1 semantic web for the military user progress tom martin research management enterprises...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Semantic Web for the Military User Progress
Tom Martin
Research Management Enterprises
(571) 215-9802
2
DAMLProgram
Semantic Web Military Applications
World Wide Semantic WebW3C/DAML-OIL
Infrastructure, Tools, Applications, and Language
Specific Projects, Military Applications
Forcenet/ESG/Doctrine/LL
Web Enabled Navy
IntelinkHorus
Center for Army Lessons
LearnedThesaurus
Other/TBD
Ongoing
Ongoing & Planned
JBIForeign
ClearanceGuidance
3
Semantic Web for the Military User Meetings
• SWMU II – Nov 12/13 2001—Agenda—Attendees—Approach—Outcome – Working Session Results
• Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEE Meeting March 25-27, 2002—Background—Rationale for Joint Meeting—Objectives—Approach/Agenda
4
SWMU II Agenda
• Tuesday, November 12, 2001— AM – Introduction for those who had not attended SWMU-I (June 2001)
– Ontologies Introduction, Horus Overview, DAML Language, Example Demo IT Talks, & Summary of Last Meeting (SWMU-I)
— PM – Plenary for all attendees– Update of DAML– Several short DAML demos – BBN, DRC, and LM AeroText– CoABS Grid Military Users Group (GMUG) overview– Horus update– NWDC updates, – Updates from Breakout groups:
– Intelligence (Joe Rockmore)– Doctrine/Lessons Learned (Alice Mulvehill)– C2 Applications (Tom Martin)
— Evening Demo session
• Wednesday, November 13, 2001— Intel, Doctrine/LL, and C2 Breakouts and Outbriefs
5
SWMU II Attendee/Organizations
Elaine Marsh/NRLFrank Muller/BBNPaul Kogut/Lockheed-MartinJoe Rockmore/CyladianMike Dean/BBNRob Rasch/BCBL-L (Army)Mike Rimmer/NWDCMark Gorniak/AFRLKen Whitebread/LMSC/ATLFrank White/SSCMartha Kahn/Global InfotekHal Hultgren/NWDCPaul Neves/BBNLee Lacy/DRCTom Martin/RMEAlice Mulvehill/BBNWayne Perras/NWDC
David Rager/BBNDavid Aha/NRLJake Jacobowitz/OC IncSally DeGozzaldi/Joint Staff/J7Mike Pratt/OC IncDennis Toomey/AnteonTed Baer/AnteonBruce Peoples/RaytheonMark Werner/NWDCChuck A Menges USMC Doc DivPhillip Boos/Thomas AssociatesBob Lucas/JCLL at JWFCChuck McGrath/OC Inc/JFCOM/JWFCKalyan Gupta/ITT Industries/NRLMike Dietvorst/USAF Doctrine CenterMarti Hall/DRC Orlando Paul Odell/NWDC
6
Intelligence BreakoutJoe Rockmore - Facilitator
• Charter— How do the ideas of the semantic web specifically apply
to intelligence problems?— What unique problems does the intelligence community
have with respect to using semantic web technology?— How can we leverage the work being done in DAML, and
specifically the applications to intelligence, to other efforts?
7
Semantic Web Functional Architecture
Docs
DBs
MarkupMarkupMarkup
MapMapMap
{ DAML } KB
Analyses
Userinteractions
• Browsing• Visualization• Q & A• Etc.
Ont dev
8
Intelligence Ontologies(vice C2, logistics, or others)
• Intelligence needs to talk about what was, is, and might be (with uncertainty), while C2 plans what to do with resources available, logistics makes resources available, etc.— Ontologies need to reflect differences in data and mission
• Issues of interest to intelligence (primary)— Money laundering, geopolitical issues, financial
transactions, non-military organizations, drugs, counter-terrorism, etc.
— Imagery, signals, open source, & analysis of this data• Generally higher levels of abstraction than C2, etc.• Source info and confidence in source important• Temporal and spatial reasoning important
9
Significant Issue: Geolocation & Temporal Representation
• Understand documents enough to know locations in a document
— Placename, lat/lon, BE num, UTM, etc.
— Disambiguation
— Granularity issues
• Understand documents enough to know temporal aspects in a document
— Absolute time in different granularity (date & time to milliseconds vs. season) and representations (Julian date, DTG, etc.)
— Disambiguation
— Relative time (before, after, within, overlapping, close to, etc.)
• Co-reference problems in geolocations and times
10
Significant Issue: Markup Tools
• Consumer-based and producer-based markup tools needed— Combine automated and manual markup intelligently— Markup as part of authoring
• Culture is analysts (producers) are too busy to do any additional work, such as markup, unless— Its very easy to do— There is clear value to producers (not just consumers)— Someone measures them on the quality/quantity of markup
• Mid term: mixed initiative, where authoring and knowledge object creation are done in parallel and with either driving the process
• A long term view: author knowledge objects from the outset; form products from these objects, including English text documents
• Multilingual opportunities
11
Significant Issue: Access to Data
• Tailored push; also pull (“My Intelink”), including changes of sufficient magnitude— Subscriptions and data descriptions for matching against
subscriptions may be best done using hierarchical ontologies (vice database schemata, which are not sufficiently expressive)
• Crawlers of value, but may have access control issues (open source an exception)
• Uncertainty of data (both by source and about source)• Inference-based retrieval of information• Pedigree critical to maintain (but often raises the security levels)• Indexing of markup important for speed of access• Timelines for intelligence information.
— Can be long, if national— Can be short, if tactical
12
Significant Issue: Collection
• Tie collection, processing, production together• A common markup language will enhance collection, thus
optimizing use of intel resources• Producers and consumers have different ways of looking at
the world; there is not necessarily a mapping between them— Can consumers provide tasking to producers, via
markup, of requirements on collection?— Info data needs from UJTL tasks or other statement of
data needs
13
Significant issue:Security
• Will DAML markup allow semantic understanding of information enough to affect releasability processes?— Can we do our collection and analysis at SCI and report
at lower levels (including collateral , coalition, and unclass)?
14
Recommendations
• Military and intelligence users that particularly should hear about semantic web: — DoD elements: DIA (esp JIVA), NSA— Agencies: NRO, NIMA, CIA— Service intel agencies: ISCOM, AFIA, ONI, MCIA— Unified commands: JIC’s and JAC’s— Standards setting and interoperability orgs
• How do organizations understand what DAML products and approaches could help them?— Focused TIE’s with appropriate producers and
consumers around specific value propositions
Need straightforward explanation of what DAML is and its value added (over XML)
15
Doctrine/Lessons Learned:Breakout Session Out-Brief
– Working Group Name: Doctrine/LL– Purpose – Significant Issues– Recommendations/Plan of Action
– Working Group Name: Doctrine/LL– Purpose – Significant Issues– Recommendations/Plan of Action
OutlineFacilitator: Alice Mulvehill (BBN)
16
Some Common Goals
• Use DAML to support user groups:– Operations: Decision support – Training – Doctrine: Both producers and consumers
• User Processes:– Information (doctrine/lessons) access– Auto-generation of valid/reliable structured information– Just-in-time information delivery (post approval/verification)
Across all levels (strategic, operational, tactical) Tailored granularity (concept, task, mission) Usable format
• Constraints:– Portable: Does not require net connection– Tools must be easy to use, inexpensive to acquire
17
Significant Issues/Needs
Process:1. Tools for searching and inferencing with DAML ontologies
• for context-sensitive search for given documents• for document revision and change tracking• for speeding up the markup process
2. Meta-tag generation 3. Identifying user’s granularity need (e.g., paragraph vs. task)4. Approval of DAML links in doctrine generation5. Bandwidth of existing info infrastructure systems, & search implications6. Performance Tasks:
• Representations for situation collection Verification and editing
• Trend analysis (e.g., from lessons, commonalities among METLs)• Comparative evaluations (e.g., search using DAML markup vs. not)
Process:1. Tools for searching and inferencing with DAML ontologies
• for context-sensitive search for given documents• for document revision and change tracking• for speeding up the markup process
2. Meta-tag generation 3. Identifying user’s granularity need (e.g., paragraph vs. task)4. Approval of DAML links in doctrine generation5. Bandwidth of existing info infrastructure systems, & search implications6. Performance Tasks:
• Representations for situation collection Verification and editing
• Trend analysis (e.g., from lessons, commonalities among METLs)• Comparative evaluations (e.g., search using DAML markup vs. not)
Product:1. Provide portable/local search (e.g., not connected to SIPRNET)2. Agent-based tools for exploiting DAMLized LL/doctrine 3. Meta-tag use
Product:1. Provide portable/local search (e.g., not connected to SIPRNET)2. Agent-based tools for exploiting DAMLized LL/doctrine 3. Meta-tag use
18
Questions
1. Can PDF files (or their indices) be DAMLized (i.e., is HTML needed)?1. Can PDF files (or their indices) be DAMLized (i.e., is HTML needed)?
2. Any existing dataspace visualization tools for viewing DAML links?• If so, what are their existing capabilities?
2. Any existing dataspace visualization tools for viewing DAML links?• If so, what are their existing capabilities?
19
1. Build ontologies for METLs (DRC)2. Demonstrate the utility of DAML for applying doctrine/LL in decision
support systems (Several groups)3. Provide PDF mission folder examples (with indices) for
experimentation re: just-in-time index generation (C. McGrath)4. Test ontology creation & markup tools (M. Dietvorst w/ D. Rager)5. Provide intro descriptions & system requirements of available
DAML tools (A. Mulvehill)6. Provide feedback/assessments to Alice on DAML tools (all)
1. Build ontologies for METLs (DRC)2. Demonstrate the utility of DAML for applying doctrine/LL in decision
support systems (Several groups)3. Provide PDF mission folder examples (with indices) for
experimentation re: just-in-time index generation (C. McGrath)4. Test ontology creation & markup tools (M. Dietvorst w/ D. Rager)5. Provide intro descriptions & system requirements of available
DAML tools (A. Mulvehill)6. Provide feedback/assessments to Alice on DAML tools (all)
Recommendations/Plan of Action
1. Make requested DAML tools available• e.g., Ontology generators, auto-markup tools, DAML editors
2. Create inferencing tools for use with DAML markup3. Advertise DAML tutorial (i.e., the walk-thru example)4. Request DAML tool summary at next meeting
1. Make requested DAML tools available• e.g., Ontology generators, auto-markup tools, DAML editors
2. Create inferencing tools for use with DAML markup3. Advertise DAML tutorial (i.e., the walk-thru example)4. Request DAML tool summary at next meeting
20
C2 ApplicationsFacilitator – Tom Martin
• Objectives— Explore Command and Control Applications for DAML
developments, both long and short term– What are ways in which we can best explore the value of
DAML for C2 functions
21
DAML in Expeditionary Sensor Grid(ESG) for Data and Information Fusion
ESG - A sensor grid architecture that integrates sensors, networks, decision aids, warriors and supporting systems into a highly adaptive comprehensive system that operates from the surface to space and from sea to land.
Widely varying heterogeneity, thousands of sensors and sources - coalition, legacy and emerging systems and sensors
Fusion will require many more operators than practical and automation of fusion will depend on software agents
DAML Contribution Referenced metadata regarding sensor
characteristics, performance and reliability (pedigree), and decision-needs context for multiple heterogeneous sensors/sources/systems enabling high level automated (agent-based) fusion.
FY 02 ESG Enabling Experiments Assess DAML markup utility for enhancement of fusion Explore bandwidth overhead and scalability issues.
22
Sensor Processing Stream using fixed structure, XML, and DAML
Sensor d specification
Algorithm description…
Sb` Sc Szz
Sa`
Sa`
Sa`
Sa`
TimeSeries
Sensor FusionProcessor
Event Time/Freq, Intensity, Shape Features, Sensor Data
C2 Fusion
ClassificationConfidenceLocalizationTracks+ Event Data
Sd Se……...
Heterogeneous Sensors
Sensor c specification
Algorithm description…
Sensor b specification
Algorithm description…
Semantic Resources
Fixed DataStructure XML DAML
DAML in Sensor Fusion
23
DAML in Sensor Fusion
Sensor Processing Stream using fixed structure, XML, and DAML
Sb`
S
c
S
zzTimeSeries
Event Time/Freq, Intensity, Shape Features, Sensor Data
Existence of objectClassificationConfidenceLocalizationTracks+ Event Data
S
d
S
e
…...
Heterogeneous Sensors and Sources
Sensor c specification
Pedigree
Algorithm description
“Unit definition”
Decision Context
…
Semantic Resources
Fixed DataStructure, XML
DAML
DATA AND INFORMATION FUSION (Client and Services?)
Level 0 Signal Data Refinement
Level 1
Object Refinement
Objects
Le
ve
l 4
R
es
ou
rce
Re
fin
em
en
t
Object Base
Situation
Visualization, Management
Level 2Situation Refinement
Level 3Impact Situations
ImpactsHigh
Low
INF
ER
EN
CE
LE
VE
LSensor b specification
Pedigree
Algorithm description
“Unit definition”
Decision Context
…
Sensor a specification
Pedigree
Algorithm description
“Unit definition”
Decision Context
…
HUMINTOpen Source…
?
?
24
By the way
• XML = 10x hard code• DAML = 2x XML• Jini/Java breakpoint
25
Recommendations/Actions
26
Communications
• For ESG, smart agent needed for dynamic communications management to do reasoning about the network – to support the smart agent operation, need:— Comms ontology from Operational Level to Tactical
Level (see next slide)— Identify boundaries of sensor nets, etc.
27
Ontology Development
• Ontology from Operational Level (CJTF) to tactical level (weapons on target) for supporting modeling of sensor/ communications/ information management needs—Benefits to ESG
– Experiment design
– System Concept Testing
– Once refined, system design, and construction
—Ties to many many other needs– Intelligence, Leverage of Doctrine/TTP/Lessons
Learned/Training work
28
Experimentation
• Experimentation (General)— For both Communications and Fusion applications, refine
the CoABS Grid DAML interfaces for Utility for– Dynamic Communications– Sensor Management– Sensor Fusion
• DAML for Fusion— EEE Experimentation
– Explore the Depth of where DAML markup makes the most sense
– Explore Jini/Java (I.e., Grid) object translation to DAML
— Research – Assess DAML tools for the multiple layers from the physical to
the information management– Bandwidth tradeoffs, etc.
– Modeling DAML/assessing utility in the mobile environment
29
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEEMarch 25-25, 2002
SPAWAR Systems Center, San Diego, CA
A new approach to the Agent Based Computing
Outreach to Transition Partners
30
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEE March 25-27, 2002Background
• Vision of Future Warfare— Fit to ESG/Interest of Navy in Agent Based Computing— Agent-Based and DARPA Fusion Technology Roles
– CoABS Grid
– Semantic Web/DAML
– DDB/DTT
– Each Program at a turning point
– Changes of the Military EnvironmentChanges of the Military Environment
– Changes of Management and OrganizationChanges of Management and Organization
31
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEERationale for Joint Meeting
• Unprecedented Opportunity— Fruition of DARPA Technologies— Role of NWDC in ESG Experimentation— FY 01 Accomplishments with CoABS Grid
– Interoperability– Dynamic Reconfigurability– Security
— FY 02 Plans– Distributed Multiple “Real” vs. Virtual Sensors– Teaming with JBI and possibly AATD– Fusion efforts – DDB/AIM and DAML
• Joint Meeting Rationale– Many of Same Participants for all Three Meetings– Sharing with Those Greatest Stressing the Technologies– Opportunity Joint Work on Future
32
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEEObjectives
• Review ESG Enabling Experiment Plans— Expose non-EEE Participants to key use of ABC— NWDC Explore Added Opportunities for Co-evolve
Emerging Technologies with New Concepts and Doctrine
— Adjust/Refine EEE Plans Accordingly• A Forum for Sharing Grid and Semantic Web Experiences
— Review of Key Lessons Learned – Challenges, Problems, Work-arounds– Feed Back to Developers and Program Managers
• Explore Potential for Key ABC and Fusion Technologies to Contribute to ESG/JBI in Future
• Identify Potential DARPA Initiatives to Address Unsolved Technology Issues
• Result in actionable Plan of Action and Milestones to meet those objectives above
33
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEEApproach
• Joint meeting for all three groups• Sequence
—Objectives and Sponsor Views– ONR/NWDC Objectives– DARPA – CoABS, DAML, DDB/AIM
—Users Reviews– EEE Plans and Progress, and Grid Lessons Learned– DAML Issues, NWDC Lessons Learned/Doctrine
CALL– Horus, AATD, CECOM, AFRL/JBI
—Working Groups
34
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEEWorking Group Process
• 4 Focus Areas
— Connectivity, Interoperability, and Security (SSC and JBI Lead)
— Sensors, Fusion, and Representation Using DARPA Technologies (SSC Lead)
– Highlight DARPA Projects CoABS Grid, DAML, and DDB/AIM
— Agents for C2 (NWDC Lead)
— Ontologies for Military Use – Representation, C2, Fusion, Military Lessons Learned, Doctrine, Intelligence (NWDC Lead)
• Objectives
— Focus – Issues, Problems, Lessons Learned, Opportunities
— Objective, POA&M with with responsibilities, milestones, and due dates assigned
— Interrelated, not stove-piped approaches and solutions
35
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEEOverall Process
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
Objectives&
User Review
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing*
Working Groups
Working Groups
Final Briefs,SponsorCloseout
Connectivity…
Sensors, …
Agents in …
Ontologies …Plenary
Plenary
Plenary
Connectivity,Interoperability,
&Security
*Cross-Pollination Opportunity
36
Working Groups
Final Briefs,SponsorCloseout
Connectivity…
Sensors, …
Agents in …
Ontologies …Plenary
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEE - Working Group Process – Interim Briefing – Cross Pollination
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
1. Connectivity, ..
2. Sensors, ..
3. Agents in C2
4. Ontologies for..
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
Objectives&
User Review
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing*
Working Groups
Plenary
Plenary
Connectivity,Interoperability,
&Security
*Cross-Pollination Opportunity
37
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEE - Working Group Process – Final POA&M’s – Interrelated
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
ObjectivesKickoff
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing
Objectives&
User Review
Sensors,Fusion,
and Representation
AgentsIn Command and Control
OntologiesFor
Military Use
InterimBriefing*
Working Groups
Working Groups
Final Briefs,SponsorCloseout
Connectivity…
Sensors, …
Agents in …
Ontologies …Plenary
Plenary
Plenary
Connectivity,Interoperability,
&Security
*Cross-Pollination Opportunity
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
1. Connectivity, ..
2. Sensors, ..
3. Agents in C2
4. Ontologies for..
38
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEESchedule
AM
PM
Monday 3/25 Tuesday 3/26 Wednesday 3/27
User Review EEE-02 Plan Review
EEE-02 Progress
EEE Grid Lessons
Learned
DAML Issues
Horus Review
AATD
CECOM
JBI/AFRL
Plenary Working Group Interim Briefs (0830-0930) then Resume Cross-Fertilization Working Groups
Sponsor Intro/Joint Meeting Objectives and Process Navy ONR/NWDC – FY
02 Navy Objectives
DARPA Objectives
and Updates
CoABS
DAML
DDB/AIM
Workshop Process
Working Groups 1. Connectivity,
Interoperability, &
Security
2. Sensors, Fusion, &
Representation
3. Agents in C2
4. Ontologies for
Military Use
Working Groups
Re-convene (1330-1600) then Working Group Out-
Brief and Sponsor Wrap-up/Future Planning
39
Joint SWMU/GMUG/EEEOutcome
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Near Term PlansABC Such and So
Tuesday 3/26
1. Connectivity, ..
2. Sensors, ..
3. Agents in C2
4. Ontologies for..
Wednesday 3/27
Working Groups
Re-convene (1330-1600) then Working Group Out-
Brief, Sponsor Wrap-up, and Future Planning
Working Groups1. Connectivity,
Interoperability, &
Security
2. Sensors, Fusion, &
Representation
3. Agents in C2
4. Ontologies for
Military Use
Sponsor Intro/Joint Meeting Objectives and Process
Navy ONR/NWDC – FY
02 Navy Objectives
DARPA Objectives
and Updates
CoABS
DAML
DDB/AIM
Workshop Process
Plenary Working Group Interim Briefs (0830-0930) then Resume Cross-Fertilization Working Groups
User ReviewEEE-02 Plan Review
EEE-02 Progress
EEE Grid Lessons
Learned
DAML Issues
Horus Review
AATD
CECOM
JBI/AFRL
Working Groups
Re-convene (1330-1600) then Working Group Out-
Brief, Sponsor Wrap-up, and Future Planning
Working Groups1. Connectivity,
Interoperability, &
Security
2. Sensors, Fusion, &
Representation
3. Agents in C2
4. Ontologies for
Military Use
Sponsor Intro/Joint Meeting Objectives and Process
Navy ONR/NWDC – FY
02 Navy Objectives
DARPA Objectives
and Updates
CoABS
DAML
DDB/AIM
Workshop Process
Plenary Working Group Interim Briefs (0830-0930) then Resume Cross-Fertilization Working Groups
User ReviewEEE-02 Plan Review
EEE-02 Progress
EEE Grid Lessons
Learned
DAML Issues
Horus Review
AATD
CECOM
JBI/AFRL