Ontology-Based Resource Interoperability in Socio-Cyber-Physical Systems

Alexander Smirnov, Tatiana Levashova, Alexey Kashevnik


The paper proposes a core ontology of socio-cyberphysical systems for resource interoperability. The ontology comprises the main concepts and relationships which are identified as relevant to model such systems. The approach considers a socio-cyber-physical system comprising cyber space, physical space, and mental space. In the ontology, these spaces are represented by sets of resources. The ontology provides the resources with a common vocabulary to share information and services and therefore makes these resources interoperable. The core ontology is specialized for a socio-cyber-physical system embedded in robotics domain. Technology of online communities is proposed to be used for resource communication.


socio-cyber-physical system; ontology; interoperability; collaboration


G. Hoffman and C. Breazeal, “Collaboration in human-robot teams,” AIAA 1st Intelligent Systems Technical Conference, 2004, http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2004-6434.

D. Androcec and N. Vrcek, “Ontologies for platform as service APIs interoperability,” Cybernetics and Information Technologies, vol. 16, no. 4, 2016, pp. 29–44, doi: 10.1515/cait-2016-0065.

S. Nirenburg and V. Raskin, “Ontological Semantics”. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004.

V. Raskin, J.M. Taylor, and C.F. Hempelmann, “Ontological semantic technology for detecting insider threat and social engineering,” 2010 New Security Paradigms Workshop, New York: ACM, 2010, pp. 115– 128.

M. Petrenko and C.F. Hempelmann, “Robotic reasoning with ontological semantic technology,” In Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications, J.-H. Kim et al., Eds., Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 208, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 2012, pp. 883–892.

J.H. Hong, E.T. Matson, and J.M. Taylor, “design of knowledge-based communication between human and robot using ontological semantic technology in firefighting domain,” Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 2, J.-H. Kim et al., Eds., Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 274, Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2014, pp. 311–325.

V. Raskin, “Theory, methodology, and implementation of robotic intelligence and communication,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 56, 2015, pp. 508–513.

S. Borgo and P. Leitão, “The role of foundational ontologies in manufacturing domain applications,” In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2004: CoopIS, DOA, and ODBASE, R. Meersman and Z. Tari, Eds., LNCS, vol. 3290, 2004, pp. 670–688.

G. Guizzardi and G.A. Wagner, “Unified foundational ontology and some applications of it in business modeling,” Proc. Open InterOp Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Ontologies for Interoperability Co-located with CAiSE'04 Conference. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2004, http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-125/paper2.pdf.

F.F. Oliveira, J.C.P. Antunes and R.S.S. Guizzardi, “Towards a collaboration ontology,” Proc. Second Brazilian Workshop on Ontologies and Metamodels for Software and Data Engineering (WOMSDE 2007), 2007, pp. 97–108.

C. Schlenoff, “An IEEE standard ontology for robotics and automation,” 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IEEE, 2012, pp. 1337–1342.

S. Lemaignan, R. Ros, E.A. Sisbot, R. Alami, and M. Beetz, “Grounding the Interaction: anchoring situated discourse in everyday human-robot interaction,” Int. J. Soc. Robot., 4, 2012, pp. 181–199.

M. Daoutis, S. Coradeshi, and A. Loutfi, “Grounding commonsense knowledge in intelligent systems,” J. Ambient Intell. Smart Environ, 1, 2009, pp. 311–321.

J.C. Nardi, R. de Almeida Falbo, G. Guizzardi, L.P. Pires, M.J. van Sinderen, N. Guarino, and Fonseca, C.M., “A commitment-based reference ontology for services,” Inform. Syst., vol. 54, Dec., 2015, pp. 263–288.

D.A. Wollman, “Cyber-physical systems framework,” NEMA Electroindustry Journal, Nov., 2015, pp. 12–13.

A. Smirnov, T. Levashova, N. Shilov, and K. Sandkuhl, “Ontology for cyber-physical-social systems self-organisation,” Proc. 16th Conference of Open Innovations Association FRUCT, 2014, pp. 101–107.

Z. Liu, D.-S. Yang, D. Wen, W.-M. Zhang, and W. Mao, “Cyberphysical-social systems for command and control,” IEEE Intell. Syst., July/August, 2011, pp. 92–96.

A.K. Dey, “Understanding and using context,” Pers. Ubiquit. Comput., vol. 5, no. 1, 2001, pp. 4–7.

A. Zimmermann, A. Lorenz, and R. Oppermann, “An operational definition of context,” In CONTEXT 2007, B. Kokinov et al., Eds., LNAI, vol. 4635, Springer-Verlag, 2007, pp. 558–571.

N. Baumgartner, W. Gottesheim, S. Mitsch, and W. Retschitzegger, “BeAware!-Situation awareness, the ontology-driven way,” Editorial, Data & Knowledge Engineering, vol. 69, no. 11, 2010, pp. 1181–1193.

E.M. Sanfilippo, S. Borgo, and C. Masolo, “Events and activities: is there an ontology behind BPMN?” In Formal Ontology in Information Systems, P. Garbacz and O. Kutz, Eds., IOS Press, 2014, pp. 147–156.

D. Berrueta, D. Brickley, S. Decker, et al. “SIOC core ontology specification,” 2010, http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/.

A. Scherp, C. Saathoff, T. Franz, and S. Staab, “Designing core ontologies,” Appl. Ontol., vol. 6, no. 3, 2011, pp. 177–221.

M. d'Aquin and A. Gangemi, “Is there beauty in ontologies?” Appl. Ontol., vol. 6, no. 3, 2011, pp. 165–175.

Full Text: PDF


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

IT in Innovation IT in Business IT in Engineering IT in Health IT in Science IT in Design IT in Fashion

IT in Industry @ (2012 - ) . http://www.it-in-industry.com . ISSN (Online): 2203-1731; ISSN (Print): 2204-0595