Evolutionary Shared Knowledge Architecture Perspective and Principles (Networking enables social evolution of knowledge.) ...
Architecture Challenge: Enabling dynamic evolution of social knowledge relevant to mission goals and needs of collaborativ...
Evolutionary Shared Knowledge Architectural Perspective and Principles <ul><li>Knowledge is dynamic and evolves  with huma...
<Domain Knowledge>  <Domain Knowledge>  Intentional Comm Agent B Ex p = <Context, Domain, Intention, Language  Intentional...
Examples of Semantic Interoperability Architectural Problems <ul><li>Semantic interpretation errors of system interactions...
Architectural Perspective of Increasing Semantic Capability for Agents Evolving Mission relevant Social Knowledge <ul><li>...
Agent Knowledge Social Knowledge Sharing of Semantic Interactions Leading to Social Knowledge Evolution
Explicit Services and Purposeful Speech Acts, No Semantics Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts...
Explicit Semantic Knowledge, Services, and Speech Acts Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Con...
Explicit Mission Context Knowledge Added Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Purposefu...
Comprehensive Cognitive Semantic Interoperability Model Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Co...
Conclusion <ul><li>A shared knowledge architecture perspective ensures consistent semantic interoperability across all int...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Jydodenterprisearch2010talk

308 views

Published on

&quot;Evolutionary Shared Knowledge Architecture Perspective&quot;, Presentation at 2010 DoD Enterprise Architecture Conference

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
308
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
18
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Knowledge is dynamic and evolves with human experience, networks and systems are partners in this evolution. Architectures will focus on providing knowledge required to its user community by defining dynamic and evolutionary capabilities to gather, search, analyze, interpret, model, predict, and share consistent information relevant to their mission and purpose Architectures will be more extensible and flexible through dynamic coordination of knowledge resources at different levels of scope, semantic compatibility, and granularity for different user roles and capabilities An overarching knowledge perspective is required across all architecture views as to identifying the enabling or impeding capabilities for knowledge sharing and mutually consistent interpretation A careful assessment should be made of the nature of the architectural semantic definitions for all messages, data, schemas, interfaces, protocols, etc. (machine, human, hybrid) to identify possible semantic impediments preventing shared knowledge
  • Jydodenterprisearch2010talk

    1. 1. Evolutionary Shared Knowledge Architecture Perspective and Principles (Networking enables social evolution of knowledge.) Panelist: John A. Yanosy Jr. [email_address] 972-705-1807
    2. 2. Architecture Challenge: Enabling dynamic evolution of social knowledge relevant to mission goals and needs of collaborative communities Action Readiness Mission Relevance Effort Unity Coordination Knowledge Mission Requirements Knowledge Tasking Decision Knowledge Shared knowledge Architecture defined capabilities to collect, fuse, discover, represent, relate, understand, and reason about knowledge
    3. 3. Evolutionary Shared Knowledge Architectural Perspective and Principles <ul><li>Knowledge is dynamic and evolves with human experience and social networks </li></ul><ul><li>Social networking architecture enables evolution of community knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Architecture must support dynamic coordination and social use of knowledge resources relevant to mission </li></ul><ul><li>An overarching knowledge perspective is required across all architecture views </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Compatibility and Consistency of network dependencies for knowledge representation and reasoning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Explicit definitions versus implicit assumptions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Machine versus human representation and reasoning </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. <Domain Knowledge> <Domain Knowledge> Intentional Comm Agent B Ex p = <Context, Domain, Intention, Language Intentional Expressions Semantic Interaction Domain Knowledge Intentional speech acts Intentional Speech acts Collaborative knowledge Cognitive Reasoning & Logics Perception, Actions Perception, Actions Intensional knowledge Context Knowledge Cognitive Reasoning & Logics Domain of Interest - Real & Social- Cultural Worlds External Knowledge( Schemas, Taxonomies, Ontologies, Namespaces, Metadata) Semantic Interactions & Query Language Semantic Interactions & Query Language Ontologies & Logic Taxonomies Domain Schemas Vocabularies Namespaces Common Logic Upper Ontologies Semantic Rules Context KR Intensional Logic XML Data Elements Ontologies & Logic Taxonomies Domain Schemas Vocabularies Namespaces Common Logic Upper Ontologies Semantic Rules Context KR Intensional Logic XML Data Elements Intensional Semantics Intensional Semantics Collaboration Multi Agent Semantic Model Distributed & Common Knowledge) Collaboration Multi Agent Semantic Model Distributed & Common Knowledge Context knowledge Context knowledge
    5. 5. Examples of Semantic Interoperability Architectural Problems <ul><li>Semantic interpretation errors of system interactions cause significant interoperability problems </li></ul><ul><li>Semantic interpretation errors occur in multiple areas and at different phases of a system’s lifecycle (requirements, architecture, design, implementation, test, operation) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Between systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between systems and people </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between systems and sensors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between software elements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between protocols </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between network services and clients, users of services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between information systems and creators/users of information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between different organizations and expectations about the use of systems and information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Between definitions of concepts between people in different contexts </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. Architectural Perspective of Increasing Semantic Capability for Agents Evolving Mission relevant Social Knowledge <ul><li>Architectural knowledge dependencies can be analyzed for explicit-implicit knowledge representation for </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction Goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction Context </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shared Domain Knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction Intention </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication scope for above elements </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Full Semantic interoperability enables an open world environment of multiple system types and agent purposes by having and sharing explicit semantic representations of agent, system and environment goals, context, intentions, actions, available services, domain knowledge, and speech acts have explicit semantic representations </li></ul>
    7. 7. Agent Knowledge Social Knowledge Sharing of Semantic Interactions Leading to Social Knowledge Evolution
    8. 8. Explicit Services and Purposeful Speech Acts, No Semantics Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Purposeful Communications Intentions, Services Intentions, Services Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Request, Commitment Shared Knowledge Perspective, Situation Collaboration, Role REACTIVE COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT Perception Perception World Modifying Actions World Modifying Actions ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT
    9. 9. Explicit Semantic Knowledge, Services, and Speech Acts Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Purposeful Communications Intentions, Services Intentions, Services Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Request, Commitment Shared Knowledge Perspective, Situation Collaboration, Role REACTIVE COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT Perception Perception World Modifying Actions World Modifying Actions ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT
    10. 10. Explicit Mission Context Knowledge Added Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Purposeful Communications Intentions, Services Intentions, Services Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Request, Commitment Shared Knowledge Perspective, Situation Collaboration, Role REACTIVE COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT Perception Perception World Modifying Actions World Modifying Actions ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT
    11. 11. Comprehensive Cognitive Semantic Interoperability Model Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Goals Knowledge Speech Acts Context Purposeful Communications Intentions, Services Intentions, Services Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Reasoning Request, Commitment Shared Knowledge Perspective, Situation Collaboration, Role REACTIVE COGNITIVE ENVIRONMENT Perception Perception World Modifying Actions World Modifying Actions ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT
    12. 12. Conclusion <ul><li>A shared knowledge architecture perspective ensures consistent semantic interoperability across all interdependent collaborating elements supporting agent knowledge sharing and evolution of social knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>A semantic interaction model is defined to assist in the analysis and development of semantically consistent architecture interactions </li></ul>

    ×