Smart city's ontologies review
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Formal Metadata
| Title |
| |
| Subtitle |
| |
| Title of Series | ||
| Number of Parts | 8 | |
| Author | 0000-0002-6382-5259 (ORCID) 0000-0002-1798-5809 (ORCID) | |
| Contributors | ||
| License | CC Attribution - NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported: You are free to use, copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor. | |
| Publisher | ||
| Release Date | ||
| Language | ||
| Production Year | 2021 |
Content Metadata
| Subject Area | ||
| Genre | ||
| Abstract |
| |
| Keywords |
00:00
Computer animation
00:18
Computer animation
00:55
Computer animation
01:23
Computer animation
04:54
Computer animation
06:03
Computer animation
10:28
Computer animationMeeting/Interview
10:47
Meeting/Interview
Transcript: English(auto-generated)
00:01
So, my name is Dmitry Kudryavtsev and my colleague's name is Natalia Chichkova. We represent the company Digital City Planner, and we will make a presentation about our smart review within ORCAG. So a couple of words about our company, so Digital City Planner is a startup company
00:26
and our current focus is within two areas and is associated to two products. The first one is a solution for city transformation with pre-installed knowledge base, and the
00:43
second one is a solution for helping team leaders in digitalization planning area to improve their business capabilities based on team's competencies. So, before launching the startup, we had a lot of experience in consulting, research
01:04
and education, and mostly in the area of enterprise architecture management, knowledge management and knowledge engineering. And we worked with different industrial companies and also work at universities.
01:23
So about our contribution to the ORCAG. So we curated the Smart City Planning Observatory within the Open Research Knowledge Graph. We've already described more than 200 papers and made more than 20 comparisons.
01:45
And they mostly cover such issues as smart city anthologies and how to describe cities' performance management and metrics for cities, reusable building blocks for smart cities,
02:06
so reference architectures, reusable architectures and so on. So here you see some examples of our comparisons and smart reviews.
02:23
So, as you see, they are mostly about anthologies, smart city indicators and stuff like that. So before we will start with our smart review, I'd like to provide a brief introduction
02:40
into the topic. And so smart city is a municipality that uses information and communication technologies to increase operational efficiency, share information with the public and improve both the quality of government services and citizen welfare.
03:02
So what are the smart city implementation challenges? Data integration is rather problematic, non-sufficient collaboration between departments. And also many promising technologies such as AI, digital twin require solid conceptual
03:20
skeleton in order to be transparent and manageable. And as it seems for us, smart city anthologies can be considered as a solution for these challenges. So ontologies defines basic terms and relations comprising the vocabulary of a topic area.
03:46
Then here you may see an example of smart city ontology. So it was suggested by Greek specialists and as you see there are classes, relationships
04:03
between them and so on. But there is also some problems with anthologies in smart city domain, since the project specific anthologies and similar information or knowledge models shouldn't be created from
04:22
scratch and they should be assembled from existing building blocks or from existing anthologies. So ontology reuse is highly popular, but it is hard to select suitable ontology or ontologies and its elements for reuse within the specific project.
04:45
And it seems for us that smart review in ORKG may help solving this problem. So our smart city anthologies review, a smart review integrates three comparisons.
05:05
The first one is about anthologies for smart city and covers levels and key classes of these anthologies. The second one is about domain coverage of anthologies.
05:21
And the third one about reuse or ontology reuse within existing smart city anthologies. And as you can see from this paper, we created the smart review based on 18 papers
05:41
and created about 40 contributions in order to create these comparisons. And now my colleague Natalia will provide more details about smart review within the ORKG.
06:03
Hello, everyone. I will just demonstrate my monitor very quick. So can you see my screen?
06:20
Everything is fine? I see. Okay, good. So as my colleague said, here is our smart review. It's about smart city anthologies. We have three comparisons related to this topic. And first of all, I want to mention that one tool which I used all the time while
06:41
I was creating comparisons was templates. Like as soon as I discovered templates, I use it all the time. I found it the most useful tools for me to work with ORKG. So let's come back to our smart review. So here we have a free comparison.
07:00
The first one, what we try to do, we try to have few smart city anthologies and compare their classes and try to classify their classes into some kind of city administrative or physical levels. And here, such as like activity level, administration level, agent level and so on.
07:23
And we try to find similarities and differences like in different city anthologies. Like what kind of classes they were created. And as you can see, some of the anthologies didn't have any classes regards to activity level.
07:40
Some of them has one and so on. So yeah, they're pretty different. Even though we have a property which called reuse model where you can see the anthologies which were used in creation of smart city anthologies and they're pretty different as well.
08:00
So yeah, here and why we even create the smart review. One more remark. The main question for us was to understand smart city even has their standards and even view standards. Is it even possible to create like a general or like common anthology for smart city
08:21
and that every city can use it? So and why it's already been created so many smart city anthologies. So here, yeah, so we have we found some similarities, found some differences. And here is the next table shows you properties that and their description or their
08:43
definitions here. So the last two comparisons was based on the same paper Espinoza areas 2019. And first of all, she took a few anthologies. Some of them is similar as we consider in the first comparison, some of them different.
09:03
So first of all, we checked ontology domains. They again, do they have any similarities or they don't? So yeah, so some of them obviously has and some not. And the second one was about again, ontology which were reused in a smart city ontology.
09:23
So some of them were reused as a reference. Some of them were reused as imported. Some of them was reused as reference as metadata. And again, here you can find really interesting different results. So as a conclusion, we can say that smart review, this smart review about ontology,
09:46
smart city ontology can help to select a relevant smart city ontology for a specific project and needs. And the answer to our question was, it's actually impossible to create it like a general like common smart city ontology for any city just in the case that ontology is used
10:05
for different purposes for different needs. So it's just your choice, which one you want to use, which one is more relevant to your research or to your topic. So this is all for me if Dimitri want to add something.
10:25
No, thank you. We're ready to answer your questions. Thank you for this presentation of the smart review. That's something new here.
10:42
So that's a nice change. Any questions from the audience? They're all shy. So I have some questions. So first of all, you already mentioned that you like the templates.
11:03
Could you explain your general workflow for adding content to the ORKG? I guess you start reading the papers, of course, but then any tools in addition to the templates that you generally used? Yeah, I use templates all the time. It's helped me a lot just like to create, you know, like a skeleton of my comparison
11:26
and after just the information was extremely useful. And however, I tried to use another tool which called like survey. Hold on. I even open it. Survey table import.
11:42
And it's not actually works because I tried why I tried to use it because I have a pretty big table and I tried to maybe automatically download it or something. And it was it's interesting. I don't remember today describe you this issue about the part of the table was on one page and another part was on the second page.
12:01
And these two couldn't read it. It could read just first part and couldn't read the second part. So I stopped using just because it was really inconvenient for me. And of course, like I create a template. I downloaded the paper and after choose a field and through the template.
12:22
Yeah, I choose a template and it was so easy to add information. However, yeah, I have seen now that you already create like a template button where you hide all the templates which is will be even more useful. I think like I will create more more comparison in the future and it will help even more.
12:42
So yeah, for me it was enough. Like I didn't use a CV CV like exporter or something imposter. So for me to place was enough like more than more than enough. I may add that I actively used work with resources and classes.
13:04
So when, for example, we have different indicators for smart cities or different classes in our ontology, we created a class in the editor and then we added instances
13:25
for this class and in order to reuse them in comparisons in the cells within the comparisons. So it was another thing that we used actively and maybe as a future steps.
13:44
I hope it will be also possible to make a hierarchy of classes and actually create ontologies within a knowledge graph. Yeah, yeah, we are working on that. So if you would have to make a selling point, a pitch for the ORKG,
14:05
what would that be? Why do you want to use the ORKG? I mean outside of the curation grant? We think that it can be considered as a knowledge base for reusable content.
14:29
And so if some organization requires reusable knowledge resources in any domain, for example, if there is an organization which works a lot with information models and they
14:44
need some already built set of ontologies, for example, they may use knowledge graph as a source for their knowledge base or maybe they may have a kind of
15:03
their own observatory, for example, organizational observatory within your ORKG in order to curate their company knowledge within this. So it can be a kind of knowledge base solution or knowledge management system
15:27
or a part of it for companies. And what was the most annoying thing? When working with the ORKG? Just a little small issues which I usually describe and describe.
15:42
Like I have some of them like technology. I understand that like you're still working with that and like I can handle. Maybe for me, maybe and I will show I have one more issue with smart review today. And for me, it's just maybe not as I don't know how to solve it,
16:03
sometimes it's not really helpful to see the whole comparison. I know it's difficult to show all 30 papers which I add, but sometimes when I see just three of them, it's not very useful as well on my screen. I don't know how to make it like better or something.
16:21
So something like that, just like a view, it's better to have like a full picture. But honestly, I don't know how to solve this. Maybe it's the best one, how you solve it now. Always good to have at least descriptions of the things that annoy and then we can think about solutions for that.
16:41
It means a lot. Any questions from the audience? That's not the case, then thank you too.