Jiao Tao
From Semantic Portal Wiki
| Jiao Tao (Person) [ Edit ] | |
| File:Anonymous.png | |
| Basic Description | |
| affiliation | RPI |
| occupation | Category:PhD Student |
| Contact Information | |
| General Relation | |
| Inferred Relation
| |
Contents |
publications
total:4
2009
- Jiao Tao, Li Ding, Deborah L. McGuinness. Instance Data Evaluation for Semantic Web-Based Knowledge Management Systems , Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2009 [TW-2009-01] [ download paper ] [ download slides ]
2008
- Li Ding, Jiao Tao, Deborah L. McGuinness. OWL Instance Data Evaluation , OWL Experiences and Directions DC (OWLED2008DC), 2008 [TW-2008-04] [ download paper ] [ download slides ]
- Jiao Tao, Li Ding, Jie Bao, Deborah L. McGuinness. Characterizing and Detecting Integrity Issues in OWL Instance Data , Proceedings of the fifth International Workshop on The OWL: Experiences and Direction (OWLED),October 2008 [TW-2008-22] [ download paper ] [ download slides ]
- Li Ding, Jiao Tao, Deborah L. McGuinness. An initial investigation on evaluating semantic web instance data , WWW pp.1179-1180, 2008 [TW-2008-03] [ download paper ] [ download slides ]
Projects
CSCI 6966 Advanced Semantic Web (Fall 2008)
Jiao Tao's Presentation in CSCI6966
- In lesson 2(9/4/2008), I had a brief presentation SWIDE
- In lesson 4(9/18/2008), I did my research qualification presentation
- I did 3 presentations to Jie Bao and Ankesh about Integrity Constraint Checking
| Presentation Page | Paper Presented | Authors | URL |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jiao Concept Mapping | Learning Concept Mappings from Instance Similarity | Shenghui Wang Gwenn Englebienne Stefan Schlobach |
http://www.dit.unitn.it/%7Ep2p/RelatedWork/Matching/Wang-iswc08.pdf |
| Jiao Journal Presentation | Combining answer set programming with description logics for the Semantic Web | Thomas Eiter | http://tw.rpi.edu/portal/Image:AI-2008.pdf |
| Questions for From SPARQL to Rules | From SPARQL to Rules (and back) | Axel Polleres | |
| Questions for The Expressive Power of SPARQL | The Expressive Power of SPARQL | Renzo Angles Claudio Gutierrez |
Presentation Questions from CSCI6966
Total: 5
| Question for the Presentation | Question asked | |
|---|---|---|
| Flink Jiao | James Journal Presentation | In section 3.2, "Flink also makes use of the rule language for carrying out identity reasoning". Name matching and and object identification are discussed. Object identification baed on IFP really makes sense. About name matching, differences in the last names are disallowed. Does this mean differences in the first names are allowed? If this it true then "jiao tao" and "jia tao" would be viewed as same persons however they are not. |
| Flink Jiao2 | James Journal Presentation | In figure 4 of section 3.1, four knowledge resources, which are HTML pages from the web, FOAF profiles from the semantic web, public colections of emails and publications. It is said web mining is used to discover the social network extraction from given HTML pages. How about the other knowledge sources? I think web mining can also be used to discover the associaions between researchers, at least from bibliographic information. For example, coauthor relationship in a given publication is one kind of proof of the associations between the authors; and the keywords of the publication suggest the research topic/interestes of the authors. Did the authors mention these in the paper? |
| Flink Jiao3 | James Journal Presentation | In the "errors in the extraction of specific cases" of section 4, it is said that disambiguation terms are used to mitigate the possible ambiguity (i.e. two different persons have same name) in the knowledge collection stage.However, only two disambiguation terms, semantic web and ontology, are mentioned in this paper. Are they enough? At least in semantic web domain, there are some other words can be used, like description logic, semantic query, and semantic web service, etc. |
| Flink Jiao4 | James Journal Presentation | In section 4, the author mentiones several aspects which may affect the quality of the data they collected. "To verify our method, we also plan to execute a separate study, where we compare the results from a traditional questionnaire method to the acquisition methods described here." Did the authors have any continual work on this? And what is the result of this comparison study? |
| Ontologyareus Jiao | Debbie Journal Presentation | In the evaluation section, the answers to question "In terms of the association between the concepts, which ontology of Semantic Web related concepts do you consider more accurate?" are used as metrics to demonstrate community-based ontology extraction method is better than item-based ontology extraction method. It's not surprising that community-based one is more accurate since it incorporates one more element, actor. Probably improving accurateness can be achieved by many ways, for example, provenance. And is "accurateness" enough for the comparison? How about the other issues, like scalability, tool support, etc.? |
I have answered the questions about my presentation in class. And I also asked some questions in class about the presentations made by other students. However, I didn't put them in their presentation page.
