Context Based Adaptation of Semantic Rules in Smart Buildings

654 views
548 views

Published on

presentation of the paper:
Kumar, V., Fensel, A., Fröhlich, P. “Context Based Adaptation of Semantic
Rules in Smart Buildings”. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM International
Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications &
Services (iiWAS2013), ACM, 2-4 December 2013, Vienna, Austria.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
654
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Linked Rule Principles:1. Individual rules and rule-bases should be named using URIs.2. These URIs should be able to be \dereferenced" to obtain a description in the RIF format.3. Rules should operate over data expressed in RDF.4. Rules must be linked.
  • We ignored the parameter ‘People’ here to start with as this would make the use case more complex.
  • Context Based Adaptation of Semantic Rules in Smart Buildings

    1. 1. CONTEXT BASED ADAPTATION OF SEMANTIC RULES IN SMART BUILDINGS Vikash Kumar (kumar@ftw.at) Anna Fensel (fensel@ftw.at, anna.fensel@sti2.at) Peter Fröhlich (froehlich@ftw.at) iiWAS„13, December 4, 2013, Vienna, Austria
    2. 2. Outline       Introduction: Motivation & Research Question State of the Art in Rule Exchange Approach: Towards Semantic Rules Adaptation Implementation Evaluations Conclusion
    3. 3. Introduction: Motivation and Research Question
    4. 4. Motivation  Rules find increasing use in semantic applications as well as traditional IT systems for representing preferences, privacy constraints, etc.  Several initiatives aim to transform a Rule from:  However, there is little or no provision for: © FTW -4-
    5. 5. So where is the „Real Problem“??
    6. 6. Research Questions © FTW -6-
    7. 7. State of the Art in Rule Exchange
    8. 8. State of the Art in Rule Exchange (1)  W3C received several submissions towards standardization of a Web rule language specification: - Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL) - Web Rule Language (WRL) - Semantic Web Services Language (SWSL)  In 2005 W3C launched a Rule Interchange Format (RIF) working group tasked with standardizing a common rule interchange format for the web - Consists of various interconnected dialects representing rule languages - Dialects provide a formal description of a rule„s syntax, semantics & XML serialization - Existing and upcoming rule languages may be mapped to this format serving as an interlingua between various languages © FTW -8-
    9. 9. State of the Art in Rule Exchange (2)  Linked Rules: A set of basic principles by which rules can be represented and shared over the web - Several methods of rule reuse proposed - Demonstration on N3 based AIR web rule languages  Rule Markup Language (RuleML), Reasoning on the Web with Rules and Semantics (REWERSE) © FTW -9-
    10. 10. Approach: Towards Semantic Rule Adaptation
    11. 11. The Approach  This thesis focuses on contextual independence rather than language independence  The main objective is to achieve adaptation of a Policy created in a certain rule language into a different context in the same language  To achieve this we: - Identify the context parameter trigger and its inter-dependence with other context parameters - Manipulate the dependent parameters based on the triggering parameters © FTW - 11 -
    12. 12. Context Definition *Dey, A.K., Abowd, G.D., Salber, D.: A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Human-Computer Interaction 16 (2-4), 97-166, 2001.
    13. 13. Context Parameters Considered  All parameters defined wrt Sensors as subject  Parameters involved: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Location – physical location of the sensor Time – of reading the sensor value Identity – Unique id of the sensor Type – Sensor type (heat, light, motion, etc.) State – ON/OFF, Temp reading, luminosity, etc. People – Individuals or groups, co-located or distributed
    14. 14. Example rdf:type gr:computingTablet rdf:type gr:Location rdf:type gr:DateTime Send me all offers for Samsung Galaxy tab from 4020, Linz on Weekdays after 11 AM © FTW - 14 -
    15. 15. Preserving the Semantic Idea  Explore how change in one context (location, time, etc.) affects other contexts  The context interdependence is described keeping in mind our use cases  Which other context parameters might need to be adapted in an ON/OFF or Alert Policy when a particular context changes  Other contexts may either Definitely get affected, Possibly get affected or Not get affected
    16. 16. Context Interdependence *Identity is NOT the same as Type # Parameters in Gray represent the contexts that May get affected while those in Black represent contexts that Will get affected
    17. 17. Adaptation Rules  The priority order is decided on the basis of three rules: 1. The parameter that definitely affects the most number of parameters has highest priority 2. The parameter that potentially affects other parameters comes next 3. Only the parameters affected by initial parameter change gets affected (i.e. there are no cycles)
    18. 18. The Adaptation Protocol
    19. 19. Implementation
    20. 20. Types of Rules Considered  ON/OFF Policies - Policies the upon satisfaction of conditions in its antecedent, can change device states from ON <-> OFF  ALERT sending policies - Policies that upon satisfaction of conditions in its antecedent, produce/send an alarm to designated services
    21. 21. Triggering Context The Architecture Contextually Adapted Rule Rule Parser Output Language Specific Parsing User Interaction Target Rule
    22. 22. Implementation Details  Extend the Ontology with concept-context relationship  Parametrized SPARQL rules (CONSTRUCT queries)  Adapted using ARQ (QuerySolutionMap) - ARQ is a query engine for Jena - A map of variable names to RDFNode objects - Used for dynamic binding of variables to values  Interaction with user asking values for affected variables/parameters - Present the user with justified ontology* showing explanation of the context  Instantiating the Rule with new values for variables *A justification for an entailment in an ontology, is a minimal subset of the ontology that is sufficient for the entailment to hold
    23. 23. Two Real Smart Building Setups  School in Austria  Factory floor in Russia
    24. 24. Smart Building Installation @ School  Several Smart Meters  Sensors (e.g. light, temperature, humidity)  Smart plugs, for individual sockets  Rule based shutdown services for PCs  Rule based alarms/alerts  User interfaces and apps: Web, tablet, smartphone (Android)
    25. 25. The Alert Monitoring app
    26. 26. Power Management Service - Tablet
    27. 27. Power Management Service - Smartphone
    28. 28. Evaluations
    29. 29. Evaluation Criterion  Policy adaptation - correctness, - automation, - acceptance, etc.  Tools evaluated - Alert Monitoring App - Power Management Services
    30. 30. Alert Monitoring Policies - Evaluation  App installed in 2 Android based tablets  Data collected over ~6 months used to come up with alert thresholds  Underlying system policies were adapted according to these threshold values  Pupils of a class were allowed to share the tablets and use them for monitoring alerts and set filters themselves  Trials were carried out for 1 week
    31. 31. Alert Monitoring Policies - Evaluation
    32. 32. Power Management Service - Evaluation  Android based smartphones and tablets were distributed among pupils and teachers  App was used to monitor and control the power management service installed in 3 of the computer rooms of the school  The app would also allow a user to change the state of the computers in computer rooms from IDLE to AWAKE or OFF.  Tests performed with pupils from two classes for 1 week each (= total 2 weeks) with the tablets and 1 week with the smart phones  Policies were adapted after every week (Phase) of the trial
    33. 33. Power Management Service – Evaluation: Week 1 vs Week 2
    34. 34. Power Management Service – Evaluation: Week 2 vs Week 3
    35. 35. Conclusion
    36. 36. Conclusions 1. How dependent are semantic policies on the contextual conditions for which they have been developed?  Various degrees of dependence of policies on various parameters shown 2. Which context parameters are included in a typical policy?  A list of five context parameters identified and studied in details. “People” as context deliberately excluded from this list
    37. 37. Conclusions 3. How dependent are the context parameters on each other?  The inter-dependencies of the listed parameters studied and explained in details 4. Can a policy be adapted from one contextual setting to another using this knowledge and still solve the purpose for which the policy was originally created?  A technique for context based adaptation of semantic policies was proposed and evaluated for the use case of smart buildings on real users
    38. 38. Thank You for Attention Reference: Kumar, V., Fensel, A., Fröhlich, P. “Context Based Adaptation of Semantic Rules in Smart Buildings”. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services (iiWAS2013), ACM, 2-4 December 2013, Vienna, Austria.

    ×