Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-f6s65 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-03T11:02:37.312Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semantically interoperable three-dimensional scientific objects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2012

Marios Pitikakis ,
Manolis Vavalis  and
Catherine Houstis
Marios Pitikakis*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer and Communication Engineering, University of Thessaly, GR 38221 Volos, Greece Laboratory for Information Systems and Services, Centre for Research and Technology—Thessaly, GR 38500 Volos, Greece
Manolis Vavalis*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer and Communication Engineering, University of Thessaly, GR 38221 Volos, Greece Laboratory for Information Systems and Services, Centre for Research and Technology—Thessaly, GR 38500 Volos, Greece
Catherine Houstis*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer and Communication Engineering, University of Thessaly, GR 38221 Volos, Greece Laboratory for Information Systems and Services, Centre for Research and Technology—Thessaly, GR 38500 Volos, Greece
*
e-mail: mpitikak@inf.uth.gr, mav@inf.uth.gr, houstis@inf.uth.gr
e-mail: mpitikak@inf.uth.gr, mav@inf.uth.gr, houstis@inf.uth.gr
e-mail: mpitikak@inf.uth.gr, mav@inf.uth.gr, houstis@inf.uth.gr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In recent years, digital content of three-dimensional (3D) scientific objects has become widespread and is made available in a plethora of on-line scientific repositories. A systematic and formal approach becomes necessary to represent the knowledge/information related to these objects, in order to facilitate their search, retrieval and reuse. In this paper, we employ semantic interoperability to manage 3D scientific object content in a large-scale framework of scientific applications that consists of 3D shape models, associated tools and resources. We use an advanced ontological organization for their metadata, powerful reasoning engines for their search and retrieval and we elucidate several crucial issues in the design and implementation of 3D knowledge-based management systems.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , 22 February 2012 , pp. 33 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

3D-COFORM. 2008. Tools and expertise for 3d collection formation, FP7-IST Collaborative project. http://www.3d-coform.euGoogle Scholar
AceMedia. 2005. Towards a common multimedia ontology framework report, FP6-IST Integrated Project. http://www.acemedia.orgGoogle Scholar
Aduna Open Source project. 2009. Sesame: an open source RDF framework. http://www.openrdf.orgGoogle Scholar
AIM@SHAPE. 2005. Advanced and innovative models and tools for the development of semantic-based systems for handling, acquiring, and processing knowledge embedded in multidimensional digital objects, FP6-IST Network of Excellence. http://www.aimatshape.netGoogle Scholar
AIM@SHAPE. 2006a. The Digital Shape Workbench. http://dsw.aimatshape.netGoogle Scholar
AIM@SHAPE. 2006b. Shape Repository. http://shapes.aimatshape.netGoogle Scholar
Albertoni, A., Papaleo, L., Robbiano, F., Spagnuolo, M. 2006. Towards a conceptualization for shape acquisition and processing. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Shape and Semantic, Matsushima, Japan, 85–90.Google Scholar
Arnaud, R., Barnes, M. 2006. Collada: Sailing the Gulf of 3D Digital Content Creation. AK Peters Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arndt, R., Troncy, R., Staab, S., Hardman, L., Vacura, M. 2007. Comm: designing a well founded multimedia ontology for the web. In Proceedings of the 6th International and 2nd Asian Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2007+ASWC2007), Busan, Korea, November 11–15, 2007. 29–42. http://data.semanticweb.org/conference/iswc-aswc/2007/tracks/research/papers/29Google Scholar
ATK project. 2008. 3store: an RDF triplestore. http://threestore.sourceforge.netGoogle Scholar
Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P. (eds). 2003.The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Babik, M., Hluchy, L. 2008. A testing framework for OWL-DL reasoning. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Semantics, Knowledge and Grid, Beijing, China, December 3–5, 2008. 42–48.Google Scholar
Bloehdorn, S., Simou, N., Tzouvaras, V., Petridis, K., Handschuh, S., Avrithis, Y., Kompatsiaris, I., Staab, S., Strintzis, M. G. 2004. Knowledge representation for semantic multimedia content analysis and reasoning. In Proceedings of the European Workshop on the Integration of Knowledge, Semantics and Digital Media Technology (EWIMT), London, UK, November 25–26, 2004. http://www.image.ece.ntua.gr/publications.phpGoogle Scholar
Bustos, B., Fellner, D., Havemann, S., Keim, D., Saupe, D., Schreck, T. 2007. Foundations of 3D digital libraries—current approaches and urgent research challenges. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Digital Libraries Foundations DLF07), Vancouver, Canada, June 23, 2007. 7–12. http://www.delos.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=576&Itemid=313Google Scholar
Catalano, C., Camossi, E., Ferrandes, R., Cheutet, V., Sevilmis, N. 2008. A product design ontology for enhancing shape processing in design workflows. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 20(5), 553–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catton, C., Sparks, S., Shotton, D. 2005. The imagestore ontology and the bioimage database: Semantic Web tools for biological research images. In Proceedings of The International Conference on Computer as a Tool (EUROCON 2005), Belgrade, Serbia & Montenegro, November 21–24, 2005. 257–264.Google Scholar
Chen, D.-Y., Tian, X.-P., Shen, Y.-T., Ouhyoung, M. 2003. On visual similarity based 3D model retrieval. Computer Graphics Forum 22(3), 223–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COLLADA. 2009. 3D Asset exchange schema. http://www.khronos.org/colladaGoogle Scholar
Daras, P., Zarpalas, D., Tzovaras, D., Strintzis, M. G. 2004. Shape matching using the 3D radon transform. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on 3D Data Processing Visualization and Transmission, (3DPVT 2004), Thessaloniki, Greece, September 6–9, 2004. 953–960.Google Scholar
Doulaverakis, C., Kompatsiaris, Y., Strintzis, M. 2005. Ontology-based access to multimedia cultural heritage collections the REACH project. In Proceedings of The International Conference on Computer as a Tool (EUROCON 2005), Belgrade, Serbia & Montenegro, November 21–24, 2005. 151–154.Google Scholar
Dublin Core 2006. Dublin core metadata initiative. http://dublincore.orgGoogle Scholar
EPOCH. 2008. Excellence in processing open cultural heritage, FP6-IST Network of Excellence. http://www.epoch-net.orgGoogle Scholar
Falcidieno, B., Spagnuolo, M., Alliez, P., Quak, E., Houstis, C., Vavalis, M. 2004. Towards the semantics of digital shapes: the AIM@SHAPE approach. In Proceedings of the European Workshop on the Integration of Knowledge, Semantic and Digital Media Technologies EWIMT 2004, November 25–26, 2004. IEE.Google Scholar
Fikes, R., es, P. 2, Horrocks, I. 2003. OWL-QL—a language for deductive query answering on the Semantic Web. Technical Report KSL-03-14, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Computer Science Department, Stanford University. ftp://ftp.cs.pitt.edu/chang/revs/c916.pdfGoogle Scholar
FOCUS K3D. 2008. FOCUS K3D, FP7-IST coordination action. http://www.focusk3d.euGoogle Scholar
Funkhouser, T., Kazhdan, M., Min, P., Shilane, P. 2005. Shape-based retrieval and analysis of 3d models. Communications of the ACM 48, 58–64.Google Scholar
Galinski, J., Kaya, A., Moller, R. 2005. Development of a server to support the formal Semantic Web query language OWL-QL. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics, Horrocks, I., Sattler, U. & Wolter, F. (eds). Edinburgh, UK, July 26–28, 2005. Available online as CEUR Workshop Proceedings Volume 147. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-147/Google Scholar
Gutirrez, M., Garca-Rojas, A., Thalmann, D., Vexo, F., Moccozet, L., Magnenat-Thalmann, N., Mortara, M., Spagnuolo, M. 2007. An ontology of virtual humans: incorporating semantics into human shapes. The Visual Computer 23, 207–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendler, J. 2003. Science and the Semantic Web. Science 299, 520–521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1078874CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Humanoid animation. 2009. H-anim. http://h-anim.org/Specifications/H-Anim200xGoogle Scholar
Hunter, J. 2001. Adding multimedia to the Semantic Web—building an mpeg-7 ontology. In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS), Stanford, USA, July 30–August 1, 2001. 261–281.Google Scholar
Hunter, J., Koopman, B., Sledge, J. 2003. Software tools for indigenous knowledge management. In Proceedings of the Museums and the Web, Charlotte, 19–22 March 2003. http://www.archimuse.com/mw2003/papers/hunter/hunter.htmlGoogle Scholar
IBM Corporation. 2004. IODT: integrated ontology development toolkit. http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/semanticstkGoogle Scholar
International Council of Museums. 2009. CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model. http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/Google Scholar
ISO FDIS 21127. 2007. Information and documentation—a reference ontology for the interchange of cultural heritage information. http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=34424Google Scholar
ISO-IEC Moving Picture Experts Group working group. 2004. MPEG-7 overview. http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/standards/mpeg-7/mpeg-7.htmGoogle Scholar
Jiantao, P., Ramani, K. 2007. An integrated 2D and 3D shape-based search framework and applications. Computer-Aided Design and Applications 4(6), 817–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazhdan, M., Funkhouser, T., Min, P. 2004. A comparison of text and shape matching for retrieval of online 3d models. Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer 3232, 209–220.Google Scholar
Kiryakov, A., Ognyanov, D., Manov, D. 2005. OWLIM a pragmatic semantic repository for OWL. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Scalable Semantic Web Knowledge Base Systems (SSWS 2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 3807, 182–192.Google Scholar
Lagoze, C., Hunter, J. 2001. The abc ontology and model. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications 2001, 160–176. National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Lee, R. 2004. Scalability report on triple store applications. http://simile.mit.edu/reports/storesGoogle Scholar
Leifman, G., Meir, R., Tal, A. 2005. Semantic-oriented 3d shape retrieval using relevance feedback. The Visual Computer 21, 865–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBride, B. 2002. Jena: a Semantic Web toolkit. IEEE Internet Computing 6(6), 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, P. 2004. A 3D Model Search Engine. PhD thesis, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Noy, N., Fergerson, R., Musen, M. 2000. The knowledge model of Protege-2000: Combining interoperability and flexibility. In Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management, EKAW 00, 17–32. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Pereira, F. 2001. The MPEG-21 Standard: Why an open multimedia framework? Interactive Distributed Multimedia Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer 2158, 219–220.Google Scholar
Racer Systems GmbH & Co. (n.d.). Renamed abox and concept expression reasoner RACER. http://www.racer-systems.comGoogle Scholar
RDFS. 2009. Resource description framework schema. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schemaGoogle Scholar
SALERO. 2006. Semantic audiovisual entertainment reusable objects, FP6-IST STREP. http://www.salero.infoGoogle Scholar
SCHEMA. 2002. Content-based semantic sense analysis and information retrieval, FP6-IST Network of Excellence. http://www.iti.gr/SCHEMAGoogle Scholar
SCULPTEUR. 2005. Semantic and content-based multimedia exploitation for European benefit, FP7-IST STREP. http://www.sculpteurweb.orgGoogle Scholar
Seaborne, A. 2004. RDQL—a query language for RDF. http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-RDQL-20040109Google Scholar
Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E. 2008. EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional.Google Scholar
Vasilakis, G., Pitikakis, M., Vavalis, M., Houstis, C. 2005. A semantic based search engine for 3D shapes: design and early prototype implementation. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop on the Integration of Knowledge, Semantics and Digital Media Technologies, London, UK, 391–397.Google Scholar
Vasilakis, G., Garcia-Rojas, A., Papaleo, L., Catalano, C. E., Robbiano, F., Spagnuolo, M., Vavalis, M., Pitikakis, M. 2010. Knowledge-based representation of 3D shapes. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 20(5), 739–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veltkamp, R. C. 2001. Shape matching: similarity measures and algorithms. In Proceedings of Shape Modelling International (SMI 2001), Genoa, Italy, May 7–11, 2001. 188–197.Google Scholar
VICTORY. 2006. VICTORY, FP6-IST STREP. http://www.victory-eu.orgGoogle Scholar
W3C RDF Data Access Working Group. 2009. Joseki: a SPARQL server for Jena. http://www.joseki.orgGoogle Scholar
W3C Recommendation. 2004. OWL web ontology language. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-featuresGoogle Scholar
W3C Recommendation. 2008. SPARQL Query Language for RDF. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-queryGoogle Scholar
X3D. 2009. Extensible 3D. http://www.web3d.org/x3dGoogle Scholar