Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-grvzd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-17T17:21:50.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamic context management for pervasive applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

JÉRÔME EUZENAT ,
JÉRÔME PIERSON  and
FANO RAMPARANY
JÉRÔME EUZENAT
Affiliation:
INRIA Rhône-Alpes & LIG, 655 avenue de l'Europe, 38330 Montbonnot Saint Martin, France; e-mail: Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr
JÉRÔME PIERSON
Affiliation:
INRIA Rhône-Alpes & LIG, 655 avenue de l'Europe, 38330 Montbonnot Saint Martin, France; e-mail: Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr Orange Labs, 28 chemin du Vieux Chêne, 38240 Meylan, France; e-mail: Jerome.Pierson@orange-ftgroup.com, Fano.Ramparany@orange-ftgroup.com
FANO RAMPARANY
Affiliation:
Orange Labs, 28 chemin du Vieux Chêne, 38240 Meylan, France; e-mail: Jerome.Pierson@orange-ftgroup.com, Fano.Ramparany@orange-ftgroup.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pervasive computing aims at providing services for human beings that interact with their environment (encompassing objects and people who reside in it). Pervasive computing applications must be able to take into account the context in which users evolve, for example, physical location, social or hierarchical position, current tasks as well as related information. These applications have to deal with the dynamic integration in the environment of new, and sometimes unexpected, elements (users or devices). In turn, the environment has to provide context information to newly designed applications. This requires a framework which is open, dynamic and minimal. We describe an architecture in which context information is distributed in the environment and context managers use semantic Web technologies in order to identify and characterize available resources. The components in the environment maintain their own context expressed in RDF (Resource Description Framework) and described through OWL ontologies. They may communicate this information to other components, obeying a simple protocol for identifying them and determining the information they can provide. We show how this architecture allows introducing new devices and new applications without interrupting what is working. In particular, the openness of ontology description languages makes possible the extension of context descriptions and ontology matching helps dealing with independently developed ontologies.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 23 , Special Issue 1: Contexts and Ontologies , March 2008 , pp. 21 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

Abel, F. and Brase, J. 2004 Using semantic web technologies for context-aware information providing to mobile devices. Technical report, University of Hannover, Hannover, Germany.Google Scholar
Ben Mokhtar, S., Kaul, A., Georgantas, N. and Issarny, V. 2006 Efficient semantic service discovery in pervasive computing environments. In Proceedings of 7th Middleware conference, volume 4290 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Melbourne, Australia. pp. 240–259.Google Scholar
Bouquet, P., Giunchiglia, F., Harmelen, F. V., Serafini, L. and Stuckenschmidt, H. 2003 C-OWL: Contextualizing ontologies. In Proceedings of 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), volume 3298 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Sanibel Island, FL, USA. pp. 164–179.Google Scholar
Buchholz, S., Hamann, T. and Hübsch, G. 2004 Comprehensive structured context profiles (CSCP): Design and experiences. In Proceedings of 2nd IEEE Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOMW), Washington DC, USA. pp. 43–47.Google Scholar
Chalmers, M. 2004 A historical view of context. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 13(3), 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H., Finin, T. and Joshi, A. 2004 An ontology for context-aware pervasive computing environments. Knowledge Engineering Review 18(3), 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H., Perich, F., Finin, T. and Joshi, A. 2004 SOUPA: Standard ontology for ubiquitous and pervasive applications. In Proceedings 1st International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking and Services, Boston, MA, USA. pp. 258–267.Google Scholar
Clear, A., Knox, S., Ye, J., Coyle, L., Dobson, S. and Nixon, P. 2006 Integrating multiple contexts and ontologies in a pervasive computing framework. In Proceedings of ECAI Workshop on Contexts and Ontologies, Riva del Garda, Italy. pp. 20–24.Google Scholar
Coutaz, J., Crowley, J., Dobson, S. and Garlan, D. 2005 Context is key. Communications of the ACM 48(3), 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coutaz, J. and Rey, G. 2002 Foundations for a theory of contextors. In Kolski, C. and Vanderdonckt, J. (eds.), Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Computer-Aided Design of User Interface (CADUI), Valenciennes, France. pp. 13–34.Google Scholar
de Kleer, J. 1986 An assumption-based TMS (eds.). Artificial Intelligence 28(2), 127–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, M. and Schreiber, G. (eds.). 2004 OWL web ontology language reference. Recommendation, W3C.Google Scholar
Dey, A. 2001 Understanding and using context. Personal Ubiquitous Computing 5(1), 4–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dey, A., Salber, D. and Abowd, G. 2001 A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Human-Computer Interaction 16, 97–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dourish, P. 2001 Seeking a foundation for context-aware computing. Human-Computer Interaction 16, 2–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Euzenat, J. 2004 An API for ontology alignment. In Proceedings of 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), volume 3298 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Hiroshima, Japan. pp. 698–712.Google Scholar
Euzenat, J. 2005 Alignment infrastructure for ontology mediation and other applications. In Hepp, M., Polleres, A., van Harmelen, F. and Genesereth, M. (eds.), Proceedings of 1st ICSOC International Workshop on Mediation in Semantic Web Services, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 81–95.Google Scholar
Euzenat, J. and Shvaiko, P. 2007 Ontology Matching. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
Flury, T., Privat, G. and Ramparany, F. 2004 OWL-based location ontology for context-aware services. In Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence in Mobile Systems, Nottingham, UK. pp. 52–58.Google Scholar
Fu, F., Jones, C. and Abdelmoty, A. 2005 Building a geographical ontology for intelligent spatial search on the web. In Proceedings of IASTED International Conference on Databases and Applications (DBA), Innsbruck, Austria. pp. 167–192.Google Scholar
Gandon, F. and Sadeh, N. 2004 Semantic web technologies to reconcile privacy and context awareness. Journal of Web Semantics 1(3), 241–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giunchiglia, F. and Bouquet, P. 1997 Introduction to contextual reasoning: an artificial intelligence perspective. In Kokinov, B. (ed.), Perspectives on Cognitive Science, New Bulgarian University Press. pp.138–159.Google Scholar
Gu, T., Pung, H. and Zhang, D. 2005 A service-oriented middleware for building context-aware services. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 28(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, T., Wang, X. H., Pung, H. K. and Zhang, D. Q. 2004 An ontology-based context model in intelligent environments. In Proceedings of Communication Networks and Distributed Systems Modeling and Simulation Conference, San Diego, CA, USA. pp. 270–275.Google Scholar
Guha, R. 1995 Contexts: A Formalization and Some Applications. PhD thesis, Stanford university, Stanford, CA, USA.Google Scholar
Guha, R., McCool, R. and Fikes, R. 2004 Contexts for the semantic web. In Proceedings of 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), volume 3298 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Hiroshima, Japan. pp. 32–46.Google Scholar
Heckmann, D., Schwarzkopf, E., Mori, J., Dengler, D. and Krner, A. 2007 The user model and context ontology gumo revisited for future web 2.0 extensions. In Proceedings of 3rd Contexts and Ontologies Workshop, Roskilde, Denmark. pp. 37–46.Google Scholar
Henricksen, K. and Indulska, J. 2004 Modelling and using imperfect context information. In Procedings of 2nd IEEE Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOMW). Washington DC, USA, pp. 33–37.Google Scholar
Henricksen, K., Indulska, J., McFadden, T. and Balasubramaniam, S. 2005 Middleware for distributed context-aware systems. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Distributed Objects and Applications (DOA), volume 3760 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Orlando, FL, USA. pp. 846–863.Google Scholar
Henricksen, K., Indulska, J. and Rakotonirainy, A. 2002 Modeling context information in pervasive computing systems. In Proceedings 1st International Conference on Pervasive Computing, London, UK. pp. 167–180.Google Scholar
Khriyenko, O. and Terziyan, V. 2005 Context description framework for the semantic web. In Proceedings Context 2005 Context Representation and Reasoning Workshop. Paris, France. www.sra.itc.it/events/crr05/45.pdf.Google Scholar
Klyne, G. and Carroll, J. 2004 Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. Recommendation, W3C.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1993 Notes on formalizing contexts. In Proceedings of 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Chambéry, France. pp. 555–560.Google Scholar
Narayanan, A. 2001 Realms and states: a framework for location aware mobile computing. In Proceedings of 1st International Workshop on Mobile Commerce, New York, NY, USA. pp. 48–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ngoc, K. A. P., Lee, Y.-K. and Lee, S. 2005 OWL-based user preference and behavior routine ontology for ubiquitous system. In OTM Conferences (2), volume 3761 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Agia Napa, Cyprus, pp. 1615–1622.Google Scholar
Prud'hommeaux, E. and Seaborne, A. 2006 SPARQL Query Language for RDF. Working Draft, W3C.Google Scholar
Ranganathan, A. and Campbell, R. 2003 A middleware for context-aware agents in ubiquitous computing environments. In Proceedings of 4th Middleware Conference, volume 2672 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. pp. 143–161.Google Scholar
Schilit, B., Adams, N. and Want, R. 1994 Context-aware computing applications. In IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications. Santa Cruz, CA, USA, pp. 85–90.Google Scholar
Serafini, L. and Bouquet, P. 2004 Comparing formal theories of context in AI. Artificial Intelligence 155(1–2), 41–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strang, T., Linnhoff-Popien, C. and Frank, K. 2003 CoOL: A Context Ontology Language to enable Contextual Interoperability. In Proceedings 4th IFIP WG 6.1 International Conference on Distributed Applications and Interoperable Systems (DAIS), volume 2893 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Paris, France. pp. 236–247.Google Scholar
Traub, K., Allgair, G., Barthel, H., Burnstein, L., Garrett, J., Hogan, B., Rodrigues, B., Sharma, S., Schmidt, J., Schramek, C., Stewart, R. and Suen, K. 2005 The EPCglobal architecture framework. Specification, EPCglobal.Google Scholar
Wang, X. H., Zhang, D. Q., Gu, T. and Pung, H. K. 2004 Ontology based context modeling and reasoning using OWL. In Proceedings of 2nd IEEE Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOMW), Washington DC, USA. pp. 18–47.Google Scholar