The rosetta model: can the different physical science data models be reconciled?

From Semantic Portal Wiki

Edit

Reference:

1. Todd A. King, Deborah L. McGuinness, Raymond J. Walker, Peter Fox, D. Aaron Roberts, Christopher Harvey. The Rosetta Model: Can the Different Physical Science Data Models be Reconciled? , American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting (AGU2007) (Eos Trans. AGU 88(52), Fall Meet. Suppl., Abstract IN53B-1209), 2007

bibtex

@inproceedings { king2007the ,
  author = "Todd A. King, Deborah L. McGuinness, Raymond J. Walker, Peter Fox, D. Aaron Roberts, Christopher Harvey", 
booktitle = "American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting (AGU2007)", 
note = "Eos Trans. AGU 88(52), Fall Meet. Suppl., Abstract IN53B-1209", 
title = "The Rosetta Model: Can the Different Physical Science Data Models be Reconciled?", 
year = "2007", 
} 

abstract: There are a variety of data models in the physical sciences, some of which are in overlapping domains. Each of the data models have been derived in different ways. Some have been based on formal ontologies, others on informal ontologies and others on relational schemas. An additional complication is that different international agencies have divided the physical science domains into different sub-domains leading to some confusion as to which data model to adopt. The most prevalent data models in use today are the Planetary Data System (PDS), Space Physics Archive Search and Extract (SPASE), Virtual Solar Terrestrial Observatory (VSTO), the International Virtual Observatory Alliance (IVOA) and the Global Change Master Directory (GCMD). We take a comparative look at the various data models and ask the questions: Can they be reconciled? Is it possible to have a Rosetta Model to translate between each of the models? What role can ontologies play in defining a Rosetta Model?

download:

• paper:
• slides: