An event abstraction layer for the integration of geosensor data

References

• Anicic, D., et al., 2009. Stream reasoning and complex event processing in ETALIS. Semantic Web Journal, 3 (4), 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Battle, R. and Kolas, D., 2012. Enabling the geospatial semantic web with parliament and GeoSPARQL. Semantic Web Journal (SWJ), 3 (4), 355–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishr, A.Y., et al., 1999. Probing the concept of information communities a first step toward semantic interoperability. In: M. Goodchild, et al., eds. Interoperating geographic information systems. Vol. 495, of The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science [online], US: Springer, 55–69. Available from: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4615-5189-8_5 [Accessed 31 January 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Botts, M., et al., 2008. OGC® sensor web enablement: overview and high level architecture. Lecture notes in computer science In: S. Nittel, A. Labrinidis and A. Stefanidis, eds. Geosensor networks. Berlin: Springer, 175–190.
   Google Scholar
• Brodaric, B. and Gahegan, M., 2007. Experiments to examine the situated nature of geoscientific concepts. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 7 (1), 61–95.
   Google Scholar
• Broering, A., et al., 2009. Semantic challenges for sensor plug and play. In: J. Carswell, A. Fotheringham and G. McArdle, eds. Web and wireless geographical information systems. Vol. 5886, of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 72–86.
   Google Scholar
• Chrisman, N., 1998. Beyond the snapshot: changing the approach to change, error, and process. In: M. Egenhofer and R.G. Golledge, eds. Spatial and temporal reasoning in geographic information systems. New York: Oxford University Press, 85–93.
   Google Scholar
• Compton, M., et al., 2009. A survey of the semantic specification of sensors. In: Proceedings of the 8th international semantic web conference (ISWC 2009), 2nd international workshop on semantic sensor networks, Washington, DC, 25–29 October, Vol. 17.
   Google Scholar
• Compton, M., et al., 2012. The SSN ontology of the W3C semantic sensor network incubator group. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 17 (0), 25–32.
   Google Scholar
• Cox, S., 2007. Observations and measurements – part 1 – observation schema [online]. Available from: http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id= 22466 [Accessed 31 May 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Cox, S., 2011. Observations and measurements – XML implementation (version 2.0) [online]. Technical report, Open Geospatial Consortium. Available from: https://publications.csiro.au/rpr/pub?list=BRO&pid=csiro:EP115858&sb=RECENT&n=11&rpp=50&page=89&tr=5033&dr=all&dc4.browseYear=2011 [Accessed 31 January 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Craglia, M., et al., 2008. Next-generation digital earth: a position paper from the vespucci initiative for the advancement of geographic information science. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research (IJSDIR), 3, 146–167.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, C.A., Fonseca, F.T., and Camara, G., 2009. Understanding global change: the role of Geographic Information Science in the integration of people and nature. In: T. Nyerges, H. Couclelis, and R. McMaster, eds. The SAGE handbook of GIS and society. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Limited, 123–137.
   Google Scholar
• De Longueville, B., et al., 2010. Digital earth’s nervous system for crisis events: real-time sensor web enablement of volunteered geographic information. International Journal of Digital Earth, 3 (3), 242–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delin, K.A. and Jackson, S.P., 2001. The sensor web: a new instrument concept. In: M.R. Descour and J.T. Rantala, eds. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering, Vol. 4284. San Jose, CA: SPIE, 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Demers, A., et al., 2007. Cayuga: a general purpose event monitoring system. In: CIDR 2007[online], 412–422. Available from: http://www.cidrdb.org/cidr2007/index.html [Accessed 31 January 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Devaraju, A., 2012. Representing and reasoning about geographic occurrences in the sensor web. Thesis (PhD). Institute for Geoinformatics, University of Muenster.
   Google Scholar
• Devaraju, A. and Kauppinen, T., 2012. Sensors tell more than they sense: modeling and reasoning about sensor observations for understanding weather events. Special Issue on Semantic Sensor Networks, International Journal of Sensors, Wireless Communications and Control, 2 (1), ISSN: 2210–3279.
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, M., 2008. Complex event processing with XChangeEQ. Thesis (PhD). Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Miinchen.
   Google Scholar
• Etzion, O., 2007. Semantic approach to event processing. In: Proceedings of the 2007 inaugural international conference on distributed event-based systems, DEBS ‘07, Toronto, ON. New York: ACM, 139–139.
   Google Scholar
• Etzion, O. and Niblett, P., 2010. Event processing in action. Greenwich, CT: Manning Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Eugster, P.T.H., et al., 2003. The many faces of publish/subscribe. ACM Computing Surveys, 35 (2), 114–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Everding, T. and Echterhoff, J., 2009. OGC OWS-6 SWE event architecture engineering report [online]. Available from: https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=33347 [Accessed 31 May 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Galton, A. and Worboys, M., 2005. Processes and events in dynamic geo-networks. In: M. Rodrguez, et al., eds. Geospatial semantics. Vol. 3799, of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 45–59.
   Google Scholar
• Gangemi, A., 2010. DOLCE + DnS ultralite ontology [online]. Available from: http://www.loa.istc.cnr.it/ontologies/DUL.owl [Accessed 31 May 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Gore, A., 1998. The digital earth: understanding our planet in the 21st century. Australian Surveyor, 43 (2), 89–91.
   Google Scholar
• Grosu, M., et al., 2012. ENVISION deliverable 1.7 –- Real-time pilot case definition and requirements specification [online]. Technical report, ENVISION project. Available from: http://www.envision-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/D1-7_v1-1.pdf [Accessed 31 January 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Henson, C.A., et al., 2009. SemSOS: semantic sensor observation service. In: Proceedings of the 2009 international symposium on collaborative technologies and systems (CTS ‘09). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society, 44–53.
   Google Scholar
• Janowicz, K., 2010. The role of space and time for knowledge organization on the semantic web. Semantic Web Journal, 1 (1), 25–32.
   Google Scholar
• Kabadayi, S., Pridgen, A., and Julien, C., 2006. Virtual sensors: abstracting data from physical sensors. In: Proceedings of the 2006 international symposium on world of wireless, mobile and multimedia networks, WOWMOM ‘06. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society, 587–592.
   Google Scholar
• Kavouras, M. and Kokla, M., 2007. Theories of geographic concepts: ontological approaches to semantic integration. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klien, E. and Probst, F., 2005. Requirements for geospatial ontology engineering. In: F. Toppen and M. Painho, eds. 8th conference on geographic information science (AGILE 2005) [online], Estoril, 251–260. Available from: http://itcnt05.itc.nl/agile_old/Conference/estoril/themes.htm [Accessed 31 January 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, W., 2005. Geospatial semantics: why, of what, and how? Journal on data Semantics III, 3534, 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, W., 2012. Core concepts of spatial information for transdisciplinary research. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 26 (12), 2267–2276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenzerini, M., 2002. Data integration: a theoretical perspective. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on principles of database systems, PODS ‘02, Madison, WI. New York: ACM, 233–246.
   Google Scholar
• Luckham, D., 2002. The power of events: an introduction to complex event processing in distributed enterprise systems. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Professional.
   Google Scholar
• Luckham, D., et al., 2011. Event processing glossary – version 2.0. [online] Available from: http://www.complexevents.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/EPTS_Event_Processing_Glossary_v2.pdf [Accessed 31 May 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Masolo, C., et al., 2003. WonderWeb deliverable D18 – ontology Library (final). Technical report, WonderWeb project. Trento, Italy: Laboratory For Applied Ontology - ISTC-CNR.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, H.J., 2010. The data avalanche is here. Shouldn’t we be digging? Journal of Regional Science, 50 (1), 181–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Na, A. and Priest, M., 2007. OpenGIS sensor observation service. [online] Available from: http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=26667 [Accessed 31 May 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Patni, H., 2011. Real time semantic analysis of streaming sensor data. Master’s thesis, Wright State University, Dayton, OH.
   Google Scholar
• Perry, M. and Herring, J., 2012. OGC GeoSPARQL – a geographic query language for RDF data [online]. Technical report, Open Geospatial Consortium. Available from: https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=47664 [Accessed 31 January 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Probst, F., 2006. Ontological analysis of observations and measurements. In: M. Raubal, et al., eds. Geographic information science. Vol. 4197, of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 304–320.
   Google Scholar
• Reitsma, F., 2004. A new geographic process data model. Thesis (PhD). University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar
• Resch, B., et al., 2009. Live geography – embedded sensing for standardised urban environmental monitoring. International Journal on Advances in Systems and Measurements, 2 (2&3), 156–167.
   Google Scholar
• Sheth, A., Henson, C., and Sahoo, S.S., 2008. Semantic sensor web. IEEE Internet Computing, 12 (4), 78–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasch, C., et al., 2012. Representing uncertainties in the sensor web. In: Workshop sensing a changing world, Wageningen, 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Teymourian, K. and Paschke, A., 2009. Towards semantic event processing. In: Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on distributed event-based systems, DEBS ‘09, Nashville, TN. New York: ACM, 29: 1–29:2.
   Google Scholar
• Teymourian, K. and Paschke, A., 2010. Enabling knowledge-based complex event processing. In: Proceedings of the 2010 EDBT/ICDT workshops, EDBT ‘10, 22–26 March Lausanne. New York: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Vinoski, S., 2006. Advanced message queuing protocol. Internet Computing, IEEE, 10 (6), 87–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worboys, M. and Duckham, M., 2006. Monitoring qualitative spatiotemporal change for geosensor networks. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20 (10), 1087–1108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worboys, M. and Hornsby, K., 2004. From objects to events: GEM, the geospatial event model. In: M. Egenhofer, C. Freksa and H. Miller, eds. Third international conference on GIScience 2004. Berlin: SpringerVerlag, 327–344.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, Q., Simmhan, Y., and Prasanna, V., 2012. SCEPter: semantic complex event processing over end-to-end data flows [online]. Available from: http://www.cs.usc.edu/assets/001/82856.pdf [Accessed 31 May 2013].
   Google Scholar