<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Semantic Interoperability in Multi-Disciplinary Domain. Applications in Petroleum Industry</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jon Atle Gulla</string-name>
          <email>Jon.Atle.Gulla@idi.ntnu.no</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Darijus Strasunskas</string-name>
          <email>Darijus.Strasunskas@idi.ntnu.no</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Stein L. Tomassen</string-name>
          <email>Stein.L.Tomassen@idi.ntnu.no</email>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>The petroleum industry is a technically challenging business with high investments, complex projects and operational structures. There are numerous companies and public offices involved in the exploitation of a new oil field, and there is a high degree of specialization among them. Even though standardization has been considered important in this industry for many years, there is still very little integration across phases and across disciplines. An industrially driven consortium launched the Integrated Information Platform project in 2004, in which semantic standards based on OWL and Semantic Web technologies were to be developed for the subsea petroleum industry. In this paper, we present the IIP project in more detail and discuss applications for semantic information interoperability and retrieval.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        The petroleum industry in Norway is technically challenging with
subsea installations and difficult climatic conditions. It is
industrially still quite fragmented, in the sense that there is little
collaboration between phases and disciplines in large petroleum projects.
There are many specialized companies involved, though their
databases and applications are not necessarily well integrated with each
other. Research done by the Norwegian Oil Industry Association
(OLF) shows that there is a need for more collaboration and
integration across phases, disciplines and companies [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. The existing
standards do not provide the necessary support for this, and the
result is costly and risky projects and decisions based on wrong or
outdated data.
      </p>
      <p>
        This paper presents the Integration Information Platform (IIP)
project [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] and preliminary results. The project’s goal is to extend
and formalize an existing terminology standard for the petroleum
industry, ISO 15926. Using Semantic Web technologies, we turn
this standard into a real ontology that provides a consistent
unambiguous terminology for subsea petroleum production systems.
However, creating and maintaining ontologies is both time-consuming
and costly. Consequently, ontologies are applied for many different
tasks to increase return on investment (ROI). Therefore, the IIP
project focuses on reuse of ontologies in traditional vector-space
information retrieval (IR) systems, in addition to rules-based
notification. Considering multi-disciplinary domain and a big
variation of terminology used one of the challenges is adoption of the
created ontology to the document space. Finally, it is necessary to
consider how ontologies will be used in those applications, i.e.
application specific ontology value is an important concern in IIP.
      </p>
      <p>The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2 we go through
the structures and challenges in the subsea petroleum industry,
explaining the status of current standards and the vision of future
integrated operations. In Section 3 the IIP project is briefly introduced.
Whereas in Section 4, we discuss chosen approaches. Finally, the
conclusions are drawn in Section 5.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>THE SUBSEA PETROLEUM INDUSTRY</title>
      <p>The Norwegian subsea petroleum industry is a technically
challenging business. Sophisticated equipment and highly competent
companies are needed, and the projects tend to be both large and
expensive. Many disciplines and competences need to come
together in these projects, and their success is highly affected by the
way people and systems are able to collaborate and coordinate their
work. On the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) there are
traditional oil companies, specialized service companies and smaller
ICT service companies. The multidiciplinarity of the industry
causes in various perspectives towards the domain, and contextual
usage of different terminologies. One of the challenges is to deal
with contextual information and multi-perspective data integration
in the multidisciplinary industry.</p>
      <p>Both the projects and the subsequent production systems are
information-intensive. When a well is put into operation, the
production has to be monitored closely to detect any deviation or
problems. The next generation subsea systems include numerous
sensors that measure the status of the systems and send real-time
production data back to certain operation centers. For these centers
to be effective, they need tools that allow them to understand this
data, relate it to other relevant information, and help them deal with
the situation at hand. There is a challenge in dealing with all this
information, but also in interpreting information that is deeply rooted
in various technical terminologies.</p>
      <p>The multitude of companies involved, with their own
applications and databases, makes coordination and collaboration more
important than in the past. For the industry as a whole, this severely
hampers the integration of applications and organizations as well as
the decision making processes in general:
• Integration. Even though there is some cooperation between
companies in the petroleum sector, this cooperation tends to
be set up on an ad-hoc basis for a particular purpose and
supported by specifically designed mappings between
applications and databases. There is little collaboration across
disciplines and phases, as they usually have separate databases
rooted in different goals, structures and terminologies. It is of
course possible to map data from one database to another, but
with the complexity of data and the multitude of companies
and applications in the business this is not a viable approach
for the industry as a whole.
• Decision making. A current problem is the lack of relevant
high-quality information in decision making processes. Some
data is available too late or not at all because of lack of
integration of databases. In other cases relevant data is not found
due to differences in terminology or format. And even when
information is available, it is often difficult to interpret its real
content and understand its limitations and premises. This is for
example the case when companies report production figures to
the government using slightly different terminologies and
structures, making it very hard to compare figures from one
company to another.</p>
      <p>XML is already used extensively in the petroleum industry as a
syntactic format for exchanging data. Over the last few years, there
have been several initiatives for defining semantic standards to
achieve semantic interoperability and information sharing in the
business.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>2.1 ISO 15926 Integration of Life-Cycle Data</title>
      <p>
        ISO 15926 is a standard for integrating life-cycle data across phases
(e.g. concept, design, construction, operation, decommissioning)
and across disciplines (e.g. geology, reservoir, process, automation).
It consists of 7 parts, of which part 1, 2 and 4 are the most relevant
to this work. Whereas part 1 gives a general introduction to the
principles and purpose of the standard, part 2 specifies the modeling
language for defining application-specific terminologies. Part 2
comes in the form of a data model and includes 201 entities that are
related in a specialization hierarchy of types and sub-types. It is
intended to provide the basic types necessary for defining any kind of
industrial data. Being specified in EXPRESS [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ], it has a formal
definition based on set theory and first order logic.
      </p>
      <p>Part 4 of ISO 15926 is comprised of application or
disciplinespecific terminologies, and is usually referred to as the Reference
Data Library (RDL). These terminologies, described as RDL
classes, are instances of the data types from part 2, are related to
each other in a specialization hierarchy of classes and sub-classes as
well as through memberships and relationships. If part 2 defines the
language for describing standardized terminologies, part 4 describes
the semantics of these terminologies. There is ongoing work in the
Norwegian offshore industry to provide a comprehensive
standardized terminology for the petroleum industry in part 4. Part 4 today
contains approximately 50.000 general concepts like motor, turbine,
pump, pipes and valves.</p>
      <p>ISO 15926 is still under development, and only Part 1 and 2 have
so far become ISO standards. In addition to adding more RDL
classes for new applications and disciplines in Part 4, there is also a
discussion about standards for geometry and topology (Part 3),
procedures for adding and maintaining reference data (Part 5 and 6),
and methods for integrating distributed systems (Part 7). Neither
ISO 15926 nor other standards have the scope and formality to
enable proper integration of data across phases and disciplines in the
petroleum industry.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>2.2 The Vision of Integrated Operations</title>
      <p>
        The Norwegian Oil Industry Association proposed the Integrated
Operations program in 2004. The fundamental idea is to integrate
processes and people onshore and offshore using new information
and communication technologies. Facilities to improve onshore’s
abilities to support offshore operationally are considered vital in this
program. Personnel onshore and offshore should have access to the
same information in real-time and their work processes should be
redefined to allow more collaboration and be less constrained by
time and space. OLF has estimated that the implementation of
integrated operations on the NCS can increase oil recovery by 3-4%,
accelerate production by 5-10% and lower operational costs by
2030% [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>Central in this program is the semantic and uniform
manipulation of heterogeneous data. Decisions often depend on real-time
production data, visualization data, and background documents and
policies, and the data range from highly structured database tables
to unstructured textual documents. This necessitates intelligent
facilities for capturing, tracking, retrieving and reasoning about data.</p>
      <p>Figure 1 illustrates the objectives of the integrated operations
initiative. Whereas we in the current situation have numerous
databases that need to be mapped to each other on an ad hoc basis, we
envision a semantic standard in the future that supports integration
and interoperability between data from all phases and disciplines.
Suppliers’s applications interact with the operators’ data through
standardized semantic interfaces, making sure that a unified
terminology is used and data is consistent and unambiguous. The
implementation requirements for integrated operations include the
introduction of proper standards for efficient sharing and exchange
of information.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>THE INTEGRATED INFORMATION PLAT</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>FORM PROJECT</title>
      <p>The Integrated Information Platform (IIP) project is a collaboration
project between companies active on NCS and academic
institutions, supported by the Norwegian Research Council (NFR). Its
long-term target is to provide high quality real-time information for
decision making at onshore operation centers.</p>
      <p>The IIP project addresses the need for a common understanding
of terms and structures in the subsea petroleum industry. The
objective is to ease the integration of data and processes across phases
and disciplines by providing a comprehensive unambiguous and
well accepted terminology standard that lends itself to
machineprocessable interpretation and reasoning. This should reduce risks
and costs in petroleum projects and indirectly lead to faster, better
and cheaper decisions.</p>
      <p>The project is identifying an optimal set of real-time data from
reservoirs, wells and subsea production facilities. The OWL web
ontology language is chosen as the markup language for describing
these terms semantically in an ontology. The entire standard is thus
rooted in the formal properties of OWL, which has a
modeltheoretic interpretation and to some extent support formal
reasoning. A major part of the project is to convert and formalize the terms
already defined in ISO 15926 Part 2 (Data Model) and Part 4
(Reference Data Library), which we will come back to in the next
Section. Since the ISO standard addresses rather generic concepts,
though, the ontology must also include more specialized
terminologies for the oil and gas segment. Detailed terminologies for
standard products and services are included from other dictionaries and
initiatives (DISKOS, WITSML, ISO 13628/14224, SAS), and the
project also opens for the inclusion of terms from particular
processes and products at the bottom level. In sum, the ontology being
built in IIP has a structure as shown in Figure 2.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>APPROACH AND DISCUSSION</title>
      <p>The success of the new ontology, and standardization work in
general, depends on the users’ willingness to commit to the standard
and devote the necessary resources. If people do not find it
worthwhile to take the effort to follow the new terminology, it will be
difficult to build up the necessary support. This means that it is
important to provide environments and tools that demonstrate the
value of using the ontology. Intelligent ontology-driven applications
must demonstrate the benefits of the new technology and convince
the users that the additional sophistication pays off.</p>
      <p>
        Recall, the multidisciplinary settings of the petroleum industry.
The multidisciplinarity results in different views on the domain
followed by vast terminology variation between disciplines, e.g. oil
companies, specialized service and ICT service companies.
Nonconsistent usage of terminology causes the problems in documents
exchange among the industrial partners (see illustration in left part
of Figure 2). Furthermore, the variation in terminology may prohibit
successful commitment to the ontology and its adoption in daily
work routines. Therefore, we propose an approach to bridge the gap
among terminologies by constructing a feature vector for each of
the concepts in the ontology (see right part of Figure 3).
Development of the approach is inspired by a linguistics method
for describing the meaning of objects – the semiotic triangle (known
as triangle of meaning or Ogden’s triangle, as well) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. In our
approach, a feature vector connects a concept and a document
collection (Figure 4), i.e., the feature vector is tailored to the terminology
used in a particular collection of the documents (that is company or
discipline specific). The construction of feature vector is further
explained in section 4.3 and [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ].
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>4.1 Semantic Web Technology and Interoperability</title>
      <p>The general idea in the Semantic Web is to annotate each piece of
data with machine-processable semantic descriptions. These
descriptions must be specified according to a certain grammar and
with reference to a standardized domain vocabulary. The domain
vocabulary is referred to as an ontology and is meant to represent a
common conceptualization of some domain. The grammar is a
semantic markup language, as for example the OWL web ontology
language recommended by W3C. With these semantic annotations
in place, intelligent applications can retrieve and combine
documents and services at a semantic level, they can share, understand
and reason about each other’s data, and they can operate more
independently and adapt to a changing environment by consulting a
shared ontology.</p>
      <p>
        Interoperability can be defined as a state in which two
application entities can accept and understand data from the other and
perform a given task in a satisfactory manner without human
intervention. We often distinguish between syntactic, structural and
semantic interoperability [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6 ref7">6, 7</xref>
        ]:
• Syntactic interoperability denotes the ability of two or more
systems to exchange and share information by marking up
data in a similar fashion (e.g. using XML).
• Structural interoperability means that the systems share
semantic schemas (data models) that enable them to exchange
and structure information (e.g. using RDF).
• Semantic interoperability is the ability of systems to share and
understand information at the level of formally defined and
mutually accepted domain concepts, enabling
machineprocessable interpretation and reasoning.
      </p>
      <p>For the Semantic Web technology to enable semantic
interoperability in the petroleum industry, it needs to tackle the problem of
semantic conflicts, also called semantic heterogeneity. Since the
databases are developed by different companies and for different
phases and/or disciplines, it is often difficult to relate information
that is found in different applications. Even if they represent the
same type of information, they may use formats or structures that
prevent the computers from detecting the correspondence between
data.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>4.2 Industrial Ontologies</title>
      <p>
        In recent years a number of powerful new ontologies have been
constructed and applied in selected domains. This is particularly
true in medicine and biology, where Semantic Web technologies
and web mining have been exploited in new intelligent applications
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6 ref8 ref9">6, 8, 9</xref>
        ]. However, these disciplines are heavily influenced by
government support and are not as commercially fragmented as the
petroleum industry. Creating an industry-wide standard in a
fragmented industry is a huge undertaking that should not be
underestimated. In this particular case, we have been able to build on an
existing standard, ISO 15926. This has ensured sufficient support
from companies and public institutions. There is still an open
question, though, what the coverage of such an ontology should be.
There are other smaller standards out there, and many companies
use their own internal terminologies for particular areas. The scope
of this standard has been discussed throughout the project as the
ontology grew and new companies signalled their interest. For any
standard of this complexity, it is important also to decide where the
ontology stops and to what extent hierarchical or complementing
ontologies are to be encouraged. Techniques for handling ontology
hierarchies and ontology alignment and enrichment must be
considered in a broader perspective.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>4.3 Ontology-driven Information Retrieval</title>
      <p>
        For an Information Retrieval tool developed in IIP, we are adding a
mechanism to adopt the ontology with the words used in particular
discipline (i.e. by particular company) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. Figure 5 illustrates the
overall architecture of the ontology-based information retrieval
system. The individual components of the system will be given a brief
account.
      </p>
      <p>Feature vector miner: This component associates concept from
the ontology with relevant terms from the document space. An
ontology concept is a class defined in the ontology being used. These
concepts are extended into feature vectors with a set of relevant
terms extracted from the document collection using text-mining
techniques. The feature vectors provide interpretations of concepts
with respect to the document collection and needs to be updated as
the document collection changes. This allows us to relate the
concepts defined in the ontology to the terms actually used in the
document collection.</p>
      <p>Indexing engine: The main task of this component is to index
the document collection. The indexing system is built on top of
Lucene, which is a freely available and fully featured text search
engine from Apache. Lucene is using the traditional vector space
approach, counting term frequencies, and using tf.idf scores to
calculate term weights in the index.</p>
      <p>Query enrichment: This component handles the query specified
by the user. The query can initially consist of concepts and/or
ordinary terms (keywords). Each concept or term can be individually
weighted. The concepts are replaced by corresponding feature
vectors.</p>
      <p>Onto-based retrieval engine: This component performs the
search and post-processing of the retrieved results.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>4.4 Rule-based Notification</title>
      <p>
        Since the Semantic Web is still a rather immature technology, there
are still open issues that need to be addressed in the future. One
problem in the IIP project is that we need the full expressive power
of OWL (OWL Full) to represent the structures of ISO 15926-2/4.
Reasoning with OWL specifications is then incomplete and
inference becomes undecidable [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. Here we consider investigate the
limits of inference using the ontology implemented in OWL Full.
This will allow identifying possible scenarios and restrictions in
using OWL Full for a such scale project. This is important, since one
of the application areas is specification of rules that will be used to
analyze anomalies in real-time data from subsea sensors. At that
point we will need to exploit the logical properties of OWL and
start experimenting with the next generation rule-based notification
systems.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-12">
      <title>4.5 Application-specific Ontology Value</title>
      <p>The quality of ontologies is a delicate topic. It is important to
choose an appropriate level of granularity. In this project we have
been fortunate to have an existing standard to start with. What was
considered satisfactory in ISO 15926 may however not be optimal
for the ontology-driven applications that will make use of the future
ontology. Ultimately, we need to consider how the ontology will be
used in these applications.</p>
      <p>
        The ontology value quadrant [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] in Figure 6 is used to evaluate
an ontology’s usefulness in a particular application. The ontology’s
ability to capture the content of the universe of discourse at the
appropriate level of granularity and precision and offer the application
understandable correct information are important features that are
addressed in many ontology/model quality frameworks (e.g. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12 ref13 ref14 ref15">12,
13, 14, 15</xref>
        ]). But the construction of the ontology also needs to take
into account dynamic aspects of the domain as well as the behavior
of the application. For Ontology-driven Information Retrieval this
means that we need to consider the following issues about content
and dynamics [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]:
      </p>
      <p>Concept familiarity. Terminologies are used to subcategorize
phenomena and make semantic distinctions about reality. Ideally
the concepts preferred by the user in his queries correspond to the
concepts found in the ontology.</p>
      <p>Document discrimination. The structure of concepts in the
ontology decides which groups of documents in the collection can
theoretically be singled out and returned as result sets. Similarly, the
concepts preferred by the user indicate which groups of documents
she might be interested in and which distinctions between
documents she considers irrelevant. If the granularity of the user’s
preferred concepts and the ontology concepts are perfectly compatible,
combinations of these terms can single out the same result sets from
the document collection.</p>
      <p>
        Query formulation. The user queries are usually very short, like
2-3 words, and specialized or generalized terms tend to be added to
refine a query [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. This economy of expression seems more
important to users than being allowed to specify detailed and precise user
needs, as very few use advanced features to detail their query.
      </p>
      <p>Domain stability. The search domain may be constantly
changing, and parts of the domain may be badly described in documents
compared to others. The ontology needs regular and frequent
maintenance, making it difficult to depend on the availability of domain
experts.
5</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-13">
      <title>CONCLUSIONS</title>
      <p>The Integrated Information Platform project is one of the first
attempts at applying state-of-the-art Semantic Web technologies in an
industrial setting. Existing standards are now being converted and
extended into a comprehensive OWL ontology for reservoir and
subsea production systems. The intention is that this ontology will
later be approved as an ISO standard and form a basis for
developing interoperable applications in the industry.</p>
      <p>With the new ontology at hand, the industry will have taken the
first step towards integrated operations on the Norwegian
Continental Shelf. Data can then be related across phases and disciplines,
helping people collaborate and reducing costs and risks. However,
there are costs associated with building and maintaining such an
ambitious ontology. It remains to be seen if the industry is able to
take full advantage of the additional expressive power and formality
of the new ontology. The work in IIP indicates that both
information retrieval systems and sensor monitoring systems can benefit
from having access to an underlying ontology for analyzing data
and interpreting user needs.</p>
      <p>
        One of the main applications developed in IIP is an
ontologydriven information retrieval system [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. Here, the concepts in the
ontology are associated with contextual definitions in terms of
weighted feature vectors tailoring the ontology to the content of the
document collection. Further, the feature vector is used to enrich a
provided query. Query enrichment by feature vectors provides
means to bridge the gap between query terms and terminology used
in a document set, and still employing the knowledge encoded in
ontology.
      </p>
      <p>Also, we can build more complete semantic descriptions of
documents and add more reasoning capabilities to our information
retrieval tools. We will then see if a strong semantic foundation
makes it easier for us to handle and interpret the vast amount of data
that are so typical to the petroleum industry.</p>
      <p>Main future work is an inclusion of rules to be used to analyze
anomalies in the real-time data from the subsea sensors. Then we
will need to evaluate and investigate the logical properties of OWL
and start experimenting with the next generation rule-based
notification systems.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-14">
      <title>Acknowledgements</title>
      <p>This research work is funded by the Integrated Information
Platform for reservoir and subsea production systems (IIP) project,
which is supported by the Norwegian Research Council (NFR).
NFR project number 163457/S30.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>OLF. Integrated</given-names>
            <surname>Work</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Processes: Future work processes on the Norwegian Continental Shelf. The Norwegian Oil Industry Association</article-title>
          . URL: http://www.olf.no/?28867.
          <string-name>
            <surname>pdf</surname>
          </string-name>
          (Accessed:
          <year>2006</year>
          03 05).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sandsmark</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mehta</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Integrated Information Platform for Reservoir and Subsea Production Systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 13th Product Data Technology Europe Symposium (PDT</source>
          <year>2004</year>
          ), Stockholm, (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>International</given-names>
            <surname>Standards Association</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Industrial automation systems and integration - Product data representation and exchange</article-title>
          .
          <source>Part</source>
          <volume>11</volume>
          :
          <article-title>Description methods: The EXPRESS language reference manual</article-title>
          . URL: http://www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogoueDetail?CSNU MBER=
          <volume>18348</volume>
          . (Accessed:
          <year>2006</year>
          03 05)
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ogden</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Richards</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.A</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>The Meaning of Meaning. 8th Edition</source>
          , New York, Harcourt, Brace &amp; World, Inc., (
          <year>1923</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tomassen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gulla</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Strasunskas</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Document Space Adapted Ontology: Application in Query Enrichment</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems (NLDB'</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          ), Klagenfurt, Austria, Springer-Verlag, LNCS
          <volume>3999</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>46</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>57</lpage>
          , (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Aguilar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A. Semantic</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Interoperability in the Context of e-Health</article-title>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
          <article-title>CDH Seminar</article-title>
          . URL: http://m3pe.org/seminar/aguilar.pdf (Accessed:
          <year>2006</year>
          03 05).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Dublin</given-names>
            <surname>Core</surname>
          </string-name>
          . Dublin Core Metadata Glossary. http://library.csun.edu/mwoodley/dublincoreglossary.html. (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Gene</given-names>
            <surname>Ontology Consortium</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology</article-title>
          .
          <source>Nature Genet</source>
          .
          <volume>25</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>25</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>29</lpage>
          , (
          <year>2000</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pisanelli</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (Ed.).
          <source>Ontologies in Medicine. Volume 102 Studies in Health Technology and Informatics</source>
          . IOS Press.
          <article-title>(</article-title>
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Horrocks</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patel-Schneider</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>F. van Harmelen. From SHIQ</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <article-title>RDF to OWL: The making of a web ontology language</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Web Semantics</source>
          <volume>1</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>7</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>26</lpage>
          , (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gulla</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Borch</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ingvaldsen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Unsupervised</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Keyphrase Extraction for Search Ontologies</article-title>
          . .
          <source>Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems (NLDB'</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          ), Klagenfurt, Austria, Springer-Verlag, LNCS
          <volume>3999</volume>
          , (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burton-Jones</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Storey</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sugumaran</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ahluwalia</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A Semiotic Metrics Suite for Assessing the Quality of Ontologies</article-title>
          .
          <source>Data and Knowledge Engineering</source>
          ,
          <volume>55</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>84</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>102</lpage>
          , (
          <year>2005</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gangemi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Catenacci</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ciaramita</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lehmann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Ontology evaluation and validation. An integrated formal model for the quality diagnostic task</article-title>
          .
          <source>Technical Report</source>
          , ISTC-CNR, Trento, Italy, (
          <year>2005</year>
          ). URL: http://www.loa-cnr.it/Files/OntoEval4OntoDev_Final.pdf (Accessed:
          <year>2006</year>
          04 02)
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lindland</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O. I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sindre</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Solvberg</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modeling</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Software</source>
          ,
          <volume>11</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>42</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>49</lpage>
          , (
          <year>1994</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          [15]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lozano-Tello</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gomez-Perez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Ontometric: A method to choose appropriate ontology</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Database Management</source>
          ,
          <volume>15</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>18</lpage>
          , (
          <year>2004</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          [16]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gulla</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Auran</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Risvik</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Linguistic Techniques in LargeScale Search Engines</article-title>
          . Fast Search &amp; Transfer, (
          <year>2002</year>
          ) 15 p.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>