, Mentzas G, Gudjonsdottir R (2008) Personal and group knowledge management with the social semantic desktop. In Cunningham P, Cunnigham M (eds) Collaboration and the knowledge economy: issues, applications and case studies, echallenges e-2008 conference, 22–24 October 2008. Stockholm, Sweden, pp 1475–1482Google Scholar
  7. Quan D (2003) Designing end user information environments built on semistructured data models, PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceGoogle Scholar
  8. Sauermann L (2009) The gnowsis semantic desktop approach to personal information management, PhD thesis, University of Kaiserslautern. http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~sauermann/papers/Sauermann2009phd.pdf, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  9. Sauermann L, Dengel A, van Elst L, Lauer A, Maus H, Schwarz S (2006) Personalization in the EPOS project. Proceedings of the semantic web personalization workshop at the ESWC 2006 conference, pp. 42–52. http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~sauermann/papers/Sauermann+2006a.pdf, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  10. Sauermann L, van Elst L, Möller K (2009) Personal information model (PIMO), v1.1, Recommendation, NEPOMUK. http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/11/01/pimo/v1.1/pimo_v1.1.pdf, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  11. Schwarz S (2010) Context-awareness and context-sensitive interfaces for knowledge work, Dissertation, Technische Universität Kaiserslautern, Fachbereich Informatik. http://www.dr.hut-verlag.de/978-3-86853-388-0.html, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  12. Semy SK, Pulvermacher MK, Obrst LJ (2004) Towards the use of an upper ontology for U.S. government and military domains: An evaluation, Technical report, MITRE. http://www.mitre.org/work/tech_papers/tech_papers_04/04_0603/index.html, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  13. Sintek M, Elst L, Scerri S, Handschuh S (2007a) Distributed knowledge representation on the social semantic desktop: Named graphs, views and roles in nrl, ESWC’07: Proceedings of the 4th European conference on The Semantic Web, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 594–608Google Scholar
  14. Sintek M, Elst LV, Scerri S, Handschuh S (2007b) Nepomuk representational language specification. Nepomuk specification. http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/nrl/, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  15. Teevan J, Alvarado C, Ackerman MS, Karger DR (2004) The perfect search engine is not enough: a study of orienteering behavior in directed search. CHI ’04: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 415–422. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=985745, Accessed on 9 Aug 2011
  16. van Heijst G, Falasconi S, Abu-Hanna A, Schreiber G, Stefanelli M (1995) A case study in ontology library construction. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 7(3):227–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ansgar Bernardi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gunnar Aastrand Grimnes
    • 1
  • Tudor Groza
    • 2
  • Simon Scerri
    • 3
  1. 1.Knowledge Management DepartmentDFKI GmbHKaiserslauternGermany
  2. 2.School of ITEEThe University of QueenslandSt. LuciaAustralia
  3. 3.DERI, National University of Ireland, GalwayGalwayIreland

Personalised recommendations