Using ontological inference and hierarchical matchmaking toovercome semantic heterogeneity in remote sensing-basedbiodiversity monitoring

International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation

Volumn 37, Issue , 2015, Pages 133-141

  Nieland, Simon ^a   Kleinschmit, Birgit ^a   Förster, Michael ^a  

^a TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Earth observation; Interoperability; Natura 2000; Nature conservation; Semantic reasoning

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BIOMONITORING; EOS; HETEROGENEITY; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; NATURE CONSERVATION; REMOTE SENSING; SPATIAL DATA;

BELGIUM; GERMANY;

EID: 84930410402     PISSN: 15698432     EISSN: 1872826X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2014.09.018     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Andres, S., Arvor, D., Pierkot, C., 2012. Towards an ontological approach for classify-ing remote sensing images. In: 2012 Eighth International Conference on SignalImage Technology and Internet Based Systems, pp. 825-832.
2. Arvor, D., Durieux, L., Andrés, S., Laporte, M.A., 2013. Advances in geographic object-based image analysis with ontologies: a review of main contributions andlimitations from a remote sensing perspective. ISPRS J. Photogramm. RemoteSens. 82, 125-137.
3. Baader, F., Werner, N., 2003. Basic description logics. In: The Description Logic Hand-book. Theory, Implementation and Applications, pp. 47-95.
4. Bard, J.B.L., Rhee, S.Y., 2004. Ontologies in biology: design, applications and futurechallenges. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 213-222.
5. Belgiu, M., Tomljenovic, I., Lampoltshammer, T., Blaschke, T., Höfle, B., 2014.Ontology-based classification of building types detected from airborne laserscanning data. Remote Sens. 6, 1347-1366.
6. Blaschke, T., 2010. Object based image analysis for remote sensing. ISPRS J. Pho-togramm. Remote Sens. 65, 2-16.
7. Chan, J.C.W., Beckers, P., Spanhove, T., Borre, J.V., 2012. An evaluation of ensem-ble classifiers for mapping Natura 2000 heathland in Belgium using spaceborneangular hyperspectral (CHRIS/Proba) imagery. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinform.18, 13-22.
8. Compton, M., Barnaghi, P., Bermudez, L., García-Castro, R., Corcho, O., Cox, S., Gray-beal, J., Hauswirth, M., Henson, C., Herzog, A., Huang, V., Janowicz, K., Kelsey, W.D., Le Phuoc, D., Lefort, L., Leggieri, M., Neuhaus, H., Nikolov, A., Page, K., Pas-sant, A., Sheth, A., Taylor, K., 2012. The SSN ontology of the W3C semantic sensornetwork incubator group. Web Semant. 17, 25-32.
9. Couclelis, H., 2010. Ontologies of geographic information. Int. J. Geogr. Inform. Sci.24, 1785-1809.
10. (Council Directive) 2000/60/EEC, C., 2000. Establishing a framework for Communityaction in the field of water policy.
11. (Council Directive) 92/43/EEC, C., 1992. The conservation of natural habitats and ofwild fauna and flora.
12. Cruz, I.F., Sunna, W., 2008. Structural alignment methods with applications togeospatial ontologies. Trans. GIS 12, 683-711.
13. Decker, S., Erdmann, M., Fensel, D., Studer, R., 1998. Ontobroker: ontology basedaccess to distributed and semi-structured information. In: DatabaseSemantics:Semantic Issues in Multimedia Systems., pp. 351-369.
14. Donini, F.M., 2003. Complexity of reasoning. In: Baader, F., Calvanese, D., Mcguinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P. (Eds.), The Description Logic Handbook. The-ory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, pp. 96-136.
15. Durbha, S., King, R., Shah, V., Younan, N., 2009. A framework for semantic rec-onciliation of disparate earth observation thematic data. Comput. Geosci. 35,761-773.
16. Fonseca, F., Camara, G., Miguel Monteiro, A., 2006. A framework for measuring theinteroperability of geo-ontologies. Spat. Cognit. Comput. 6, 309-331.
17. Förster, M., Schmidt, T., Schuster, C., Kleinschmit, B., 2012. Multi-temporal detectionof grassland vegetation with RapidEye imagery and a spectral-temporal library. In: IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), pp.4930-4933.
18. Frank, A., 2003. Ontology for spatio-temporal databases. In: Spatio-TemporalDatabases: The CHOROCHRONOS Approach, pp. 9-77.
19. Frick, A., 2006. Beiträge höchstauflösender Satellitenfernerkundung zum Entwick-lung eines wissensbasierten Klassifikationsverfahrens und Anwendung inBrandenburg, TU Berlin (Ph. D. thesis).
20. Frick, A., Weyer, G., 2005. A knowledge-based approach to vegetation monitor-ing with Quickbird imagery. In: ISPRS Workshop 2005-High Resolution EarthImaging for Geospatial Information, Hannover.
21. Guarino, N., 1998. Formal ontology and information systems. In: Proceedings ofFOIS98, pp. 3-15.
22. Hess, G., Iochpe, C., Castano, S., 2007. Geographic ontology matching with iG-match. Adv. Spat. Temporal Databases, 185-202.
23. Janowicz, K., 2012. Observation-driven geo-ontology engineering. Trans. GIS 16,351-374.
24. Janowicz, K., Compton, M.,. The Stimulus-Sensor-Observation Ontology Design Pat-tern and its Integration into the Semantic Sensor Network Ontology.
25. Kavouras, M., Kokla, M., Tomai, E., 2005. Comparing categories among geographicontologies. Comput. Geosci. 31, 145-154.
26. Klien, E.M., 2008. Semantic Annotation of Geographic Information. Universität Mün-ster, Ph. D. thesis. Korfhage, R.R., 1997. Information Storage and Retrieval. John Wiley & Sons, NewYork.
27. Kuhn, W., 2005. Geospatial semantics: why, of what, and how? J. Data Semant. III,1-24.
28. Lutz, M., Klien, E., 2006. Ontology based retrieval of geographic information. Int. J. Geogr. Inform. Sci. 20, 233-260.
29. Lutz, M., Sprado, J., Klien, E., Schubert, C., Christ, I., 2009. Overcomingsemantic heterogeneity in spatial data infrastructures. Comput. Geosci. 35,739-752.
30. Manakos, I., Hellas, T., 2013. Remote sensing in Europe: status analysis and trendsfocusing on environment and agriculture. J. Aeronaut. Space Technol. 6, 1-5.
31. Mena, E., Illarramendi, A., 2000. OBSERVER: an approach for query processing inglobal information systems based on interoperation across pre-existing ontolo-gies. Distrib. Parallel Databases 8, 223-271.
32. Motik, B., Shearer, R., Horrocks, I., 2009. Hypertableau reasoning for descriptionlogics. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 36, 165-288.
33. Niemeijer, D., 2002. Developing indicators for environmental policy: data-drivenand theory-driven approaches examined by example. Environ. Sci. Policy 5,91-103.
34. Rodriguez, A., Egenhofer, M.J., 2003. Determining semantic similarity among entityclasses from different ontologies. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 15, 442-456.
35. Schmidt-Schauß, M., Smolka, G., 1991. Attributive concept descriptions with com-plements. Artif. Intell. 48, 1-26.
36. Schuster, C., Schmidt, T., Conrad, C., Kleinschmit, B., Förster, M., 2015. Grasslandhabitat mapping by intra-annual time series analysis Comparison of RapidEyeand TerraSAR-X satellite data. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinform. 34, 25-34.
37. Schwering, A., Raubal, M., 2005. Measuring semantic similarity between geospatialconceptual regions. In: GeoSpatial Semantics: First International Conference, pp.90-106.
38. di Sciascio, C., Zanni-Merk, C., Wemmert, C., Marc-Zwecker, S., de Beuvron, F.d. B.,2013. Towards a semi-automatic semantic approach for satellite image analysis. Proc. Comput. Sci. 22, 1388-1397.
39. Thoonen, G., Spanhove, T., Vanden Borre, J., Scheunders, P., 2013. Classification ofheathland vegetation in a hierarchical contextual framework. Int. J. Remote Sens.34, 96-111.
40. Vanden Borre, J., Paelinckx, D., Mücher, C.a., Kooistra, L., Haest, B., DeBlust, G., Schmidt, A.M., 2011. Integrating remote sensing in Natura 2000habitat monitoring: prospects on the way forward. J. Nat. Conserv. 19,116-125.
41. Visser, U., Stuckenschmidt, H., Schuster, G., Vögele, T., 2002. Ontologies for geo-graphic information processing. Comput. Geosci. 28, 103-117.
42. Wache, H., Voegele, T., Visser, U., Stuckenschmidt, H., Schuster, G., Neumann, H., Hübner, S., 2001. Ontology-based integration of information-a survey of existingapproaches. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI-01 Workshop: Ontologies and Informa-tion Sharing, pp. 108-117.