An Ontology and Geospatial Knowledge Graph for Reasoning About Cascading Failures (Short Paper)

Authors Torsten Hahmann , David K. Kedrowski



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.COSIT.2024.21.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.85 MB
  • 9 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Torsten Hahmann
  • School of Computing and Information Science, University of Maine, Orono, ME, USA
David K. Kedrowski
  • School of Computing and Information Science, University of Maine, Orono, ME, USA

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the entire UF-OKN team for the collaboration on this project. The presentation of the work here benefited greatly from feedback and discussions of earlier versions of the presented research with members of the UF-OKN team, in particular Lilit Yeghiazarian, Doug Fils, Thomas Narock, Sadegh Riasi, Siddharth Saksena, and Adam Shepherd. The authors also thank the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Torsten Hahmann and David K. Kedrowski. An Ontology and Geospatial Knowledge Graph for Reasoning About Cascading Failures (Short Paper). In 16th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (COSIT 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 315, pp. 21:1-21:9, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2024.21

Abstract

During a natural disaster such as flooding, the failure of a single asset in the complex and interconnected web of critical urban infrastructure can trigger a cascade of failures within and across multiple systems with potentially life-threatening consequences. To help emergency management effectively and efficiently assess such failures, we design the Utility Connection Ontology Design Pattern to represent utility services and model connections within and across those services. The pattern is encoded as an OWL ontology and instantiated with utility data in a geospatial knowledge graph. We demonstrate how it facilitates reasoning to identify cascading service failures due to flooding for producing maps and other summaries for situational awareness.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Information systems → Geographic information systems
  • Computing methodologies → Ontology engineering
  • Computing methodologies → Spatial and physical reasoning
Keywords
  • knowledge graph
  • ontology
  • OWL
  • spatial reasoning
  • cascading failures
  • urban infrastructure

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Sören Auer, Jens Lehmann, and Sebastian Hellmann. Linkedgeodata: Adding a spatial dimension to the web of data. In Intern. Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), pages 731-746. Springer, 2009. Google Scholar
  2. Eva Blomqvist, Torsten Hahmann, Karl Hammar, Pascal Hitzler, Rinke Hoekstra, Raghava Mutharaju, et al. Advances in pattern-based ontology engineering. IOS Press, 2021. Google Scholar
  3. Sergey V. Buldyrev, Roni Parshani, Gerald Paul, H. Eugene Stanley, and Shlomo Havlin. Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks. Nature, 104:1025-1029, 2010. Google Scholar
  4. Neil Carhart and Ges Rosenberg. A framework for characterising infrastructure interdependencies. international journal of complexity in applied science and technology. Intern. J. of Complexity in Applied Science and Technology, 1:35-60, 2016. Google Scholar
  5. Arkadiusz Chadzynski, Nenad Krdzavac, Feroz Farazi, Mei Qi Lim, Shiying Li, Ayda Grisiute, Pieter Herthogs, Aurel von Richthofen, Stephen Cairns, and Markus Kraft. Semantic 3D city database — an enabler for a dynamic geospatial knowledge graph. Energy and AI, 6, 2021. Google Scholar
  6. Alishiba Dsouza, Nicolas Tempelmeier, Ran Yu, Simon Gottschalk, and Elena Demidova. WorldKG: A world-scale geographic knowledge graph. In Intern. Conf. on Inf. & Knowledge Mgmt (CIKM), pages 4475-4484. ACM, 2021. Google Scholar
  7. Heshan Du, Lijun Wei, Vania Dimitrova, Derek Magee, Barry Clarke, Richard Collins, David Entwisle, Mehran Eskandari, Giulio Curioni, Ross Stirling, Helen Reeves, and Anthony G. Cohn. City infrastructure ontologies. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst., 104, 2023. Google Scholar
  8. Aldo Gangemi. Ontology design patterns for semantic web content. In 4th Int. Semantic Web Conf., 2005. Google Scholar
  9. Torsten Hahmann. Ontology repositories: A treasure trove for content ontology design patterns. In Proc. of the Workshop on Modular Ontologies (WoMO 2014), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 1248, 2014. Google Scholar
  10. Torsten Hahmann and David K. Kedrowski. OWL Ontologies for the Urban Flooding Open Knowledge Network (UF-OKN). Software, version 2.1., swhId: https://archive.softwareheritage.org/swh:1:dir:00a0f1fbcd022a6beed4d88b6430567ef1314872;origin=https://github.com/UFOKN/Knowledge-Graph;visit=swh:1:snp:c72cfbb7d2958ec9082a9266afc9de82b375f737;anchor=swh:1:rev:4b80c683fa9b83d85e3cb09cadc608069172e308 (visited on 2024-08-28). URL: https://github.com/UFOKN/Knowledge-Graph/tree/master/ontologies/v2.1.
  11. Krzysztof Janowicz, Pascal Hitzler, Wenwen Li, Dean Rehberger, Mark Schildhauer, Rui Zhu, et al. Know, Know Where, KnowWhereGraph: A densely connected, cross-domain knowledge graph and geo-enrichment service stack for applications in environmental intelligence. AI Magazine, 43(1):30-39, 2022. Google Scholar
  12. J Michael Johnson, Tom Narock, Justin Singh-Mohudpur, Doug Fils, Keith Clarke, Siddharth Saksena, Adam Shepherd, Sankar Arumugam, and Lilit Yeghiazarian. Knowledge graphs to support real-time flood impact evaluation. AI Magazine, 43(1):40-45, 2022. Google Scholar
  13. Min Ouyang. Review on modeling and simulation of interdependent critical infrastructure systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 121:43-60, 2014. Google Scholar
  14. Basel Shbita, Craig A. Knoblock, Weiwei Duan, Yao-Yi Chiang, Johannes H. Uhl, and Stefan Leyk. Building spatio-temporal knowledge graphs from vectorized topographic historical maps. Semantic Web, 2023. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail