Advanced search


Full Text:


The lack of integration and communication of various geographic information services (GI services) has resulted in many duplication collection of earth observation data, and challenges of semantic interoperability. This paper proposes an ontology-based multi-agents platform, called MAKOCI (multi-agent knowledge oriented cyberinfrastructure), which acts as GI service one stop to manage, publish, share, and discover GI services semantically. By ontologies, formal meanings of concepts are defined to annotate and discover GI services on a conceptual level for semantic interoperability. With the assistance of multi-agents, the processes in MAKOCI can be divided into various modules and be communicated based on the same semantics in ontologies. A prototype was implemented to test MAKOCI. Finally, we conclude the advantages and disadvantages of MAKOCI and point out several future works.

About the Authors

Chin-Te Jung
Department of Geography, National Taiwan University, Taipei city, Taiwan, No.1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Road, 106
Taiwan, Province of China

Chih-Hong Sun
Professor, Department of Geography, National Taiwan University, Taipei city, Taiwan, No.1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Road, 106
Taiwan, Province of China

Min-Fang Lien
Director of Technologies Department, Taiwan GIS Center, Taipei city, Taiwan, 6F, No,6, Sec. 1, Roosevelt Road, 106
Taiwan, Province of China

Chih-Shyang Chang
Professor, Department of Information Management, Tungnan University, New Taipei city, Taiwan, No. 152, Sec. 3, Beishen Road, 222
Taiwan, Province of China

Wei-Jen Chung
Engineer, Taiwan GIS Center, Taipei city, Taiwan, 6F, No,6, Sec. 1, Roosevelt Road, 106
Taiwan, Province of China

Hong-Yang Lin
Engineer, Taiwan GIS Center, Taipei city, Taiwan, 6F, No,6, Sec. 1, Roosevelt Road, 106
Taiwan, Province of China

Ping-Ying Tsai
Engineer, Taiwan GIS Center, Taipei city, Taiwan, 6F, No,6, Sec. 1, Roosevelt Road, 106
Taiwan, Province of China


1. Albrecht, J. (1998) Universal Analytical GIS Operations – A task-oriented systematisation of

2. data-structure-independent GIS functionality. In Geographic Information Research: transatlantic

3. perspectives, eds. M. Craglia and H. Onsrud, 577–591. London: Taylor & Francis.

4. Babitski, G., Bergweiler, S., Hoffmann, J., Schön, D., Stasch, C., and Walkowski, A. (2009)

5. Ontology-based integration of sensor web services in disaster management. Paper read

6. at GeoSpatial Semantics 2009, LNCS 5892, at Berlin.

7. Benjamins, V.R., Fensel, D., and Perez, A.G. (1998) Knowledge management through ontologies.

8. Paper read at Proceedings of the Second Inernational Conference on Practical

9. Aspects of Knowledge Management, at Basel, Switzerland.

10. Bernard, L., Einspanier, U., Haubrock, S., Hubner, S., Kuhn, W., Lessing, R., Lutz, M., and Visser,

11. U. (2003) Ontologies for intelligent search and semantic translation in spatial data infrastructures.

12. Photogrammetric-Fernerkundung-GeoInformation (PFG), N. 6, pp. 451–462.

13. Bishr, Y. (1998) Overcoming the semantic and other barriers to GIS interoperbility. International

14. Journal of Geographic Information Science, N. 12, V. 4, pp. 299–314.

15. Bizer, C., Heath, T., and Berners-Lee, T. (2009) Linked data-the story so far. Int. J. Semantic

16. Web Inf. Syst., N. 5, V. 3, pp. 1–22.

17. Crubézy, M., and Musen, M. A. (2003) Ontologies in support of problem solving. In Handbook

18. on ontologies, eds. S. Staab and R. Studer, 321–341. Berlin: Springer.

19. Di, L., Zhao, P., Yang, W., and Yue, P. (2006) Ontology-driven Automatic Geospatial-Processing

20. Modeling based on Web-service Chaining, Proceedings of the Sixth Annual NASA

21. Earth Science Technology Conference, College Park, MD.

22. Egenhofer, M. (2002) Towards the Semantic Geospatial Web. Paper read at Proceedings

23. of the Tenth ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information

24. Systems, at McLean, Virginia.

25. Fonseca, F., and Sheth, A. (2002) The Geospatial Semantic Web. Washington, D.C.: University

26. Consortium of Geographic Information Science White Paper.

27. Goodwin, C., and Russomanno, D.J. (2006) An ontology-based sensor network prototype

28. environment. Paper read at Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information

29. Processing in Sensor Networks, at Nashville, TN.

30. Gruber, T.R. (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge

31. Acquisition, N. 5, V. 2, pp. 199–220.

32. Hadzic, M., Wongthongtham, P., Dilon, T., and Chang, E. (2009) Ontology-Based Multi-

33. Agent Systems. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

34. Harvey, F., Kuhn, W., Pundt, H., Bishr, Y., and Riedemann, C. (1999) Semantic interoperability:

35. a central issue for sharing geographic information. The annals of regional science, N.

36. , pp. 213–232.

37. Iorio, A. D., Presutti, V., and Vitali, F. (2005) WikiFactory: An Ontology-Based Application for

38. Creating Domain-Oriented Wikis. Paper read at The 3rd European Semantic Web Conference,

39. ESWC 2006, at Budva, Montenegro.

40. Jaeger, E., Altintas, I., Zhang, J., Ludäscher, B., Pennington, D., and Michener, W. (2005) A

41. scientific workflow approach to distributed geospatial data processing using web services.

42. Paper read at SSDBM’2005 Proceedings of the 17th international conference on

43. Scientific and statistical database management, at Santa Barbara, CA.

44. Janowicz, K., Bröring, A., Stasch, C., and Everding, T. (2010) Towards Meaningful URIs for

45. Linked Sensor Data. Paper read at Proceedings of the Workshop “Towards Digital Earth:

46. Search, Discover and Share Geospatial Data 2010” at Future Internet Symposium 2010, at

47. Berlin, Germany.

48. Janowicz, K., Bröring, A., Stasch, C., Schade, S., Everding, T., and Llaves, A. (2011) A RESTful

49. Proxy and Data Model for Linked Sensor Data. International Journal of Digital Earth, N., pp.

50. Manuscript accepted for publication.

51. Klyne, G., and Carroll, J. J. (2004) Resource description framework (RDF): Concepts and

52. Abstract Syntax, ed. B. McBride.

53. Knublauch, H., Rector, A., Stevens, R., and Wroe, C. (2004) A practical guide to building

54. OWL ontologies using the Protege-OWL plugin and CO-ODE tools edition 1.0, Workshop

55. on OWL: Experiences and Directions, Fourth International Semantic Web Conference

56. (ISWC2005), Galway, Ireland.

57. Kolas, D., Hebeler, J., and Dean, M. (2005) Geospatial Semantic Web: Architecture of Ontologies.

58. Paper read at GeoS 2005, LNCS 3799, at Mexico City, Mexico.

59. Kuhn, W. (2003) Semantic reference systems. International Journal of Geographic Information

60. Science, N. 17, V. 5, pp. 405–409.

61. Kvaløy, T. A., Rongen, E., Tirado-Ramos, A., and Sloot, P. (2005) Automatic composition and

62. selection of semantic web services. Paper read at Advances in Grid Computing-EGC 2005,

63. LNCS 3470, at Berlin, Germany.

64. Lemmens, R. (2006) Semantic interoperability of distributed geo-services, International

65. Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), Delft University of

66. Technology, Enschede, The Netherlands.

67. Lutz, M. (2005) Overcoming Differences of Meaning in Spatial Data Infrastructures –

68. Achievement and Challenges, Position Paper for Workshop on Cross-learning between

69. Spatial Data Infrastructures and Information Infrastructures, Enschede, the Netherlands.

70. Lutz, M. (2006) Ontology-based discovery and composition of geographic information

71. services, Institute for Geoinformatics, University of Münster, Münster.

72. Lutz, M., Lucchi, R., Friis-Christensen, A., and Ostländer, N. (2007) A Rule-Based Description

73. Framework for the Composition of Geographic Information Services. In GeoSpatial

74. Semantics, eds. F. T. Fonseca, M. A. Rodriguez and S. Levashkin, 114–127: Springer.

75. Martin, D., Burstein, M., Hobbs, J., Lassia, O., McDermott, D., McIlraith, S., Narayanan, S., Paolucci,

76. M., Parsia, B., Payne, T., Sirin, E., Srinivasan, N., and Sycara, K. (2004) OWL-S: Semantic

77. Markup for Web Services. W3C 2004 [cited. Available from

78. OWL-S.

79. McGuinness, D. L., and Van Harmelen, F. (2004) OWL Web Ontology Language overview

80. [cited 7 June 2012]. Available from

81. Moodley, D., and Kinyua, J. (2006) Towards a multi-agent infrastructure for distributed Internet

82. applications, 8th Annual Conference on WWW Applications, Bloemfontein, South

83. Africa.

84. Moodley, D., and Simonis, I. (2006) A new architecture for the sensor web: the SWAP

85. framework, The 5th International Semantic Web Conference (IWSC), Athens.

86. Niles, I., and Pease, A. (2001) Towards a Standard Upper Ontology. Paper read at the 2nd

87. International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS-2001), at

88. Ogunquit, Maine.

89. OGC. (2005) Web Feature Service Implementation Specification: Technical report OGC

90. -094.

91. OGC. (2006a) OpenGIS Implementation Specification for Geographic information – Simple

92. feature access – Part 1: Common architecture Techincal report 06-103r4.

93. OGC. (2006b) OpenGIS® Web Map Server Implementation Specification, version 1.3.0. In

94. Technical report OGC 06-042, ed. O. G. Consortium.

95. Peachavanish, R., and Karimi, H. (2007) Ontological Engineering for Interpreting Geospatial

96. Queries. Transactions in GIS, N. 11, V. 1, pp. 115–130.

97. Peng, Z., and Tsou, M. (2003) Internet GIS: Distributed Geographic Inofrmation Services for

98. the Internet and Wireless Networks. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

99. Prud’Hommeaux, E., and Seaborne, A. (2008) SPARQL query language for RDF. In W3C

100. working draft.

101. Purves, R.S., Clough, P., Jones, C.B., Arampatzis, A., Bucher, B., finch, D., Fu, G., Joho, H., Syed,

102. A.K., Vaid, S., and Yang, B. (2007) The design and implementation of SPIRIT: a spatially

103. aware search engine for information retrieval on the internet. International Journal of

104. Geographic Information Science, N. 21, V. 7, pp. 717–745.

105. Rauble, M. (2001) Ontology and epistemology for agent-based wayfinding simulation.

106. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, N. 15, pp. 653–667.

107. Sengupta, R., and Sieber, R. (2007) Geospatial Agents, Agents Everywhere... Transactions

108. in GIS, N. 11, V. 4, pp. 483–506.

109. Stock, K. (2008) Determining Semantic Similarity of Behaviour Using Natural Semantic

110. Metalanguage to Match User Objectives to Available Web Services. Transactions in GIS,

111. N. 12, pp. 733–755.

112. Uschold, M. (1998) Knowledge level modeling: concepts and terminology. The Knowledge

113. Engineering Review, N. 13, V. 1, pp. 5–29.

114. Wooldridge, M. (1999) Intelligent Agents. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

115. Wooldridge, M., and Jennings, N. R. (1995) Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. Knowledge

116. engineering review, N. 10, V. 2, pp. 115–152.

117. Yang, C., Raskin, R., Goodchild, M., and Gahegan, M. (2010) Geospatial Cyberinfrastructure:

118. Past, present and future. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, N. 34, pp.

119. –277.

120. Yu, L. (2011) A Developer’s Guide to the Semantic Web. Berlin: Springer.

121. Zhang, T., and Tsou, M. H. (2009) Developing a grid-enabled spatial Web portal for Internet

122. GIServices and geospatial cyberinfrastructure. International Journal of Geographical

123. Information Science, N. 23, V. 5, pp. 605–630.


For citations:


Views: 476

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 2071-9388 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1565 (Online)