FilteredPush use of Open Annotation Ontology presented at Stanford University, April 8 2013

1. FilteredPush
PI James Hanken
Maureen A. Kelly
David B. Lowery
Paul J. Morris
Robert A. Morris
James A. Macklin
University of California, Davis Bertram Ludacher
Tianhong Song
Sven Koehler
Harvard University Herbaria Former Project Participants
Lei Dou
Chinua Iloabachie
University of Massachusetts, Boston Timothy McPhillips
Donna Tremonte
Zhimin Wang
NSF: DBI #0960535 (Production, Year 3 of 3)
NSF: DBI #0646266 (Prototype, Complete)
http://wiki.filteredpush.org

2. Annotate What?
●
Curatorial and scientific metadata for an
estimated 3 bn. specimens in the world's
natural history collections. 1 bn in U.S.
●
Digital record of about 1.5% at most. See
gbif.org (Also includes non-captured
observations).

4. http://www.flickr.com/photos/nhm_beetle_id/5556112706
/

5. ●
Ongoing programs in U.S., Europe,
Australia,...to digitize all.
●
In U.S., 10 year, $500 M effort now underway;
automated; semi-automated;
– QC issues; correlations to other paper and digital
resources; intentionally changing data

6. The Problem: Data Quality
● Collections & occurrence data is
all over the map
– … literally (off the map!)
– … even after “digitization” (sensu stricto)
– … and after “digitization” (sensu lato),
a.k.a. “computerization”
● Issues:
– Lat/Long transposition,
coordinate & projection issues
– Data entry/creation, “fuzzy”
data, naming issues, bit rot,
data conversions and
transformations, schema
mappings, … (you name it)
6

7. (1) Kvetch about data
(2) Push to interested parties
(3) Filter
http://xkcd.com/386/
(4) Change data
in databases
(5) Store all assertions

8. Modeling distributed annotations of
mutable, actionable, distributed
data
●
OA is almost adequate
+ clear distinction between annotation model
and domain models;
+ provenance support
+ web document-centric features are optional
+ SpecificResource model fits data annotation
well
+ Use of CNT for machine-opaque resources
+ (RDF is friendly to semantic pub/sub)

9. Modeling distributed annotations of
mutable, actionable, distributed
data
●
OA is almost adequate
- Model of Evidence for assertions in Body.
- Model to convey annotator's Expectation to
consuming apps
- Model use of queries as Selectors
(-) Model “transcription” as an oa:Motivation
(?) Model domain associations between Target
and Body

11. :anAnnotation a oa:Annotation;
oa:hasTarget :nsptarget1;
oa:hasBody <http://fp.org/rangeViolation> ;
oa:hasBody :invalidLatitudeText.
:nsptarget1 a oad:AnySuchResource;
oa:hasSelector :findInvalidLatitudes.
:findInvalidLatitudes a oad:SparqlQuerySelector;
oad:hasQuery “select distinct ?x WHERE {
?x a dwcFP:Occurrence.
?x dwc:hasLatitude ?lat.
filter (?lat > 90 || ?lat < 90).}”;
[…] .

12. Clients AnnotationProcessor
AnnotationProcessor
Specify 6 Mapper ClientLibrary
Specify6 Driver SparqlRules
Specify6-HUH Driver OA/OAD
SQL Driver dwcFP
FP-oauth-consumer
Morphbank FP-oauth-provider
FilteredPush instance
Client Tools FP Network Triage
FP-PHP-Library
ClientLibrary FP Access Point
SparqlRules
Symbiota OA/OAD
Knowledge Messaging Analysis
FilteredPush instance
dwcFP JMS-KVP Kepler
MySQL
RDF Handler Fuseki SPARQL
Push
Fedora
Kepler Kuration
Mongo

13. Who asserted photo:owner ???

14. No confusion about provenance of photo:owner assertion ?

15. END
http://wiki.filteredpush.org
Video there in a few(?) weeks

16. Specimen record annotation