Finding and sharing GIS methods based on the questions they answer

ABSTRACT Geographic information has become central for data scientists of many disciplines to put their analyzes into a spatio-temporal perspective. However, just as the volume and variety of data sources on the Web grow, it becomes increasingly harder for analysts to be familiar with all the available geospatial tools, including toolboxes in Geographic Information Systems (GIS), R packages, and Python modules. Even though the semantics of the questions answered by these tools can be broadly shared, tools and data sources are still divided by syntax and platform-specific technicalities. It would, therefore, be hugely beneficial for information science if analysts could simply ask questions in generic and familiar terms to obtain the tools and data necessary to answer them. In this article, we systematically investigate the analytic questions that lie behind a range of common GIS tools, and we propose a semantic framework to match analytic questions and tools that are capable of answering them. To support the matching process, we define a tractable subset of SPARQL, the query language of the Semantic Web, and we propose and test an algorithm for computing query containment. We illustrate the identification of tools to answer user questions on a set of common user requests.

[1]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  A reasonable Semantic Web , 2010, Semantic Web.

[2]  Jens Lehmann,et al.  Sorry, i don't speak SPARQL: translating SPARQL queries into natural language , 2013, WWW.

[3]  Daniel Fitzner,et al.  Functional description of geoprocessing services as conjunctive datalog queries , 2011, GeoInformatica.

[4]  Andrea Calì,et al.  A general datalog-based framework for tractable query answering over ontologies , 2009, SEBD.

[5]  Carlos Granell,et al.  Integrating Semantic and Syntactic Descriptions to Chain Geographic Services , 2006, IEEE Internet Computing.

[6]  Simon Scheider,et al.  Knowing Whether Spatio-Temporal Analysis Procedures Are Applicable to Datasets , 2016, FOIS.

[7]  Sebastian Rudolph,et al.  Foundations of Semantic Web Technologies , 2009 .

[8]  Matthias S. Müller,et al.  Moving code – Sharing geoprocessing logic on the Web , 2013 .

[9]  U. Visser,et al.  Ontologies for geographic information processing , 2002 .

[10]  James Allan,et al.  Frontiers, challenges, and opportunities for information retrieval: Report from SWIRL 2012 the second strategic workshop on information retrieval in Lorne , 2012, SIGF.

[11]  Philipp Cimiano,et al.  Sorry, I only speak natural language: a pattern-based, data-driven and guided approach to mapping natural language queries to SPARQL , 2015, IESD@ISWC.

[12]  Song Gao,et al.  Asking Spatial Questions to Identify GIS Functionality , 2013, 2013 Fourth International Conference on Computing for Geospatial Research and Application.

[13]  Werner Kuhn,et al.  Designing a Language for Spatial Computing , 2015, AGILE Conf..

[14]  Benjamin Pross,et al.  OGC® WPS 2.0 Interface Standard , 2015 .

[15]  Mehmet Emin Mutlu,et al.  On the track of Artificial Intelligence: Learning with Intelligent Personal Assistants , 2016 .

[16]  Simon Scheider,et al.  Semantic typing of linked geoprocessing workflows , 2018, Int. J. Digit. Earth.

[17]  Rob Lemmens,et al.  Semantic interoperability of distributed geo-services , 2006 .

[18]  Anna-Lena Lamprecht,et al.  User-Level Workflow Design , 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[19]  Anna-Lena Lamprecht User-Level Workflow Design - A Bioinformatics Perspective , 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[20]  Werner Kuhn,et al.  Core concepts of spatial information for transdisciplinary research , 2012, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[21]  Michael Lutz Ontology-Based Descriptions for Semantic Discovery and Composition of Geoprocessing Services , 2007, GeoInformatica.

[22]  Rolf Schwitter,et al.  Controlled Natural Languages for Knowledge Representation , 2010, COLING.

[23]  Bertram Ludäscher,et al.  Managing scientific data: From data integration to scientific workflows* , 2006 .

[24]  Simon Scheider,et al.  Using SPARQL to describe GIS methods in terms of the questions they answer , 2017 .

[25]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2002, May 29-31, 2002, Las Palmas, Canary Islands, Spain , 2002 .

[26]  Carlo Zaniolo,et al.  Answering Controlled Natural Language Questions on RDF Knowledge Bases , 2016, EDBT.

[27]  Sébastien Ferré SQUALL: The expressiveness of SPARQL 1.1 made available as a controlled natural language , 2014, Data Knowl. Eng..

[28]  John Yearwood,et al.  The Impact of Semantic Class Identification and Semantic Role Labeling on Natural Language Answer Extraction , 2008, ECIR.

[29]  Jimmy J. Lin The Web as a Resource for Question Answering: Perspectives and Challenges , 2002, LREC.

[30]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  An Introduction to Ontology-Based Query Answering with Existential Rules , 2019 .

[31]  Stephan Mäs,et al.  Towards a knowledge base to support geoprocessing workflow development , 2017, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[32]  Krzysztof Janowicz,et al.  Modeling Ontology Design Patterns with Domain Experts - A View From the Trenches , 2016, Ontology Engineering with Ontology Design Patterns.

[33]  Johannes Brauner Formalizations for geooperators-geoprocessing in Spatial Data Infrastructures , 2015 .

[34]  Sergio J. Rey,et al.  Show me the code: spatial analysis and open source , 2009, J. Geogr. Syst..

[35]  Stephan Mäs,et al.  Scientific geodata infrastructures: challenges, approaches and directions , 2014, Int. J. Digit. Earth.

[36]  Peng Yue,et al.  The Geoprocessing Web , 2012, Comput. Geosci..

[37]  M. Kwan Geographies of health, disease, and well-being : recent advances in theory and method , 2016 .

[38]  Konrad Hinsen,et al.  Computational science: shifting the focus from tools to models , 2014, F1000Research.

[39]  Jens Lehmann,et al.  CubeQA - Question Answering on RDF Data Cubes , 2016, SEMWEB.

[40]  Simon Scheider,et al.  Patterns of Consumption and Connectedness in GIS Web Sources , 2018, AGILE Conf..

[41]  Carole A. Goble,et al.  Using a suite of ontologies for preserving workflow-centric research objects , 2015, J. Web Semant..