Towards a comprehensive call ontology for research 2.0


Published on

Presentation of our paper at i-Know 2011

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Towards a comprehensive call ontology for research 2.0

  1. 1. Towards a Comprehensive Call Ontology for Research 2.0<br />Vladimir Tomberg, David Lamas, Mart Laanpere, Tallinn University;<br />Wolfgang Reinhardt, University of Paderborn;<br />JelenaJovanovic, University of Belgrade<br />ICWL 2011, Graz, Austria<br />
  2. 2. Researcher and CfP<br />Researchers spend a lot of time deleting dozens of useless CfPs from their email inboxes;<br />They spend even more time looking for relevant CfPs on the Web;<br />It is the very common situation when a researcher receives a word about an appropriate CfP a day after the submission deadline;<br />
  3. 3. The Challenge: Semantically enhanced CfP<br />Can we target two opposite sides of the CfP publication process: <br />Solutions for semantic search, filtering and recommendation of CfPs should be designed for researchers;<br />Semantically rich tools and workflows for the dissemination of CfPs targeted at CfP providers;<br />
  4. 4. State of the Art: Where CfPs are now?<br />Mailing Lists and Blogs;<br />Web Based Services;<br />Adding Semantics to HTML; <br />Parsing Plain CfP Data;<br />CfP Related Representation Frameworks<br />
  5. 5. Mailing Lists and Blogs<br />Mailing lists’ examples:<br />dbworld<br />AISWorld<br />Not very efficient solution in terms of filtering data or semantic search;<br />Ability of blogs to provide the semantic meaning for posts is limited by the RSS vocabulary<br />
  6. 6. Web Based Services<br />Try to implement a semantic approach to processing the CfP data:<br />WikiCFP;<br />;<br />Conference Alerts;<br />PapersInvited;<br />AllConferences.Com;<br />etc;<br />Use HTML with no semantic markup; <br />Limited, not compatible vocabularies<br />
  7. 7. Adding Semantics to HTML <br />Technologies that support applying semantics to HTML:<br />Microformats– has very limited vocabulary;<br />RDFa– not a clear prospect after end of XHTML2;<br />Microdata– a new player, almost isn’t used at all, no web browser supports microdata at the moment<br />
  8. 8. Parsing Plain CfP Data<br />The first attempts were conducted in 1989;<br />Limitations:<br />Absence of unified CfP vocabulary;<br />Complex, multi-level structures of CfPs; <br />Continuously extended types of data used in CfPs do not allow for overall data extraction<br />
  9. 9. CfP Related Representation Frameworks<br />CfP vocabulary;<br />LODE – Linking Open Descriptions of Events;<br />ESWC2006 Conference Ontology; <br />AKT Portal;<br />SWRC – Semantic Web for Research Communities;<br />SWPortal – Semantic Web Portal; <br />SwetoDblp;<br />SEDE – Scholarly Event Description Ontology<br />
  10. 10. Findings in Analysis of Existing CfP Practices<br />Difference between the original CfPsand their analogues in WikiCFP– based on vocabulary web-form scaffolds event organizers to provide information in more standardised manner;<br />We found that all used concepts can be categorised into six groups: Events, Places, Submissions, Publications, Dates, and People<br />
  12. 12. Call ontology: concepts for Events<br />
  13. 13. Call ontology: concepts for Submissions<br />
  14. 14. Call ontology: concepts for Dates<br />
  15. 15. Call ontology: concepts for Publications<br />
  16. 16. Call ontology: concepts for People and Organizations<br />
  17. 17. Two Usage Scenarios for Call Ontology<br />Timeliner – a tool for supporting collaborative scientific writing; <br />Novel conference management system ginkgo<br />
  18. 18. Timeliner<br />Timeliner – concept of a mash-up tool supporting the orchestration of collaborative writing process;<br />Timeliner aggregates CfP-related data into a joint multi-level timeline inspired by Gantt chart<br />If CfP is accepted by user, all related deadlines (submission, acceptance, registration etc) and links to resources are placed on the timeline.<br />
  19. 19. Layered Timeliner architecture<br />
  20. 20. Ginkgo – Modern Conference Management System<br />ginkgo supports Research 2.0 practices with all the phases and roles involved in the organization of events;<br />ginkgo could apply the Call ontology presented here together with an easy-to-use editor;<br />ginkgo would provide a SPARQL endpoint where crawler could access all available CfPs of events managed with the system<br />
  21. 21. Future Challenges<br />The existing conference management systems should be examined for the purpose of services integration; <br />Design of a service capable of aggregating and making use of semantic-rich CfP data generated by conference management systems. This service should: <br />Consume advertised CfPs;<br />Provide a structured and personalized access to such data for researchers<br />
  22. 22. Thanks for your attention!<br />