From VoCamp Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


This event is being held in collaboration with Data and Software Preservation for Open Science (DASPOS) , an NSF funded effort to explore issues and technical problems related preservation, reproduction and reproducibility of computational science with respect to High Energy Physics. DASPOS has a broader goal of identifying areas of generalization of these topics to other disciplines and, in particular, those that rely on computational methods as a technique for doing science. The purpose of this VoCamp is to begin to develop vocabularies, micro-ontologies, best practice guides, examples, software, and services, that aim to foster semantic interoperability between different (Linked) Data sources using existing data sources from High Energy Physics Experiments at CERN as a targeted use case. This VoCamp this event is open to everybody interested in developing conceptualizations for fostering data interoperability to provide scientific context enabling replication and reproducibility of computational experiments.


During this year's Notre Dame VoCamp, we (organizers) suggest to address the following projects and topics. Of course, as usual for a VoCamp (as an unconference), the program is not fixed beforehand but will concentrate on topics relevant to Data and Software Preservations as well as topics of relevance for integration of CERN data sources. In the initial session we will present topics participants may be interested in working on, and each topic (whether it's on the list below or not) which finds more than one person to work on, can be worked on.

Potential topics:

  1. Survey and reuse of existing vocabularies for publication provenance tracking. Some possible candidate vocabularies have been suggested by the W3C Health Care and Life Sciences interest groups work on Dataset Descriptions. These descriptions may have to be extended to cover Indico and CERN specific publication information.
  2. Initial development of Physics Information ontologies that describe High Energy Physics models. The HEP Taxonomy may be a starting point for development of these models.
  3. Post AOD processing workflow patterns. A starting point for this topic cold be Common Motifs in Scientific Workflows: An Empirical Analysis.
  4. Continued work on the Computational Observation Pattern as a connecting pattern between a observational result, a Physics Information ontology and a workflow description. A brief set of slides on the proposed pattern can be found at the Ontolog Ontology Summit 2015
  5. Cyberinfrastructure and programming for implementation of these patterns as ongoing work at CERN. Some topics may be JSON-LD representations of these vocabularies.
  6. (add your topic here)
  7. ...


Ontologies can be engineered in different ways, to suit particular purposes. For example:

1. To some, ontology creation is all about the underlying philosophy. Meta (and sometimes meta-meta) models of the process of science are proposed and then sometimes anchored into a upper ontology such as Dolce or similar. This can lead to confusion since domain scientists are not familiar with academic or theoretical principles for ontology creation.

2. To others, ontologies are created by in-depth study of a domain, and interaction with domain scientists to extract highly-detailed, specialized semantics that captures some of this deep knowledge. The complex ontologies that result may represent their target community but typically do not generalize or harmonize well.

Having experienced some of the drawbacks and frustrations of these two approaches, some of us are looking for an alternative path that provides some of the power of #2 and rigor of #1 without the inherent complexity or lack of generality. The compromise approach that characterizes VoCamps and GeoVoCamps is to try to create small, reusable ontological fragments that have high utility, but are easy to instantiate and to understand. This way we can hope to 'capture' more linked data resources without massive ontological engineering effort which may not be sustainable.

So while there is clear value to strong philosophical and deep domain approaches, our emphasis here is clearly on utility, and it is this approach that we hope to take during the workshop.


Some tools that we have found useful during past Vocamp's include yEd, a cross platform tool for creating concept maps during pattern development. Collaborative note taking is a very important need in pattern development. We have found Etherpad, Notehub or Stackedit for editing using markdown syntax as useful cloud based solutions. We will be using Google Drive for document synchronization for the Vocamp.


The Vocamp will take place May 18-19, 2015. We will start at Monday 9am and run until about Tuesday 4pm. To ensure that the meeting is productive and we get some real outcomes we hope that you can stay for the full event.


At the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana. The main workshop meeting location will be in the Jordan Hall of Science room 322. Rooms 310 and the 3rd floor landing will be available as breakout group space. A map with directions from the Ive Court Inn and Suites to the Jordan Hall of Science can be found on the DASPOS website.

Remote access will be available through CERN Indico.

Accommodations and Transportation[edit]

There are a handful of hotels within walking distance to the University of Notre Dame campus. The Morris Inn ($184-$299)is located on campus and has recently undergone a beautiful renovation. The Ivy Court Inn & Suites ($144/night) boasts a great morning breakfast and a close walk to dining and campus. The Inn at Saint Mary’s ($115-$150/night) is a boutique hotel located near dining, the toll road, and campus. This inn also offers complimentary shuttle rides to and from the airport as well as to and from campus. If you are looking to stay downtown, the DoubleTree Hilton ($143/night) is nestled among restaurants and entertainment. This choice also offers complimentary shuttle rides to and from campus.


Check out South Bend’s growing dining experience. Corndance Tavern and Evil Czech Brewery are two must sees. Owned by the same chef and restauranteur, both menus feature farm to table delectable fare both a 10 minute drive from campus. Evil Czech has live music and hand crafted brews with food ranging from the “Hog Truffle Burger” to tuna tacos, and pork carnitas poutine. The kale pizza is a vegetarian must have. Corndance is casual fine dining. Try an item off the featured item list-perhaps the Peruvian Ham hock or the Veal Schnitzel- and you won’t be disappointed. Looking for food downtown or near campus, check out Fiddler’s Hearth serving up live music, authentic Irish cuisine, and microbrews. The Mark Dine& Tap in Eddy Street Commons has an eclectic menu and if you crave Italian, pull up a seat at Parisi’s or Sunny Italy near campus.


The program is not fixed and will remain flexible to a certain degree (this is a key feature of vocamps, not a bug). The following schedule is just to give you a better impression of the structure of the GeoVocamp:

Monday 18 May 2015 (TBA)
9:15am - 9:45 Introduction of participants, the goals of the Vocamp, and the previous (Geo)Vocamps-Camps (Gary Berg-Cross[slides(pdf)] & Charles Vardeman [slides(pdf)])
9:45am - 10:00 Ontology Design Patterns in OceanLink and GeoLink (Pascal Hitzler) (slides(pdf))
10:00am - 10:15 Computational Observation Pattern (Charles Vardeman [slides(pdf)])
10:15am - 10:30 The Analysis Preservation Framework: Plans and Data Model Needs (Sunje Dallmeier-Tiessen)
10:30am - 10:45 Short break
10:45am - 11:00 (Meta)Data Models for the LHC collaborations (Patricia Sigrid Herterich)
11:00am - 11:15 Ontology Engineering at VoCamps (Krzysztof Janowicz)
11:15am - 12:00 Agree on breakout groups and patterns
12:00pm - 1:00 Lunch
1:00pm - 3:00 Breakout groups work on patterns
3:00pm - 3:15 Short break
3:15pm - 4:00 Reports from the groups
4:00pm - 5:00 Breakout groups work on incorporating feedback
6:30pm -- Dinner (in small groups or together)
Tuesday 19 May 2015 (TBD)
9:15am - 9:40 Brief recap
9:40am - 11:00 Breakout groups work on patterns
11:00am - 11:15 Short break
11:15am - 12:00 Breakout groups work on patterns
12:00pm - 1:00 Lunch
1:00pm - 2:15 Breakout groups work on examples (with real data)
2:15pm - 2:30 Short Break
2:30pm - 3:00 Reports from the groups
3:00pm - 4:30 Breakout groups work on brief documentation
4:30pm - 5:00 Final reports and outlook
6:30pm -- Dinner (in small groups or together)

Note: Presentations and other info is in folders available at folders


Please add your name here to help us planning, you can change your mind at any time and also indicate whether you will participate for sure or just maybe. You can also indicate that you cannot make it but would like share thoughts and experience via the wiki.


(The numbering does not imply any order but is just for keeping count for room capacities)

  1. Charles Vardeman (University of Notre Dame, US)
  2. Gary Berg-Cross (SOCoP, RDA US Advisory Committee, EarthCube Technical Architecture WG)
  3. Michelle Cheatham (Wright State University, US)
  4. Patricia Sigrid Herterich (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland)
  5. Sunje Dallmeier-Tiessen (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland)

Local Contact Person[edit]

  1. Charles Vardeman (University of Notre Dame, US)
  2. Kallie O'Connell (University of Notre Dame, Center for Research Computing, US)
  3. Da Huo (University of Notre Dame, Computer Science and Engineering, US)


(We will resort the list from time to time to put those that will be there for sure on top.)

  1. Charles Vardeman (University of Notre Dame, US)
  2. Pascal Hitzler (DaSe Lab, Wright State University, US)
  3. Gary Berg-Cross (SOCoP)
  4. Michelle Cheatham (DaSe Lab, Wright State University, US)
  5. Holly Ferguson (University of Notre Dame, US)
  6. Da Huo (University of Notre Dame, US)
  7. Patricia Sigrid Herterich (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland)
  8. Sunje Dallmeier-Tiessen (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland)
  9. Jarek Nabrzyski (University of Notre Dame, US)
  10. Rick Johnson (University of Notre Dame, US)
  11. Natalie Meyers (University of Notre Dame, US)
  12. Michael Hildreth (University of Notre Dame, US)
  13. Kati Lassila-Perini (CERN, CMS Experiment, Geneva, Switzerland)
  14. Gordon Watts (University of Washington, US)
  15. Michelle Brochmann (University of Washington, US)
  16. Ken Bloom (University of Nebraska-Lincoln, US)
  17. Adila Krisnadhi (DaSe Lab, Wright State University, US)
  18. David Carral (DaSe Lab, Wright State University)
  19. Krzysztof Janowicz (University of California, Santa Barbara, US) [dial-in :-(]
  20. Elizabeth S Sexton-Kennedy (Fermi National Laboratory, US)
  21. ...

Not sure yet[edit]

Would like to, but can't[edit]

  1. Ian Taylor (Cardiff University, UK)