2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-24543-0_8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ontologies for Web of Things: A Pragmatic Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…En la Tabla 2 se hizo un estudio comparativo de las principales características que implementaron los proyectos enfocados en la interoperabilidad semántica para la IoT. En general, se busca un modelo semántico que capture el contexto-conocimiento por medio de ontologías de dominio [45] y a la vez, permita definir los mecanismos de interacción ente los objetos de la IoT. Los modelos son implementados en Gateways semánticos [46], como agregadores naturales de los dispositivos en una red o entorno de interacción.…”
Section: Arquitecturas Iotunclassified
“…En la Tabla 2 se hizo un estudio comparativo de las principales características que implementaron los proyectos enfocados en la interoperabilidad semántica para la IoT. En general, se busca un modelo semántico que capture el contexto-conocimiento por medio de ontologías de dominio [45] y a la vez, permita definir los mecanismos de interacción ente los objetos de la IoT. Los modelos son implementados en Gateways semánticos [46], como agregadores naturales de los dispositivos en una red o entorno de interacción.…”
Section: Arquitecturas Iotunclassified
“…We propose to derive a popularity measure based on corresponding scientific publications associated with an ontology. We are inspired to follow this approach as a large number of ontologies for WoT application domains emerge from research projects, as evidenced in [1,10,13,16]. Furthermore, it overcomes several limitations of other approaches: (i) as previously discussed, LOD does not provide a reliable source for ontology reuse in WoT application domains; (ii) deriving relevance through user click logs requires access to closed back-ends of existing ontology search engines with a large user base; (iii) human labeling is costly and, unlike mining relevance from scholarly data, does not come with the benefit of being reproducible.…”
Section: Relevance Mining Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The large number of available ontologies and the fast-paced developments in domains often make it difficult to find and select the most appropriate ontologies. For the WoT case, this is evidenced through extensive surveys in the literature [1,10,13,16]. This does not only concern ontologies with regard to sensors and sensor network setups, but further to sensor observations [13] (e.g., in the context of smart city use cases with regard to the environment, transportation, health, homes, and factories).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other ontologies such as Semanco [49] or the Aemet Network of Ontologies [5] have also been analysed, but are not reflected in this paper. Some of the consulted surveys to identify these ontologies have been [23] and [44]. An interesting comparison between different IoT ontologies is also covered in [69].…”
Section: Existing Ontologies In the Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%