Modeling Surface Hydrology Concepts with Endurance and Perdurance

Feng, Chen‐Chieh; Bittner, Thomas; Flewelling, Douglas M.

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30231-5_5

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, the analysis of the local contexts of potamonyms (i.e., the analysis of predicate-argument structure of sentences that mention named rivers) allowed the transition to global contexts (i.e., semantic frames that depicted environmental problems) that encompassed the conceptual networks reflected in the texts as background situations for specialized concepts. Therefore, since context, knowledge, and reasoning are closely intertwined (Brézillon, 2005), it will be examined how the river-evoked frames can be applied to enhance the geospatial modeling of rivers in geographic information systems, as envisaged by Feng et al (2004), Garrido andRequena (2011), andLindenschmidt andCarr (2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic Representation of Context for Description of Named Rivers in a Terminological Knowledge Base

Rojas-Garcia

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The description of named entities in terminological knowledge bases has never been addressed in any depth in terminology. Firm preconceptions, rooted in philosophy, about the only referential function of proper names have presumably led to disparage their inclusion in terminology resources, despite the relevance of named entities having been highlighted by prominent figures in the discipline of terminology. Scholars from different branches of linguistics depart from the conservative stance on proper names and have foregrounded the need for a novel approach, more linguistic than philosophical, to describing proper names. Therefore, this paper proposed a linguistic and terminological approach to the study of named entities when used in scientific discourse, with the purpose of representing them in EcoLexicon, an environmental knowledge base designed according to the premises of Frame-based Terminology. We focused more specifically on named rivers (or potamonyms) mentioned in a coastal engineering corpus. Inclusion of named entities in terminological knowledge bases requires analyzing the context that surrounds them in specialized texts because these contexts convey specialized knowledge about named entities. For the semantic representation of context, this paper thus analyzed the local syntactic and semantic contexts that surrounded potamonyms in coastal engineering texts and described the semantic annotation of the predicate-argument structure of sentences where a potamonym was mentioned. The semantic variables annotated were the following: (1) semantic category of the arguments; (2) semantic role of the arguments; (3) semantic relation between the arguments; and (4) lexical domain of the verbs. This method yielded valuable insight into the different semantic roles that named rivers played, the entities and processes that participated in the events educed by potamonyms through verbs, and how they all interacted. Furthermore, since arguments are specialized terms and verbs are relational constructs, the analysis of argument structure led to the construction of semantic networks that depicted specialized knowledge about named rivers. These conceptual networks were then used to craft the thematic description of potamonyms. Accordingly, the semantic network and the thematic description not only constituted the representation of a potamonym in EcoLexicon, but also allowed the geographic contextualization of specialized concepts in the terminological resource.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic Representation of Context for Description of Named Rivers in a Terminological Knowledge Base

Rojas-Garcia

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In these areas ontology has been practically used to clean up medical databases from hard to spot errors and to bridge medical ontologies built by different communities [22], [23]. There are numerous examples examples of successful application of various ontological methodologies in the domain of geospatial databases and data models too [24], [25].…”

Section: Formal Ontology and Its Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ontological Investigation of a Multiscale Ecosystem Classification Using the “National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units” as an Example

Sorokine

Bittner

Renschler³

2006

Geoinformatica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a formalized ontological framework for the analysis of multiscale classifications of geographic objects. We propose a set of logical principles that guide such geographic classifications. These principles are represented as definitions and axioms of the first-order predicate logic. Then we demonstrate an application of these principles with a practical example of the "National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units." The study presents a minimal set of entities and relation need for such formalizations and emphasizes the need to distinguish clearly between classes of ecosystems and ecosystems-individuals physically located on the Earth surface. The ontological framework proposed in the paper has the potential to be used to facilitate interoperability between such geographic classifications.

show abstract

“…a river's water (as a whole object) can have properties distinct from its containing river channel or changing water matter parts, as it can rise without the channel rising and its Hydro ontology engineering. Existing hydro ontologies and geospatial feature catalogs focus primarily on inland surface water features, with groundwater features typically a secondary concern (Buttigieg et al, 2016;Feng et al, 2004;Galton and Mizoguchi, 2009;Duce and Krzysztof, 2010;Santos et al, 2005;Varanka and Usery, 2015;Sinha et al, 2014;Wellen and Sieber, 2013;Tripathi and Babaie, 2008;Raskin and Pan, 2005). The key aspects of a water feature are not all distinguished by any one approach, and the complete range of representative water features is not delineated.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water features and their parts

Brodaric

Hahmann

Grüninger

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water features such as rivers, clouds, and aquifers are primarily understood from sensor measurements. Ontologies for the hydro domain play a key role in describing sensor measurements, particularly to aid water data interoperability, but water features are under-represented in such ontologies. In this paper we build upon existing work in hydro ontologies to enhance the characterization and representation of water features. An enhanced theory of physical object parthood is developed that enables water features to be characterized as wholes with various essential parts, building on Fine's theory of parts and Hayes' ontology of liquids. The results are represented as a formal extension of the DOLCE ontology, and advance the HyFO reference ontology for the hydro domain. . B. Brodaric et al. / Water featuresheight remains despite the departure of specific water matter amounts. The key aspects of a river that are thus differentiated by Fine include its water object, container, amounts of water matter and their flow. However, a river is not identified with any of these key aspects and the exact nature of the relationship between a river and each aspect is not explicitly addressed, as river ontology is not the focus of the work.Applied ontology. The ontology of fluids (Hayes, 1985) recognizes two more key aspects: (1) the void hosted by a container, such as the space in a river channel, and (2) the supporting entity holding up the water, such as a riverbed. Water features are then variously identified with a key aspect, initially with the void and then with the water object. In both cases the identification is problematic, as it implies, for example, contrary persistence conditions in the case of the void, because a river would then exist whenever its channel space exists, and it precludes the existence of dry rivers in the water object case. Whole-part relations are also not used to connect a water feature to its key aspects, such as a river to its container or void, though relations for the support, containment, connectivity, and movement of water matter appear fundamental.The emphasis on water movement is elevated in a process-oriented approach, in which the processes enacted by an object are essential to its identity and existence, with notable examples including waterfalls and rivers Mizoguchi, 2009). However, voids (Casati andVarzi, 1994;Hahmann and Brodaric, 2012) do not play a significant role in the makeup of a water feature in this approach, water features are not clearly differentiated from water objects, and tying water feature identity to enacted processes results in water features that do not exist when the processes stop or pause, e.g. if the water stops running then the hydraulic erosion of the river channel also stops, thus the river does not exist in dry periods.The potential to differentiate water features from water objects is evident in related work on quantities, such as fluids (Guizzardi, 2010), where a wine vintage is delineated from its wine matter amounts and containers. However, a vintage is ...

show abstract

Modeling Surface Hydrology Concepts with Endurance and Perdurance

Cited by 9 publications

References 12 publications

Semantic Representation of Context for Description of Named Rivers in a Terminological Knowledge Base

Semantic Representation of Context for Description of Named Rivers in a Terminological Knowledge Base

Ontological Investigation of a Multiscale Ecosystem Classification Using the “National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units” as an Example

Water features and their parts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About