Ontology of user's view
Keywords: Topic Maps, Matchmaking, mergeMap, Published Subject, Ontology, Catering Service, Cooking
Biography
Director of Synergy Incubate Inc. Received bachelor of engineering in electronic engineering from Aichi Institute of Technology. Related to SGML and XML document sharing/exchanging on the WEB for many years. Recently engaging in several Topic Maps projects. Interested in knowledge representation, knowledge processing, knowledge management etc. Member of ISO/IEC SC34, IEEE and ACM. Synergy Incubate is member of IDEAlliance and OASIS.
In order to realize exchange and share of something including information and knowledge, it should be needed for a provider and a user to arrive at same things and to recognize it. In some case the user may arrive the thing following his conceptual tree from root to leave, sometimes the user may hyper jump one branch to other. In other case the user may arrive the thing directly. According to his classification, the provider may locate his offerings in his conceptual space.
When we think about cooking as a concrete thing, it seems that there are various way a user can select a cooking. For example, the first case, the user may select a cooking from the view of ingredient like meet, fish, vegetable etc, the second case the user may select it from the view of country or area like Japanese cooking, Korean cooking, Chinese cooking, etc. And furthermore, a person who is caring about his health may select a cooking from the view of nutrient or a person who is not good health may select a cooking to fit his condition. On the other hand, it seems popular that a provider (a restaurant) provide a cooking in accordance with their menu and classifying and locating it in their context. Some kinds of restaurant may have a menu that is one-sided to specific cooking, another kinds of restaurant have a menu that cover wide range of cooking. It seems that the condition a cooking is selected is that a user and a provider identify and specify the same cooking.
We engaged in the catering service project of a self-governing body. In that project, we developed choice system of cooking using Topic Maps. From the user's and the provider's point of view, we classified the cooking (ontology) and created Topic Maps separately. In that we defined things (cooking) that the user and the provider could identify in common and use it to make Topic Maps as component. We used mergeMap function of Topic Map and also used the cooking as binding point of merge. As a result, the user was able to select the cooking and the provider from user's point of view (matchmaking of user and provider) without special matching mechanism. In this case it seems that the common things (cooking) can be defined as the Published Subject. As the result, Published Subjects become the binding points. Though in this project the common things were the cooking, it is possible to apply to another things.
Each user and provider creates Topic Map separately according to their ontology using same component, which are defined as the Published Subjects. Then they bring their Topic Maps into “common place” (market place) and merge all of them using mergeMap function of Topic Map. As a result locating the Published Subjects as binding points, the user and the provider can obtain matchmaking mechanism, which is personalized for each user and provider. We hope that eventually the knowledge and theory developed through this project will help bring new application of Topic Maps.
Introduction
Brief
Overview of Empiric Test
Context
Purpose
Position
and Scope
Choice
System of Cooking using Topic Maps
Topic
(Concept/Subject)
User
Provider
Menu
Classification
of Cooking, Criteria of
Choice
Name
of Cooking
Interrelation
between Topics
User's
View
Provider's
View
Topic
Maps from various Points of View
Matchmaking
Mechanism
Consideration
Published
Subject as Binding Point
Challenges
in Future
Normalization
of Cooking Name
Correspondence
to Change
Development
of Topic Maps Graphical Editor/Viewer
Conclusion
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
Bibliography
We engaged in the catering service project of a self-governing body from August 2001 to May 2002. In that project, we developed choice system of cooking using Topic Maps. In order to assist a user to select a cooking, this system acts as intermediary between the user and the provider of the cooking.
At the beginning of this paper, we give an overview of the empirical project and show the position of the cooking choice system in that project. Next we describe topics (subjects), interrelations of topics and mechanism of matchmaking in the domain of cooking choice. Then we consider the result and the problems to be solved. Lastly we sum up our paper.
Keywords: Catering Service, Cooking
Two years have elapsed since nursing care insurance program was prepared and enforced in Japan in order to cope with problems of the medical care for elderly people, nursing care and welfare. At this moment the framework of the nursing care insurance program is formed and is operating from insurance provider's point of view. To make this program more useful according to actual conditions, it is hoped to evolve into consolidated service providing system with community-based living, from total view point including medical care, nursing care, welfare, insurance, and living.
At the same time, for the reason of the progress of IT (information technology), global network of information have been build and it is becoming possible to circulate and share information and knowledge that consist of various media and representation. In the community-based living, it is becoming possible to enjoy the benefit of it for all people equally.
It is beginning to seek a way that leads us to higher level nursing care and welfare system. In the social framework that use IT effectively, the system can combine many people including user of nursing care, it's family, neighbors, area volunteer, service provider, etc. organically.
In the new social framework in which IT is embedded, the user of nursing care, it's family, neighbors, area volunteer, service provider, etc. can communicate more effectively and precisely using their familiar word. The purpose of this project is to enable to share word (term) especially dialect word. For that purpose we collect the word, classify, clean up and define it. Additionally, in the community-based living with strong link, it is intended that people can live a meaningful life.
In the catering service project, the choice system of cooking using Topic Maps is located to a part of the information system that support the catering service. This system define and computerize the word and the vocabulary and the interrelation of them namely ontology, that is used to select cooking. It make possible to share, use and exchange the ontology between computer system and human and also make possible to select cooking according to the ontology. Accordingly, we collect the word and the vocabulary within the realm of the cooking choice system.
Note that, in that fiscal year we develop the ontology and the system independently, and the integration with related system is expected to implement the next year.
Keywords: Topic Maps, Matchmaking, mergeMap, Published Subject, Ontology
In order to realize exchange and share of something including information and knowledge, it should be needed for a provider and a user to arrive at same things and to recognize it. In some case the user may arrive the thing following his conceptual tree from root to leave, sometimes the user may hyper jump one branch to other. In other case the user may arrive the thing directly. According to his classification, the provider may locate his offerings in his conceptual space.
Concepts and relationship of concepts are by no means simply represented by tree structure. It is rather complex graph that have layers of several times over.
This chapter describes the matchmaking mechanism using Topic Maps between users and cooking that are provided by providers.
As main topic (concept/subject) related to the cooking choice system, we can conceive user and provider of cooking first. Cooking is presented in a menu and is classified by diverse view point.
It is the user of catering service, and it contains not only himself but also his family.
It is the provider of cooking. There are two kind of provider, one of them is supplier of the catering service and the other is restaurant.
It is the menu of cooking that is made by a provider and is used by a user to select the cooking.
It seems popular that a provider (a restaurant or a supplier of the catering service) provides the cooking in accordance with their menu and classifying and locating it in their context. Some kinds of restaurants may have the menu that is one-sided to specific cooking and another kinds of restaurants have the menu that covers wide range of cooking.
In the case of a user classify and select a cooking and a provider make a menu, it becomes the criteria of it.
When we think about cooking as a concrete thing, it seems that there are various way a user can select a cooking. For example, the first case, the user may select the cooking from the view of ingredient like meet, fish, vegetable etc, the second case the user may select it from the view of country or area like Japanese cooking, Korean cooking, Chinese cooking, etc. And furthermore, a person who is caring about his health may select a cooking from the view of nutrient or a person who is not good health may select a cooking to fit his condition.
shows the classification of word or vocabulary related cooking.
| Ingredient | Representation of Gustation | Nursing Care Cooking | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nutritional Elements | Area | Season | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Table 1
Additionally, each classification includes many example of concrete cooking. shows the concrete cooking regarding egg dishes that is classified according the ingredient.
| Egg Dishes |
|---|
| fried egg |
| eggs fried sunny-side up |
| boiled egg |
| scrambled egg |
| pot-steamed hotchpotch |
| steamed egg custard |
| omelet |
| egg-drop wheat noodle |
| egg-drop buckwheat noodle |
Table 8
It is the name of the cooking which is conceived conceptually and bind concrete entity. It become possible to select and provide because of a user and a provider share the common recognition.
As the interrelations between topics, there are widely two kind of view. One is the view in the case of a user select a cooking and the other is the view of a provider. The examples of relationship are the following.
Keywords: Topic Maps, Ontology
It seems that the condition of when a cooking has selected is that a user and a provider identify and specify the cooking.
From a user's and a provider's point of view, we classified the cooking (ontology) and created Topic Maps separately. In that we defined things (cooking) that the user and the provider could identify in common and use it to make Topic Maps as component. shows the ontology from user's point of view. And shows the ontology from provider's point of view.
Keywords: Matchmaking, mergeMap, Cooking, Ontology
We use the mergeMap function of Topic Map and also use the cooking as binding points of merge. As a result, the user can select the cooking and the provider from the user's point of view (matchmaking of user and provider) without special matching mechanism. shows the bound ontology of user's ontology and provider's ontology.
Keywords: Published Subject, Topic Maps, Ontology, mergeMap, Matchmaking
Keywords: Published Subject, Topic Maps, mergeMap
It seems that the common things that can be commonly conceived by a user and a provider can be defined as the Published Subjects . As the result, Published Subjects become the binding points. Though in this project the common things are cooking, it is possible to apply to another things.
Each user and provider creates Topic Map separately according to their ontology using same components that are defined as Published Subjects. Then they bring their Topic Maps into “common place” (market place) and merge all of them using mergeMap function of Topic Map. As a result locating Published Subjects as binding points, the user and the provider can obtain matchmaking mechanism that is personalized for each user and provider.
There is a huge variety of cooking the number is more than expected at first and rise further by attaching a rhetorical figure. In a certain case, depending on users, providers and areas, the same cooking name mean different kind of cooking, conversely a cooking has several names. After this, it seems to be necessary to normalize the name of the cooking, for this purpose it is expected that enormous amount of work and patience is necessitated.
In the menu provided by the provider, there are considerable cooking that change on a daily or monthly basis. To cope with the change, it is a problem to be solved to develop features that input menu and generate a Topic Map automatically.
In order to do more visually and be able to navigate selecting process of cooking more friendly to user, it is desired to develop a graphical viewer that customized for the application in question. Also it is believed that the ontology that be used to select a cooking have been changing all the time because of addition and alteration of the cooking and addition and alteration of the classification, etc. To cope with it, the necessity of graphical tools that can be operated intuitively by the user is strongly recognized.
Keywords: Published Subject, Topic Maps, Ontology, mergeMap, Matchmaking
We described the matchmaking mechanism using Topic Maps, as one of the application of Topic Maps. Ontology is usable to various applications, and it makes the application possible to have intuitive man-machine interface and to arrange and organize information along with it.
There is a possibility that each people recognize abstract concepts and it's interrelations differently, go to extremes 100 people can make 100 different kind of ontology. In such a condition, Introducing the Published Subject can make the ontology to merge and bind each other and the Published Subject become a bind point of them. By using personal ontology, it makes possible to organize information from personal view point (so called Personalization), at the same time by merging the ontology, it makes possible to organize information from generic and standard view point.
By means of combining ontology, Published Subject, and application, it makes possible freely to set up a view to information that is currently increasing so to speak anarchically and makes possible to organize it according to the ontology, and it also makes possible to achieve advanced type of information processing further more knowledge processing. We hope that eventually the knowledge and theory developed through this project will help bring new application of Topic Maps.
A published subject is any subject for which a subject indicator has been made available for public use and is accessible online via a URI. A published subject indicator is therefore any resource that has been published in order to provide a positive, unambiguous indication of the identity of a subject for the purpose of facilitating topic map interchange and mergeability. Please see http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/ and http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tm-pubsubj/
