This presentation is about how global terminology can evolve without a centralized organisation. The simple idea is, that everybody has to disclose the identity of at least two identifiers for the same think. These local semantic handshakes will have the effect of global terminological alignment.

1. The Impact of Semantic Handshakes TMRA 2006, Leipzig, 12.10.2006 Lutz Maicher, University of Leipzig [email_address]

4. The Integration Model of the TMDM

6. The Integration Model of the TMDM in practice equality holds not (according TMDM) In the case of terminological diversity…. [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher} A [subject identifier] {ns2:MaicherLutz} B [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher} A [subject identifier] {ns2:MaicherLutz} B

7. The Integration Model of the TMDM in practice equality holds (according TMDM) In the case of terminologial alignment…. the PSI case But who can enforce universal vocabularies? [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher} A [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher} B C [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher} merging (according TMDM)

8. Semantic Handshakes and Interaction Protocols

9. Semantic Handshake equality holds (according TMDM) The author of A has decided that both terms can be used to indicate Lutz Maicher [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz} A [subject identifier] {ns2:MaicherLutz} B C [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz} merging (according TMDM)

10. Local Semantic Handshakes and Interaction Protocols TM1 TM3 TM2 TM4 All Topic Maps interacting using the existing protocols like TMRAP, TMIP … [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz} A [subject identifier] {ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} B [subject identifier] {ns3:ML} C [subject identifier] {ns4:Lutz, ns3:ML} D Local Semantic Handshake Local Semantic Handshake Local Semantic Handshake

11. Local Semantic Handshakes and Interaction Protocols Request: Do you have a Topic Item with „ns1:LutzMaicher“ or „ns2:MaicherLutz“ in the property [subject identifier]? (Do you have information about the Subject Lutz Maicher?) Step 1 [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz} A [subject identifier] {ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} B [subject identifier] {ns3:ML} C [subject identifier] {ns4:Lutz, ns3:ML} D

12. Local Semantic Handshakes and Interaction Protocols Request: Do you have a Topic Item with „ns1:LutzMaicher“ or „ns2:MaicherLutz“ in the property [subject identifier]? (Do you have information about the Subject Lutz Maicher?) Step 1 [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz} A [subject identifier] {ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} B [subject identifier] {ns3:ML} C [subject identifier] {ns4:Lutz, ns3:ML} D NO NO ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML ns2:MaicherLutz, ns1:LutzMaicher

13. Local Semantic Handshakes and Interaction Protocols Request: Do you have a Topic Item with „ns1:LutzMaicher“, „ns2:MaicherLutz“ or „ns3:ML“ in the property [subject identifier]? Step 2 [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} A [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} B [subject identifier] {ns3:ML} C [subject identifier] {ns4:Lutz, ns3:ML} D

14. Local Semantic Handshakes and Interaction Protocols Request: Do you have a Topic Item with „ns1:LutzMaicher“, „ns2:MaicherLutz“ or „ns3:ML“ in the property [subject identifier]? Step 2 [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} A [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} B [subject identifier] {ns3:ML} C [subject identifier] {ns4:Lutz, ns3:ML} D ns1:LutzMaicher, ns3:ML, ns2:MaicherLutz ns3:ML ns4:Lutz, ns3:ML ns1:LutzMaicher, ns3:ML, ns2:MaicherLutz,

15. Local Semantic Handshakes leads to Global Integration TM1 TM3 TM2 TM4 Global Integration through Local Semantic Handshakes. [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML, ns4:Lutz} A [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML} B [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML, ns4:Lutz} C [subject identifier] {ns1:LutzMaicher, ns2:MaicherLutz, ns3:ML, ns4:Lutz} D

16. Hypothesis and Simulation Design

21. Experiment Series

23. Simulation: Heterogenous World without Semantic Handshakes Iteration of nbrOfDifferentII in [5,100] general parameter: card(E) =100, distributionNbrOfII =<{1.0},1> specific parameter exp01: distributionII =<{1.0},100> specific parameter exp02: distributionII =<{0.8,0.9,0.95,1.0} ,100>  no Semantic Handshakes  some terms are more prominent 100 different terms will be resolved less then 40 integration clouds because some authors use the same term by chance (esp. the most prominent terms)

24. Simulation: The Impact of Semantic Handshakes Iteration of a in distributionNbrOfII=<{a,1.0},2> in [0.0,1.0] general parameters: card =100, nbrOfDifferentII =100 specific parameters exp03: distributionII =<{1.0}, 100> specific parameters exp04: distributionII =<{0.8,0.9,0.97,1.0}, 100>  high terminological diversity no semantic handshakes always a semantic handshake  some terms are more prominent 100 different terms will be resolved to ten integration clouds if only 55% of all Topics disclose a Semantic Handshake!

25. Simulation: The Impact of the terminological diversity Iteration of nbrOfDifferentII in [2,100] general parameters: cardE =100, distributionII=<{1.0},100> specific parameter exp05: distributionNbrOfII =<{0.2,1.0},2> specific parameter exp06: distributionNbrOfII =<{0.8,1.0},2> high terminological diversity low terminological diversity semantic handshake  by the majority  semantic handshake by the minority 50 different terms will be resolved to global integration if 80% of all Topics disclose a Semantic Handshake!

26. Result and Discussion

29. Questions?!