<!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>Doris: Managing Document-based Knowledge in Large Organisations via Semantic Web Technologies</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ravish Bhagdev</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jonathan Butters</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ajay Chakravarthy</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Sam Chapman</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Aba-Sah Dadzie</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Mark A. Greenwood</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>José Iria</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Fabio Ciravegna.</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Regent Court, 211 Portobello Street, S1 4DP Sheffield</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="UK">United Kingdom</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>The acquisition, sharing and reuse of knowledge is a prime challenge in large organisations. Doris is a framework for defining Knowledge Management applications based on Semantic Web technologies that enables flexible means of capturing knowledge and of searching and exploring the knowledge and the documents where it is contained. Applications of Doris are employed in the aerospace domain at Rolls-Royce plc and in the domain of exploring and searching archives about London of the 18th century.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>The objective of this challenge is to build an environment to effectively acquire and
share knowledge in large distributed environments. Knowledge is acquired from
documents (either from legacy documents or while new documents are created) in the
form of ontology-based annotations. Then both knowledge and documents are made
available for searching and for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Requirements for
such an environment are:
• The tool must support the user's everyday work and tasks with very limited
intrusiveness. For example it must not ask to perform detailed manual annotation
of documents, which would distract the users from their tasks.
• It must enable to accommodate different user requirements, tasks and profiles,
accommodating, for example, different search and acquisition strategies.
• The information or knowledge provided to users must be very high quality; this is
important as some of the technologies used (e.g. Information Extraction, IE, from
texts) can perform poorly in some cases.
• It must be portable to different domains and tasks with limited effort and in a
limited time.
• It must be able to work over a medium/large scale, coping with dozens (or
hundreds) of thousands of documents and thousands (or millions) of triples;
documents are expected to be multimedia objects containing text and/or images.
• It must be able to integrate knowledge, information and documents from
distributed heterogeneous sources.
•</p>
      <p>It must be able to cope with a dynamic world where new information and
documents are added constantly and must readapt to such changes.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2 Doris: effective knowledge acquisition, sharing and reuse</title>
      <p>Doris is a framework for defining Knowledge Management (KM) applications based
on Semantic Web (SW) technologies. SW technologies enable flexible means of (i)
capturing knowledge from both users and documents, and (ii) searching and exploring
knowledge and documents containing this knowledge. Its main features:
• It enables knowledge capture at document creation time with minimised
intrusiveness for the user; traditional technologies like HTML form filling are
employed to create documents, but SW technologies work in the background
both for producing the most appropriate acquisition strategy and for capturing
knowledge from user input; knowledge is captured both in text and images (and
across both). Knowledge capture is also facilitated by the use of machine learning
and IE from documents.
• It enables knowledge capture from large amounts of legacy documents using
ontology-based IE from texts; this is quite important as large organisations
generally have hundreds of thousands of historical documents containing very
valuable knowledge.
• It enables user-centric searching of documents and knowledge using hybrid
search, a strategy that accommodates ontology-based and keyword-based
searching in a flexible way. Searching and sharing is adapted to the user’s needs.
The architecture is fully based on open Web and SW standards. The central means of
representation and communication of knowledge are (a set of) ontologies that define
both the domain and the user tasks.</p>
      <p>In the following sections we will introduce Doris’ main features.</p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>2.1 Capturing Knowledge at Creation Time</title>
        <p>One of the main issues in KM is capturing knowledge when it is created. In
traditional KM models, knowledge is stored in unstructured documents (e.g., Word
files) or in databases. The problem with collections of unstructured documents is that
knowledge sharing and reuse can only be performed via keyword-based searching and
that knowledge in documents may be left implicit, and therefore unavailable.
Database schemas and associated form filling methods are instead very inflexible and
generally do not support users with different requirements.</p>
        <p>In Doris, knowledge can be captured at creation time, by:
• Generating exhaustive and explicit information without forcing users through a
pre-defined set of steps. Capturing strategies can be flexibly and declaratively
designed for the specific user’s needs, to the point that every user can have a
different acquisition strategy.
• Capturing and classifying information and knowledge via an ontology, so to
make it available for sharing and reuse.</p>
        <p>For this purpose, we have designed a component that enables easy definition of
strategies for user-centred knowledge capture via declarative means. AktiveForm is
designed to provide controlled domain/task-specific document creation and
ontologybased annotation of the contained knowledge. AktiveForm uses two ontologies: a user
ontology, to define the user tasks and processes, and a domain ontology, to tag the
knowledge inserted by the users.</p>
        <p>The user ontology allows for flexibility in supporting the users, as it provides a way to
describe the kind of support the individual user may need: for example, as different
users can have different knowledge (e.g. an expert can have more sophisticated
knowledge than a man on the street), the knowledge capturing process can be tuned to
the capabilities of each. The resulting form will be custom tailored, offering different
types of fields or different features. This is achieved by declaring in the ontology also
the required information, relevant restrictions and how to acquire it based on the user
profiles. Relations among fields such as precedence, layout and services associated
are also established. A reasoner then uses this information to plan the actual form, the
resulting document and the acquisition process. The interface displays the form using
AJAX.</p>
        <p>Data inserted by the user is automatically tagged via the domain ontology, making it
available for semantic searches (see section 2.3.1).</p>
        <p>
          AktiveForm enables the input of data via many interface strategies, like drop down
menus for enumerated fields, free text fields and free text forms. Value checking is
performed using the ontology and the reasoner. For single text fields (e.g., to input the
description of a jet engine component), support by a terminology recogniser is
provided to identify the correct value: this is particularly important for fields with
hundreds of possible values (e.g. there are 300,000 parts in a jet engine). In this case
the user can input a rough description and the terminology recogniser (constrained by
the expected value) proposes the correct term (or a set of possible ones). Terminology
recognition is based on String Distance Metrics [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>
          Free text fields containing unstructured descriptions are allowed, and their content
can be semantically annotated either by the user (using an annotation tool such as
AktiveMedia [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ]) or automatically by an IE module (see section 2.2). Images can be
added and annotated using the same strategy.
        </p>
        <p>When a document has been created by filling in all parts of the form, a PDF file is
generated containing the whole generated document. Different documents can be
generated for different users according to the intended usage, by composing the
extracted information and knowledge. Again the ontology and the reasoner explicitly
control the generation of the document and its layout.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>2.2 Acquiring Knowledge from Legacy Documents</title>
        <p>A large amount of unstructured legacy documents (e.g. Word documents,
PowerPoint presentations, etc.) is available in large organisations. We have mainly
focused on textual documents (e.g. Word or HTML files), containing images. The
acquisition architecture is illustrated in Fig. 1; documents are either discovered by a
Fig. 1: Document indexing and annotation: traditional keyword indexing and document ranking
(top of figure) is done in parallel with ontology-based annotation (bottom).
crawler or submitted individually to the system and then indexed using a traditional
keyword based indexer (plug-ins are available for Lucene and Nutch), which will
generate inverted indexes.</p>
        <p>
          In order to extract knowledge and make it available to other components within Doris,
documents are classified and the relevant ontologies for annotation identified. This
can be done manually by the user (e.g. by assigning directories or collections of
documents to a specific task/ontology) or automatically by a trained classifier. Then
the document is annotated using one of the available plug-ins, i.e., T-Rex[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ] or Saxon,
a rule-based extraction system (or any combination of the two). Doris also allows for
manual annotation (or correction of automatic annotation) via the AktiveMedia
module [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ]. Extracted information (ontology-based annotations) is stored in the form
of RDF triples according to OWL or RDF ontologies in a triple store (currently
Sesame or 3Store).
        </p>
        <p>
          Doris uses an ontology-based data representation model that greatly enhances the
extensibility of its knowledge acquisition modules. All the modules use the same
underlying representation for the input documents by referring to the same ontology
that models how the documents should be represented for the purposes of knowledge
acquisition. The ontology specifies which entities, and which relations between those
entities, should be instantiated in the representation when documents are processed by
NLP tools such as tokenizers, part-of-speech taggers and parsers. Modules are
plugins managed within a framework [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] that automatically decides which modules to run
based on the data representation model chosen. This has allowed the system to be
extended and ported to a number of domains via a definition of the appropriate
ontology that models the data to be obtained from the documents in that domain.
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-3">
        <title>2.3 Knowledge Sharing and Reuse</title>
        <p>As the goal of knowledge management is to provide the right information at the
right time, searching can be considered a main way of sharing.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-4">
        <title>2.3.1 Searching</title>
        <p>
          Searching is performed using X-Search, a component within Doris that implements
a Hybrid Search (HS) strategy, mixing keyword-based searches (KS) and
ontologybased searches (OS) [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          ]. HS combines the flexibility of full text keyword-based
retrieval with the ability to query and reason on document metadata. In HS, users can
combine, within the same query: (i) OS via unique identifiers (e.g. URIs or unique
identifiers); (ii) KS and (iii) keyword-in-context. Keyword-in-context searches the
keywords only in the portion of the document annotated with a specific concept in the
ontology; for example in an aerospace domain, it enables searching for the string
"fuel" but only in the context of all the text portions annotated with the concept
affected-engine-part.
        </p>
        <p>At retrieval time, HS requires the following steps:
• the query is parsed and the three types of searches identified (keywords,
keywordsin-context and ontology-based) and separated;
• keywords are sent to the traditional information retrieval system; this will
return the identifiers (URIs) of all the documents containing those keywords;
performing two types of matches: strict matches, where all keywords must be
present in the returned documents, or less strict matches where some of the
keywords can be missing from the documents. X-Search uses Nutch for
indexing documents, because of the high quality keyword mechanism of Nutch
and its ability to exploit ranking strategies used by search engines.
• queries about concepts (and their relations) are matched with the facts in the
knowledge base using a query language like SPARQL1; results can be returned
that strictly match the results; in a more sophisticated approach it is possible to
perform near matches, for example by automatically relaxing constraints.
Concerning support for triple stores, X-Search provides plug-ins for Sesame and
3Store; query languages supported are SPARQL and Sesame’s SeRQL.
• queries of keywords-in-context are sent to the knowledge base, returning
conceptual instances containing the given keywords (again using SPARQL);
again near matches can be performed;
• Finally, the results of the different queries are merged, ranked and displayed.</p>
        <p>A user query is created via a web form interface that enables easy graphical
composition of ontology and keyword-based conditions (left part of Fig. 2).
Keywords can be inserted into a default form field in a way similar to that required by
search engines; Boolean operators AND and OR can be used in formulating queries.
Conditions on the metadata can be added to the query by clicking on an ontology
concept.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-5">
        <title>2.3.1 Quantitative Analysis of Information (graphs)</title>
        <p>Quantitative analysis of information enables users to explore the knowledge space
and then drill down to documents of provenance to check the details. X-Search
supports quantitative analysis by automatically generating graphs and charts. The user
can choose the style (pie or bar chart) and the variables to plot. Each graphic item is
1 www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
active and can be clicked to focus on the sub-set of documents that contains that
specific occurrence. Both graphs and documents can then be shared with other users.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3 Testing and User Evaluation</title>
      <p>AKTiveForm has been tested informally in-house and is currently undergoing further
development prior to more comprehensive pilot tests and user evaluation. This will
address interface limitations such as moving between sections of a form during fill-in.</p>
      <p>
        X-Search has undergone in-house stress testing, in addition to evaluation by real
users in their working environments, where it emerged that some users first performed
keyword-based searches and in a second iteration added conditions on the ontology;
others composed conditions on the ontology and keywords in a single step; yet others
used the ontology as a first approach and added keywords later to refine the search.
HS overcomes some of the limitations of the methodologies used for knowledge
capture, and in particular IE from legacy documents. It is a well known issue with IE
that in some tasks (e.g. complex event capturing) there is an upper limit in its
accuracy (defined in the MUC conferences [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] as the 60/70 Precision/Recall upper
limit). In Doris, IE is designed so as to perform at a very high accuracy (above 90% in
terms of precision/recall) to enable high quality ontology search. For the pieces of
information where ontology-based annotations are not available this accuracy is
unreachable. Searching however remains effective as the keywords used are
constrained by the presence of other ontology-based constraints (confirmed during
evaluation as users never complained about the limitation). Also, keyword search can
be limited to specific sections of a document, further constraining search.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4 Conclusions</title>
      <p>In this paper we have presented Doris, a framework for the definition of document
based Knowledge Management. It enables semantic knowledge capture both while
documents are created and from legacy documents. It also enables flexible search
across documents and knowledge. The interesting aspects of Doris are:
• All the applications work in a browser on client-server architecture; either locally
or on a remote server. Therefore they can be used even in mobile situations and
synchronised at a later time.
• Ontology-based annotations are generated as a side effect of user activity (via
form filling, as fields in a form are associated to concepts in ontologies) or as a
direct effect of explicit user-centred annotation. Annotations are also generated
automatically for legacy documents by the IE modules.</p>
      <p>The interesting aspects of knowledge capture at creation time are:
• The generation of applications is completely declarative and done via ontologies
and reasoning; changes do not require any programming, just the modification of
a simple ontology.
• The adoption of applications in a work environment does not require any
workflow change for the users. The user workflow can be simulated by the form
filling activity and appropriate non intrusive strategies can be defined. Again,
defining a new class of users with different acquisition requirements does not
require any programming, just changes to the ontology.
• At the end of the process, as well as structured knowledge a PDF file is generated
which can be printed or sent out by email.</p>
      <p>
        The interesting aspects of the knowledge acquisition from legacy documents are:
• Traditional keyword-based document indexing is done in parallel with
ontologybased IE from the documents; this approach is also found in other systems such
as KIM [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]; however, in Doris this is used at search time via HS.
• An ontology-based data representation model enables extensibility of the
knowledge acquisition capabilities of Doris.
      </p>
      <p>Concerning searching, Doris supports multiple approaches to searching and sharing
through the HS framework, combining keyword only, ontology only or different
combinations of both.</p>
      <p>In order to test the effectiveness of Doris, two real world applications were
developed:
• Company’s Knowledge Management: a knowledge capturing application was
developed for Rolls-Royce plc. Two corpora containing dozens of thousands of
documents were used for extraction and the resulting system was released in an
alpha test to 32 Rolls-Royce engineers (see Fig. 3 for user evaluation results).
The system is currently under beta test by about a hundred users. In this
application, we have so far analysed only legacy documents. The capturing of
information at creation time is expected to enter alpha test in early autumn 2007
after the effectiveness on legacy data is fully assessed.
• Historical information search in distributed archives for London of the 18th
century: this is a more limited application, which enables historians to navigate
data about 18th Century London by simultaneously searching data in
heterogeneous archives.</p>
      <p>Acknowledgments. The work was jointly supported by IPAS, which is funded by the UK DTI (Ref.
TP/2/IC/6/I/10292) and Rolls-Royce plc, and X-Media, (www.x-media-project.org), EC grant number
ISTFP6-026978. The application to the history domain was sponsored by the AHRC. Thanks to Matthew
Rowe, Lei Xia, Daniela Petrelli, Vitaveska Lanfranchi and Ziqi Zhang for helping in the preparation of this
challenge.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chapman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>SimMetrics: a similarity library of metric algorithms for integration and comparison,</article-title>
          <year>2004</year>
          , http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~sam/simmetrics.html
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chakravarthy</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lanfranchi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ciravegna</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Cross-media Document Annotation and Enrichment</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in Proc. of the 1st Semantic Authoring and Annotation Workshop</source>
          , ISWC2006, Athens, GA, USA,
          <year>2006</year>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Iria</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ireson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ciravegna</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>An Experimental Study on Boundary Classification Algorithms for Information Extraction using SVM</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. of the Workshop on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining (ATEM</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          ),
          <source>at EACL</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          ,
          <year>April 2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Iria</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Ciravegna</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>A Methodology and Tool for Representing Language Resources for Information Extraction</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. of LREC</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          , Genoa,
          <fpage>24</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>25</lpage>
          -26 May,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            <surname>Lanfranchi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Bhagdev</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Chapman</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Ciravegna</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Petrelli</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Extracting and Searching Knowledge for the Aerospace Industry</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Proceedings of 1st European Semantic Technology Conference, May</source>
          <year>2007</year>
          , Vienna, Austria.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Popov</surname>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kiryakov</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ognyanoff</surname>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Manov</surname>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kirilov</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>KIM - A Semantic Platform</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>For Information Extraction and Retrieval</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Journal of Natural Language Engineering</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>10</volume>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Issue</surname>
          </string-name>
          3-
          <issue>4</issue>
          ,
          <year>Sep 2004</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>375</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>392</lpage>
          , Cambridge University Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Message</given-names>
            <surname>Understanding</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Conference (MUC)7</article-title>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Linguistic</given-names>
            <surname>Data</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Consortium</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>PA USA</source>
          ,
          <year>2001</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>