Archive

Author Archive

Data.gov Datasets Translated in RDF!

July 22nd, 2009

We have created 16 RDF datasets covering 187 of the datasets published at data.gov (171 EPA datasets are subsets of three larger EPA datasets). The original datasets were published by EPA, US Census Bureau, USGS and Office of Management and Budget in CSV compatible format, and they contributed 13,532,250 table entries. The translated RDF datasets includes a total of 2,927,398,352 triples involving 2,526 properties.

We publish the RDF data in two alternative ways: (i) a collection of linked partition files in RDF/XML for users to browse the dataset and dereference the URIs using semantic web browsers, and (ii) one big N-TRIPLE file (data.nt) concatenating the partition files for machines, especially triple stores, to download and import. The largest dataset is Dataset_91, which contributed 2.11 billion triples.

To access the RDF datasets, users may go to Data.gov_Catalog with the following options:

  • follow links in the “rdf(index file)” column to access the index file in RDF/XML which contains the property list, statistics, and links of the RDF dataset. e.g. http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/raw/401/index.rdf
  • follow links in the “rdf(partition files)” column to start an RDF browser (e.g. tabulator) to surf the RDF/XML partition files. e.g. http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/raw/401/link00001.rdf
  • follow links in “the rdf(complete file)” column to download the complete RDF dataset in N-TRIPLE format (gzipped). e.g. http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/raw/401/data-401.nt.gz
  • follow links in the “url(data.gov)” column to see the original metadata at data.gov
  • follow links in the “wiki page” column to see enhanced metadata about data.gov datasets

More datasets are coming, so please stay tuned and come back to http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/.

Further reading:

Li Ding, Dominic DiFranzo, Sarah Magidson, and Jim Hendler

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 9.6/10 (7 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Author: Categories: linked data, Semantic Web Tags: , ,

What’s in data.gov

June 25th, 2009

A recent article by Tim Berners-Lee, “Putting Government Data online“, has  attracted significant interest to the  datasets published at the US data.gov website.  As Berners-Lee discusses the Semantic Web techniques that can be used to get those data into RDF space (something we are now working on), we would like to share our initial investigation of the contents of these government datasets.

updates:

* we have now published 5 billions triples from hundreds of datasets at http://data.gov. see http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/wiki/Data.gov_Catalog

I. Translate dataset into RDF

The catalog of the datasets in data.gov,http://www.data.gov/details/92,  is published in CSV format as part of data.gov. We  converted it into RDF using simple CSV parsing. We kept the translation minimal: (i) the properties are directly created from thecolumn names; (ii) each table row is mapped to an instance of pmlp:Dataset; (iii) all non-header cells are mapped to a literal – we don’t create new URIs at this point. The output of our work is published on tw website at:

http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/raw/92/data-92.rdf

(We are now starting to do more  integration work, extracting multiple objects from single tables, linking into the linked open data  cloud, etc.  and will publish new version when that is done – the purpose of this first work was simply to make the catalog more available to the RDF community)

II. Browse and query the RDF graph

As an example, we can browse the dataset in tabulator, and then use a SPARQL web service to query the dataset. For example, we use a sparql query to list datasets published in CSV format:

http://onto.rpi.edu/sw4j/sparql?queryURL=http://data-gov.tw.rpi.edu/sparql/select-csv-dataset.sparql

III. Observations on the RDF graph

Using this service we can answer some basic questions about the data.gov datatsets:

1. How many datasets are published, and how many among them can be easily converted into RDF?

There are 332 datasets which can be partitioned by  type:  raw data catalog(301);  tool catalog (31).

Not all of the datasets have a link to downloadable data because some offer only browseable data via their own websites,  Others  publish datasets in multiple formats. As of today, the online static files associated with the datasets are distributed as  follows:  204 datasets offer a CSV format dump, 10 datasets offer an XML format dump, and 21 datasets offer an XLS format dump.

2. How are the datasets categorized?

Category number of datasets
Geography and Environment 227
Labor Force, Employment, and Earnings 30
Social Insurance and Human Services 30
Health and Nutrition 11
Law Enforcement, Courts, and Prisons 7
Population 4
Other 3
Prices 3
Business Enterprise 2
Education 2
Energy and Utilities 2
Federal Government Finances and Employment 2
Income, Expenditures, Poverty, and Wealth 2
Science and Technology 2
Transportation 2
Construction and Housing 1
International Statistics 1
National Security and Veterans Affairs 1

3. What are some of the key items in the dataset?

4. What are the  sources of the datasets?

The majority of the datasets are published by the EPA, and they contain environmental data partitioned by the states of the US in three individual years.  Others come from other govt agencies – the distribution is as follows:

IV. Getting Datasets linked

Although the datasets are not explicily linked, we see a number of opportunities for connecting these datasets to others (and into the Linked Open Data datasets):

  • A large percentage of files have some sort of geo-tagging, thus they can be linked to DBpedia or Geo-names (and then presented via Map services).
  • Some datasets are subsets of other datasets, e.g. EPA data “2005 Toxics Release Inventory data for the state of Georgia” is a subset of  “2005 Toxics Release Inventory National data file of all US States and Territories” making for easier “internal” linking of the datasets.
  • A number of the datasets contain temporal information, e.g. IRS’s “Tax Year 1992 Private Foundations Study”,…”Tax Year 2005 Private Foundations Study” which provides an opportunity for mashups using timelines and such.

V. Conclusions

We are committed to getting more of the data.gov data online soon (in RDF), and then investigating data integration and knowledge discovery. In order to get our datasets linked to the linked data cloud, we will use SPARQL for extracting entities and our Semantic Mediawiki as a platform to capture the owl:sameAs mappings.  Scalable dataset publishing is also challenging as some of these are very large datasets, e.g. “2005-2007 American Community Survey Three-Year PUMS Population File” has a 1.1 g zipped csv file.  Moreover, some datasets are not directly available in one file but via a web service.  Our current plan is to produce RDF documents available for download soon, and to work on bringing more of these datasets into live, SPARQLable forms as we can.

Li Ding, Dominic DiFranzo and Jim Hendler

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Author: Categories: linked data Tags:

Musing the Future of Semantic Wikis

March 5th, 2009

Just finished the last Ontolog mini-series on Semantic Wiki, and I would like to contribute my two cents:

1. We should differentiate work on semantic wiki

  • Semantic wiki – we download it, and use it. It is a wiki with some semantic capabilities.
  • Semantic wiki engineering – we develop conventional web applications (e.g. CMS, portal) using semantic wiki as the underline platform. But keep in mind that most efforts fall in application design and development, not development of wiki itself.

2. We should worry more about the reality and the end users

  • Similar to the case “we got trained by Google search”, it takes longer time to get users spend more time on adding semantic annotation then editing text
  • It seems we are still organizing content using web pages, but is there any other intuitive way? In particular, how can we enable “one edit on data can affect all pages importing the data”
  • Users are impatient so they prefer speed, easy, minimal is always critical. BTW, “easy” is hard to define, and the end users want “easy enough” not “easier”.

Now I can list the highlights of that great event

Mark:

  • UI is the key problem, and we are expecting “zero-training”
  • knowledge engineers still cannot be replaced by social systems, and how do we achieve network effects of semantics

Rudi:

  • “keep it simple” is more important than “more power” and
  • sharing data across wiki boundary
  • semantic wiki can progress from CMS to Knowledge management system

schaffer

  • survey of semantic wiki systems and application areas
  • semantic wiki can be used as a Web engineering platform, a testbed of Semantic Web

Solbrig

  • the identity features of semantic wiki
  • summaries of several semantic wiki instances
  • some features are removed from some semantic wiki: page, text (but is that a good way to go?)

Voelkel/Kroetsch

  • semantic MediaWiki,
  • key technologies include extensions, UI design, rule support, best practices/design patterns, and etc.

Dean/Yim

  • domain applications of semantic wiki: biomedical vocabulary, campus information, math

Ding/Bao

  • there are several issues that affect all semantic wiki based applications:
    • interoperability – wiki should be an island of information
    • collaboration – does semantic wiki provide enough collaboration support, e.g. privacy protection?
    • usability – it is the key for any web application to survive and deployed
    • methodology – we need best practices

Discussions on the future of semantic wiki

  • how to compete/collaborate with online documents e.g. googledoc
  • wiki will vanish because it is general purposed
  • wiki should be easy, fast, minimal

To find more details and download presentation slides, please go to http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_03_05

Best,
Li

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Author: Categories: Semantic Web Tags:

URL daily (Radical translation)

December 11th, 2008

url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_translation

Radical translation is a term invented by American philosopher W. V. O. Quine to describe the situation in which a linguist is attempting to translate a completely unknown language, which is unrelated to his own, and is therefore forced to rely solely on the observed behavior of its speakers in relation to their environment.”

“Quine tells a story (Quine 1960) to illustrate his point, in which an explorer is trying to puzzle out the meaning of the word “gavagai”. He observes that the word is used in the presence of rabbits, but is unable to determine whether it means ‘undetached rabbit part’, or ‘fusion of all rabbits’, or ‘temporal stage of a rabbit’, or ‘the universal ‘rabbithood’”

“radical translation” carries the similar criticism to strong AI as chinese room by John Searle

“…(Searle 1980), which attempts to show that a symbol-processing machine like a computer can never be properly described as having a “mind” or “understanding“, regardless of how intelligently it may behave.”

While language translation is by itself a very interesting work, I would wonder when Chinese was translated into English for the first time. Here are some examples:

1. Proper names of real world entities, such as elephant (象), can be easily translated.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant

2. Functionary figures such as dragon (龙) carries different meanings

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_dragon

3. non-accessible things, such as the philosophical term Tao (道), causes more difficulties because they themselves do not have a clear cut definition in their native language.

4. Another example is the term china,which is also used to refer high-quality porcelain or ceramic ware, originally made in China. This sense is a good example of radical translation, where Quine’s “rabbit” was replaced by porcelain and “gavagai” was replaced by “china”.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ming-Schale1.jpg

The above philosophical arguments and real world translation examples lead to the following thoughts on the social norms:

1. meaning is rather Quine’s ontological commit, where the definition is socially agreed

2. while understanding and translation may be done by one person, the correctness of these actions is evaluated by social peers

3. it is worthy to read Searle’s The Construction of Social Reality (1995), (wikipedia provided a nice briefing)

Li Ding, 2008-12-11

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 8.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Author: Categories: AI, Semantic Web, Web Science Tags:

Notes on the Mark Greaves talk on Semantic Wiki (ISWC 2008 Industrial Talk)

October 29th, 2008

Two complimentary strands of semantic web

Strand 1: “semantic” aspect, powerful knowledge representation, database quality data, centralized workflows for knowledge management. E.g. oracle triple store. It has enterprise uses case, e.g. bio-medial study.

Strand 2: “web” aspect. Publish knowledge rather than text on the Web. Rooted in the original vision of the Semantic Web. while the promise look great, the real world use cases are fairly poorly understood.

Challenge: “Can strand 2 semantic web applications overcome the data chaos of the emergence semantic web”

Semantic Wiki lives in both strands. It inherits the web 2.0 nature from wiki and is quite easy to be adopted, and in the mean time, it has pretty good support to encode structured data using RDF.

On promising potential is that semantic wiki may enable ontology convergence. Note that without convergence, semantic data may be in chaos and thus less useful. In halo experiment, ontology convergence has been observed in collaborative annotation contributed by college students.

Several findings learned from

* user interface matters, (sure, semantic web developers should pay more attention to UI for better adoption)

* gardening matters (wikibots works, so does semantic wiki bots)

* user created ontology are not always well-designed (that’s why administrators are needed to clean up, but how to deal with such imperfectness and will that cause data chaos? )

* natural language is necessary to augment bare RDF(S) semantics (the “situation calculus” problem indeed is a good justification, as we cannot encode all in semantic web way, some free text may help fix the empty space in the absence of semantic wiki. )

Digital Aristotle for scientific knowledge – Halo project (2006): to build a question answer system that allows domain experts to build robust system for answering challenging and complex questions.

Conclusions

* the two strands of semantic web should meet each other.

* semantic wiki is one the applications that can bridge both strands

* halo demonstrated that by addressing hard AI problem using semantic wiki.

By Li Ding, Greetings from ISWC 2008

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Author: Categories: Semantic Web Tags: