Implied ontological representation within the levels of conceptual interoperability model

The Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model LCIM has been developed to provide both a metric of the degree of conceptual representation that exists between interoperating systems and also as a guide showing what is necessary to accommodate a targeted degree of conceptual representation between systems. The model was originally developed to support the interoperability of simulation systems, but has been shown to be useful for other domain areas. The model is stratified into seven general levels, and these are introduced and defined. Implied within the model is that the information and processes of one system should be described and that description is then made available to another system. This description of information and processes can take many forms, but is generally an ontological representation. The components of an ontological representation are defined in form and also as elements for the various layers of the LCIM.

[1]  Leslie S. Winters,et al.  Next Generation Data Interoperability: It's all About the Metadata , 2008 .

[2]  Chen C. Chang,et al.  Model Theory: Third Edition (Dover Books On Mathematics) By C.C. Chang;H. Jerome Keisler;Mathematics , 1966 .

[3]  Andreas Tolk,et al.  The Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model , 2003 .

[4]  Mike Uschold,et al.  A Framework for Understanding and Classifying Ontology Applications , 1999 .

[5]  J. Mark Pullen,et al.  Extensible Battle Management Language as a Transformation Enabler , 2004, Simul..

[6]  Ram D. Sriram,et al.  Ontology-based exchange of product data semantics , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering.

[7]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Understanding and building, using ontologies , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[8]  Andreas Tolk,et al.  Taxonomies, Ontologies, Battle Management Languages - Recommendations for the Coalition BML Study Group , 2005 .

[9]  Ronald J. Brachman,et al.  An overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System , 1985 .

[10]  Bo Sun,et al.  Web Services based on the C2IEDM - Data Mediation and Data Storage , 2005 .

[11]  Andreas Tolk,et al.  Overview of recent Findings of the Study Groups of the Simulation Interoperability Workshop dealing with C3I and M&S Interoperability , 2003 .

[12]  Stefano Spaccapietra,et al.  Model independent assertions for integration of heterogeneous schemas , 1992, The VLDB Journal.

[13]  Leslie S. Winters,et al.  Composable M&S Web Services for Net-Centric Applications , 2006 .

[14]  Werner Ceusters,et al.  Towards a Reference Terminology for Ontology Research and Development in the Biomedical Domain , 2006, KR-MED.

[15]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[16]  J. Stuart Aitken,et al.  A Process Ontology , 2002, EKAW.

[17]  Barry Smith,et al.  Beyond Concepts: Ontology as Reality Representation , 2004 .

[18]  Peter P. Chen.  The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, VLDB '75.

[19]  Armin Haller,et al.  A process ontology to represent semantics of different process and choreography meta-models , 2006 .

[20]  Vladan Devedzic,et al.  Understanding ontological engineering , 2002, CACM.

[21]  Leo Obrst,et al.  The Semantic Web: A Guide to the Future of XML, Web Services and Knowledge Management , 2003 .

[22]  C. K. Ogden,et al.  The Meaning of Meaning , 1923 .

[23]  Jane Hunter,et al.  Towards a Core Ontology for Information Integration , 2003, J. Digit. Inf..

[24]  Chris Welty.  Guest editorial: ontology research , 2003 .