C2 Domain Ontology C2 Domain Ontology Within Our LifetimeWithin Our Lifetime

Paper ID 120, C2 Concepts and Policy TrackPaper ID 120, C2 Concepts and Policy Track

International Command and Control Research and International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium 2009Technology Symposium 2009

1515--17 Jun 200917 Jun 2009

Ms. Leslie WintersMs. Leslie WintersUSJFCOMUSJFCOMLeslie.winters@jfcom.milLeslie.winters@jfcom.mil

Dr. Andreas TolkDr. Andreas TolkOld Dominion UniversityOld Dominion Universityatolk@odu.eduatolk@odu.edu

Bottom Line UpfrontBottom Line Upfront

Development of a practical C2 domain Development of a practical C2 domain ontology is feasible in the near to mid termontology is feasible in the near to mid term

Efforts should follow the principles and Efforts should follow the principles and best practices of the Applied Ontology best practices of the Applied Ontology community while reusing existing C2 community while reusing existing C2 modeling artifacts to the extent practicalmodeling artifacts to the extent practical

What is What is ““OntologyOntology””??

PhilosophyPhilosophy--based Definitionsbased Definitions

Merriam Webster:[7]Merriam Webster:[7]

1.1. a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations of being relations of being

2.2. a particular theory about the nature of being or the kinds of a particular theory about the nature of being or the kinds of things that have existencethings that have existence

Wikipedia: [8]Wikipedia: [8]

TThe study of the nature of being, existence or reality in he study of the nature of being, existence or reality in general, as well as of the basic categories of being and their general, as well as of the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch ofrelations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differencesdifferences

Philosophy-Based definitions emphasize REALITY…

Information Science DefinitionsInformation Science Definitions

Wikipedia [12]Wikipedia [12]

A formal representation of a set of concepts within a A formal representation of a set of concepts within a domain and the relationships between those domain and the relationships between those concepts. It is used to reason about the properties concepts. It is used to reason about the properties of that domain, and may be used to define the of that domain, and may be used to define the domaindomain

Gruber [13]Gruber [13]

A formal, explicit specification of a shared A formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualizationconceptualization

… Information Science definitions emphasize CONCEPTS

Key Terms and ConceptsKey Terms and Concepts

Realism Realism vsvs

RelativismRelativism

Realist Realist FallibilismFallibilism

Realistic Realistic PerspectivismPerspectivism

UniversalsUniversals

ParticularsParticulars

ClassesClasses

RelationsRelations

TuplesTuples

Entity LevelsEntity Levels

Level 1 EntitiesLevel 1 Entities

((realityreality):):

The The objects, processes, qualities, objects, processes, qualities, states, states, etc. in reality.etc. in reality.

Level 2 Entities (Level 2 Entities (conceptsconcepts):):

Cognitive representations of this Cognitive representations of this reality on reality on the part of researchers the part of researchers and others.and others.

Level 3 Entities (Level 3 Entities (artifactsartifacts): ): Concretizations of these cognitive Concretizations of these cognitive representations in (for example representations in (for example textual or graphical) textual or graphical) representational artifacts.representational artifacts.

From Smith [6]

C2 Domain Ontology Working C2 Domain Ontology Working DefinitionDefinition

C2 Domain OntologyC2 Domain Ontology:: A composite formalized A composite formalized representational artifact, representational artifact, comprising a taxonomy as comprising a taxonomy as proper part, proper part, whose representational units designate C2 whose representational units designate C2 universals, defined classes, and relations between them. universals, defined classes, and relations between them. The C2 domain ontology may be used as a reference to The C2 domain ontology may be used as a reference to describe and reason about C2 in general, or about C2 describe and reason about C2 in general, or about C2 particulars when applied to a dataset pertaining to these particulars when applied to a dataset pertaining to these particularsparticulars

Recommended artifacts per C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, Jan 2009: [17]1.

A natural language vocabulary explicitly describing C2 representational units2.

An OWL-DL instantiation of the C2 representational units3.

Rules (e.g. constraints) expressed in a logic language such as SWRL

Ontology and the Semantics SpectrumOntology and the Semantics Spectrum

From Obrst, L. (2003): ―Ontologies for Semantically Interoperable Systems,∥ Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, November 2003,pp. 366-369.

Ontology Types & Ontology Types & ApplicationsApplications

Ontology ApplicationsOntology Applications

Describe something (the world, a Describe something (the world, a particular domain) particular domain)

Organize information Organize information

Integrate disparate information Integrate disparate information representationsrepresentations

Infer information about something by Infer information about something by applying ontological relationsapplying ontological relations

Advance knowledge about somethingAdvance knowledge about something

Common Ontology TypesCommon Ontology Types

Reference OntologiesReference Ontologies

Application OntologiesApplication Ontologies

Ontology Levels Ontology Levels

Formal or Upper Level OntologiesFormal or Upper Level Ontologies

Intermediate or MidIntermediate or Mid--Level OntologiesLevel Ontologies

Regional, LowerRegional, Lower--level, Material, or Domain level, Material, or Domain OntologiesOntologies

Simple Post Office Ontology Simple Post Office Ontology Illustrating Ontological LevelsIllustrating Ontological Levels

Sample Upper Level or Formal Sample Upper Level or Formal OntologiesOntologies

Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) [24][25][24][25]

Suggested Upper Merged Ontology Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) (SUMO) [26][26]

Descriptive Ontology for Language and Descriptive Ontology for Language and Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE) Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE) [27][27]

Sample Biological Domain OntologiesSample Biological Domain Ontologies

Genome Ontology (GO) Genome Ontology (GO) [28][28]

Describes gene products by associated processes, cellular Describes gene products by associated processes, cellular components, and molecular functionscomponents, and molecular functions

24,000 terms organized into 3 ontologies24,000 terms organized into 3 ontologies

Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) Semantic Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) Semantic Network Network [29][29]

ThesaurusThesaurus--like ontology like ontology

1 million biomedical concepts & 5 million concept names 1 million biomedical concepts & 5 million concept names stemming from 100 controlled vocabularies and classification stemming from 100 controlled vocabularies and classification systems systems

Open Biological Ontology (OBO) Foundry Open Biological Ontology (OBO) Foundry [30][30]

60+ biomedical ontologies from participating members60+ biomedical ontologies from participating members

Vision to become interoperable through a common design Vision to become interoperable through a common design philosophyphilosophy

Biological Domain Ontological Biological Domain Ontological LayeringLayering

Figure 2: Ontological Layering in the Biological Domain (Stenzhorn [37])

NASA Domain OntologiesNASA Domain Ontologies

NASA Exploration Initiative Ontology Models NASA Exploration Initiative Ontology Models ((NexIOMNexIOM) ) [31][31]

Supports NASA Constellation ProgramSupports NASA Constellation Program

Family of approximately 140 ontologies working Family of approximately 140 ontologies working across hundreds of datasetsacross hundreds of datasets

Formalizes the way NASA computers and personnel Formalizes the way NASA computers and personnel refer to NASA elements, their scientific and refer to NASA elements, their scientific and engineering disciplines, related work activities, and engineering disciplines, related work activities, and their interrelationships their interrelationships

Facilitates information retrieval, aggregation, Facilitates information retrieval, aggregation, reasoning, etc. to generate information, enable reasoning, etc. to generate information, enable interoperability, and inform decisions interoperability, and inform decisions

NASA Ontology ArchitectureNASA Ontology Architecture

Graphic used with permission of Ralph Hodgson, Top Quadrant [31]

Additional Ontology ArtifactsAdditional Ontology Artifacts

Numerous ontology artifacts available through Numerous ontology artifacts available through

online libraries and search engines, e.g. online libraries and search engines, e.g.

SchemaWebSchemaWeb••

http://http://www.schemaweb.info/ebwww.schemaweb.info/eb

OntoSelectOntoSelect••

http://olp.dfki.de/OntoSelect/http://olp.dfki.de/OntoSelect/

Illustrates the growing popularity of webIllustrates the growing popularity of web--based based ontology solutionsontology solutions

HoweverHowever……

Ontology CaveatOntology CaveatNot all ontology is good ontology

Many (most?) ontology development efforts are not Many (most?) ontology development efforts are not following basic principles and best practices of Applied following basic principles and best practices of Applied Ontology, e.g. with respect to:Ontology, e.g. with respect to:

Precise definition of vocabulary termsPrecise definition of vocabulary terms

Useful and appropriate classification schemesUseful and appropriate classification schemes

Proper use of basic ontological relationsProper use of basic ontological relations

Methods for partitioning a domainMethods for partitioning a domain

Rationale and benefits of the realist perspectiveRationale and benefits of the realist perspective

Reuse of existing formal, intermediate, and domain ontologiesReuse of existing formal, intermediate, and domain ontologies

As a result, many (most?) ontologies do not accurately As a result, many (most?) ontologies do not accurately represent their domain and/or do little to solve represent their domain and/or do little to solve information integration problemsinformation integration problems

C2 Domain OntologyC2 Domain Ontology

C2 Domain Ontology RationaleC2 Domain Ontology Rationale

C2 demands the ability to organize, C2 demands the ability to organize, integrate, and understand large quantities integrate, and understand large quantities of informationof information

Application AreasApplication Areas

Operational C2Operational C2

C2 Concept DevelopmentC2 Concept Development

C2 TrainingC2 Training

C2 Capability ManagementC2 Capability Management

Potential C2 Ontology ContributorsPotential C2 Ontology Contributors

C2 CoreC2 Core

JC3IEDMJC3IEDM

C2 COI ArtifactsC2 COI Artifacts

Joint Capability AreasJoint Capability Areas

Universal Joint Task ListUniversal Joint Task List

C2 Architecture ProductsC2 Architecture Products

NATO C2 Conceptual NATO C2 Conceptual ModelModel

C2 Data Models & XML Schemas C2 Taxonomies

C2 Capability Models

Joint Capability Areas (Joint Capability Areas (JCAsJCAs) ) [41][41]

U.S. U.S. DoDDoD

authoritative authoritative management construct for management construct for partitioning military capabilities partitioning military capabilities

Provides taxonomy and vocabulary Provides taxonomy and vocabulary for defining C2 from a process for defining C2 from a process perspectiveperspective

Tier 1 Tier 1 JCAJCA’’ss

may be considered an may be considered an intermediate ontologyintermediate ontology--like construct like construct that relates C2 to the larger that relates C2 to the larger DoDDoD

capability domaincapability domain

US Joint Staff J7 maintains an US Joint Staff J7 maintains an authoritative mapping between authoritative mapping between JCAsJCAs

and the Universal Joint Task and the Universal Joint Task List (UJTL) List (UJTL) [43][43]

Tier 1 JCAs:Command and ControlForce ApplicationBattlespace AwarenessNet-CentricBuilding PartnershipsLogisticsForce SupportCorporate Management & Support

Tier 2 C2 JCAs:OrganizeUnderstandPlanningDecideDirectMonitor

C2 Core Vocabulary and C2 Core Vocabulary and Conceptual ModelConceptual Model

Emerging U.S. Emerging U.S. DoDDoD

approach to approach to facilitate understandable and facilitate understandable and interoperable C2 data sharinginteroperable C2 data sharing

Includes a conceptual model and Includes a conceptual model and vocabulary for commonly vocabulary for commonly exchanged C2 dataexchanged C2 data

Extended from the U.S. Universal Extended from the U.S. Universal Core Core [5][44],[5][44],

which may be which may be considered an intermediate considered an intermediate ontologyontology--like constructlike construct

COIsCOIs

and missionand mission--specific specific constructs extend from C2 Core constructs extend from C2 Core to lower domains to lower domains

Joint Consultation Command and Control Joint Consultation Command and Control Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM)Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM)

Doctrinally based, comprehensive Doctrinally based, comprehensive product based on ~ 20 years of C2 product based on ~ 20 years of C2 domain expert inputs domain expert inputs [46][47][46][47]

Relevant artifacts include Relevant artifacts include conceptual and logical data models, conceptual and logical data models, extensive vocabulary, and rules setextensive vocabulary, and rules set

Numerous papers exploring Numerous papers exploring relevance of JC3IEDM to a C2 relevance of JC3IEDM to a C2 domain ontology (ICCRTS, SISO)domain ontology (ICCRTS, SISO)

OWLOWL--DL and SWRL are required to DL and SWRL are required to capture the model itself as well as capture the model itself as well as rules governing the relationships rules governing the relationships between JC3IEDM entitiesbetween JC3IEDM entities

COI and Program VocabulariesCOI and Program Vocabularies

Numerous C2Numerous C2--related related COIsCOIs

producing semantic products to producing semantic products to facilitate data sharing for a specific facilitate data sharing for a specific missionmission

Maritime Domain AwarenessMaritime Domain Awareness

Time Sensitive TargetingTime Sensitive Targeting

Joint Air and Missile DefenseJoint Air and Missile Defense

Meteorology and OceanographyMeteorology and Oceanography

Global Force ManagementGlobal Force Management

Not domain ontologies, but share Not domain ontologies, but share entities with and/or model part of entities with and/or model part of the C2 domainthe C2 domain

May also serve as lower May also serve as lower ontologies for C2 domain and ontologies for C2 domain and provide provide ““bottombottom--upup””

perspective perspective

C2 Architecture ProductsC2 Architecture Products

U.S. U.S. DoDDoD, NATO, and coalition , NATO, and coalition partners have been developing partners have been developing C2 operational architectures for C2 operational architectures for several years several years

Architectural artifacts describe Architectural artifacts describe operational entities, relationships operational entities, relationships between them, information that is between them, information that is exchanged, and relevant exchanged, and relevant processes. (Ontologyprocesses. (Ontology--like)like)

Large scale integrated Large scale integrated architecture efforts such as the architecture efforts such as the JFCOM JTF C2 architecture are JFCOM JTF C2 architecture are akin to C2 domain modelsakin to C2 domain models

In the U.S., C2 architecture In the U.S., C2 architecture products have been mapped to products have been mapped to JCAJCA’’ss

and the UJTLand the UJTL

NATO C2 Conceptual Model NATO C2 Conceptual Model (SAS(SAS--050 050 [56][56]

))

Conceptual model of C2 Conceptual model of C2 intended to capture knowledge intended to capture knowledge and serve as point of departure and serve as point of departure for further explorationfor further exploration

Main components are Main components are Reference Model, Value View, Reference Model, Value View, Working C2 process modelsWorking C2 process models

Generic process view of C2 Generic process view of C2 not specific to any operational not specific to any operational domain. (an intermediate domain. (an intermediate ontology?) ontology?)

C2 Reference Model contains C2 Reference Model contains wealth of information regarding wealth of information regarding C2 entities and relationships C2 entities and relationships

Includes provision for human Includes provision for human dimensions of C2 dimensions of C2

Ontological Layering of C2 ArtifactsOntological Layering of C2 Artifacts

FormalLevel

RegionalLevel

IntermediateLevel

Basic Formal Ontology Continuents

Basic Formal Ontology

Occurents

UCore Who, WhatJC3IEDM Object Type

C2 Architecture Object Types

Air TaskingOrder

• Tier 2-4 C2 Capabilities• SAS-50 Working Models •Universal Joint C2 Tasks• Joint C2 Mission Threads, e.g. JCAS, Crisis Action Planning

101st ABN Div 12th AF COL SmithSGT SnuffyCAPT Ahab

OPORDBZ-02

•COL Smith preparingan OPLAN•Torch 31 Close Air Support Mission

Instances

• Tier 1 Joint Capability Areas

Mission Orders

JF Component Commanders

JFLCC JFACC

Personnel

Army OPORD

ATO AB-01

C2 Core, JC3IEDM, COI, and Misc Data Models ,SAS-50 Reference Model elements,C2 Architecture Objects, e.g.

SITUATIONAL MODEL USING REFERENT TRACKING

Situation at time(t)

TargetWeapon

Referent Tracking Concept Illustration from Cuesters [58]

Conclusions, Conclusions, Recommendations, and Recommendations, and

ChallengesChallenges

Summary and ConclusionSummary and Conclusion

Ontology has been used successfully (for Ontology has been used successfully (for thousands of years) to capture and represent thousands of years) to capture and represent domain knowledge and facilitate practical domain knowledge and facilitate practical understanding, reasoning, and information understanding, reasoning, and information integration integration

Based on successes in the biological and other Based on successes in the biological and other domains, the authors conclude that development domains, the authors conclude that development of a practical (but partial) C2 domain ontology is of a practical (but partial) C2 domain ontology is feasible in the near to mid termfeasible in the near to mid term

Efforts should follow the principles and best Efforts should follow the principles and best practices of the Applied Ontology community practices of the Applied Ontology community while reusing existing C2 modeling artifacts to while reusing existing C2 modeling artifacts to the extent practical the extent practical

Practical Recommendations for Practical Recommendations for Realizing a C2 Domain OntologyRealizing a C2 Domain Ontology

Identify relevant and feasible applications that can Identify relevant and feasible applications that can be achieved in the near to mid termbe achieved in the near to mid term

Establish a common approach to C2 ontology Establish a common approach to C2 ontology

specification specification

Adopt the realist perspectiveAdopt the realist perspective

Leverage existing C2 ontologyLeverage existing C2 ontology--like artifactslike artifacts

Include key stakeholders in an open processInclude key stakeholders in an open process

Foster C2 community Applied Ontology Foster C2 community Applied Ontology

awareness and expertiseawareness and expertise

Long Term ChallengesLong Term Challenges

Scope, complexity, diversity, and unclear Scope, complexity, diversity, and unclear

partitions and boundaries of C2partitions and boundaries of C2

ProcessProcess--based nature and strong human based nature and strong human

element of C2element of C2

Dependencies on other Dependencies on other warfightingwarfighting

domains domains

that do not have ontologies in placethat do not have ontologies in place

Time and resource requirementsTime and resource requirements

Constantly evolving nature of warfare Constantly evolving nature of warfare

Questions?Questions?

ReferencesReferences

[1] U.S. Department of Defense Chief Information Office: [1] U.S. Department of Defense Chief Information Office: Department of Defense NetDepartment of Defense Net--Centric Data Centric Data StrategyStrategy, May 2003., May 2003.

[2] NATO C3 Board: [2] NATO C3 Board: NATO NetNATO Net--Enabled Capability Data StrategyEnabled Capability Data Strategy, 20 Dec 2005., 20 Dec 2005.

[3] U.S. Department of Defense Chief Information Office: [3] U.S. Department of Defense Chief Information Office: Department of Defense NetDepartment of Defense Net--Centric Centric Services Strategy: A Strategy for a NetServices Strategy: A Strategy for a Net--Centric, ServiceCentric, Service--Oriented Enterprise, Oriented Enterprise, May 2007May 2007

[4] United States Joint Forces Command: [4] United States Joint Forces Command: Joint Operating Environment 2008, Challenges and Joint Operating Environment 2008, Challenges and Implications for the Future Joint ForceImplications for the Future Joint Force, 25 Nov 2008., 25 Nov 2008.

[5] Meyerriecks, D., Davis, S., Pipher, J., Guthrie, P.: [5] Meyerriecks, D., Davis, S., Pipher, J., Guthrie, P.: Independent Assessment Team Report on Independent Assessment Team Report on C2 DataC2 Data, Institute for Defense Analyses, IDA Paper P, Institute for Defense Analyses, IDA Paper P--4404, Nov 2008. 4404, Nov 2008.

[6] Smith, B. Et al, [6] Smith, B. Et al, Towards a Reference Terminology for Ontology Research and DeveloTowards a Reference Terminology for Ontology Research and Development in pment in the Biomedical Domainthe Biomedical Domain, KR, KR--MED 2006 "Biomedical Ontology in Action",November 8, 2006, MED 2006 "Biomedical Ontology in Action",November 8, 2006, Baltimore, Maryland, USABaltimore, Maryland, USA

[7] Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, [7] Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, http://www.merriamhttp://www.merriam--webster.com/dictionary/ontologywebster.com/dictionary/ontology

[8] Wikipedia, [8] Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology

[9] Smith, B., and Klagges, B. : [9] Smith, B., and Klagges, B. : Philosophy and Biomedical Information SystemsPhilosophy and Biomedical Information Systems, Applied , Applied Ontology An Introduction, Chapter 1, pg 22., Transaction Books, Ontology An Introduction, Chapter 1, pg 22., Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[10] Johansson, I., [10] Johansson, I., Four Kinds of Is_A RelationsFour Kinds of Is_A Relations, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 235, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 235--254, 254, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[11] Munn, L., Smith, B.: Applied Ontology An Introduction, Tran[11] Munn, L., Smith, B.: Applied Ontology An Introduction, Transaction Books, Rutgers saction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.University, NJ, 2008.

[12] Wikipedia, [12] Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(information_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(information_science))

[13] Gruber, T: [13] Gruber, T: A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology SpecificationsA Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications, Knowledge , Knowledge Acquisition, 1993 Acquisition, 1993

[14] Deborah L. McGuinness and Frank van Harmelen, Editors,: [14] Deborah L. McGuinness and Frank van Harmelen, Editors,: OWL Web Ontology Language OWL Web Ontology Language OverviewOverview, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004., W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004.

[15] Smith, B., [15] Smith, B., A Realist Logic with ApplicationsA Realist Logic with Applications,,

Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 109Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 109--124, 124, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

ReferencesReferences

[16] Grenon, P., [16] Grenon, P., A Primer on Knowledge Management and Ontological EngineeringA Primer on Knowledge Management and Ontological Engineering, Applied , Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 57Ontology An Introduction, pp 57--82, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.82, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[17] C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, 15[17] C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, 15--16 Feb 2009, Buffalo NY16 Feb 2009, Buffalo NY

[18] SWRL semantic rule web language combing OWL and RuleML [18] SWRL semantic rule web language combing OWL and RuleML http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/

[19] U.S. [19] U.S. DoDDoD

Metadata Registry, Metadata Registry, https://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/homepage.htmlhttps://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/homepage.html

[20] [20] Bittner, T., Smith, B., Bittner, T., Smith, B., A Theory of Granular PartitionsA Theory of Granular Partitions, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp , Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 125125--158, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.158, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[21] Johnson, W[21] Johnson, W., ., Logic:PartLogic:Part I, I, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1921. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1921.

[22] Hennig, B., [22] Hennig, B., What is Formal Ontology,What is Formal Ontology, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 39Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 39--56, 56, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[23] Husserl, E., [23] Husserl, E., Ideas: General Introduction to Pure PhenomenologyIdeas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. (W.R. Gibson, Trans.) . (W.R. Gibson, Trans.) London. CollierLondon. Collier--Macmillan. 1931.Macmillan. 1931.

[24] Basic Formal Ontology (multiple references and artifacts): [24] Basic Formal Ontology (multiple references and artifacts): http://www.ifomis.org/bfo/BFOhttp://www.ifomis.org/bfo/BFO

[25] Masolo, C., et al: [25] Masolo, C., et al: The WonderWeb Library of Foundational Ontologies Prelimary ReporThe WonderWeb Library of Foundational Ontologies Prelimary Report,t, WonderWeb Deliverable D17, ISTCWonderWeb Deliverable D17, ISTC--CNR, May 2003. CNR, May 2003.

[26] Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) portal: [26] Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) portal: http://www.ontologyportal.org/SUOhttp://www.ontologyportal.org/SUO

[27] Descriptive Ontology for Linguistics and Cognitive Engineer[27] Descriptive Ontology for Linguistics and Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE) portal: ing (DOLCE) portal: http://www.loahttp://www.loa--cnr.it/DOLCE.htmlcnr.it/DOLCE.html;;

[28] [28] The Gene Ontology Consortium. "Gene Ontology: tool for the unifiThe Gene Ontology Consortium. "Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology". cation of biology". Nature Nature GeneticsGenetics 2525: 25: 25––29, 2000. Also, 29, 2000. Also, http://http://www.geneontology.orgwww.geneontology.org//

[29] [29] Bodenreider, Olivier. Bodenreider, Olivier. The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS): integrating biomedicThe Unified Medical Language System (UMLS): integrating biomedical al terminologyterminology. Nucleic Acids Research, 32, D267. Nucleic Acids Research, 32, D267--D270. 2004. D270. 2004.

[30] Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) Foundation candidate ontol[30] Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) Foundation candidate ontologies: ogies: http://http://www.obofoundry.orgwww.obofoundry.org//

ReferencesReferences

[31] Hodgson, R., NASA NexIOM Ontologies, Briefing at the C2 Ont[31] Hodgson, R., NASA NexIOM Ontologies, Briefing at the C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, ology Technical Exchange, National Center for Ontological Research (NCOR), Buffalo, NY, USNational Center for Ontological Research (NCOR), Buffalo, NY, USA, January 15A, January 15--16, 200916, 2009

[32] SchemaWeb (online [32] SchemaWeb (online directory of RDF schemata expressed in RDFS, OWL and DAML+OIL)directory of RDF schemata expressed in RDFS, OWL and DAML+OIL): : http://http://www.schemaweb.info/ebwww.schemaweb.info/eb

[33] OntoSelect, [33] OntoSelect, http://olp.dfki.de/OntoSelect/http://olp.dfki.de/OntoSelect/

[34] Smith, B., [34] Smith, B., KlaggesKlagges, B., , B., Bioinformatics and PhilosophyBioinformatics and Philosophy, , Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp21Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp21--

38, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.38, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[35] Jansen, L., [35] Jansen, L., Classifications,Classifications, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 159Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 159--172, Transaction Books, 172, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[36] Schwarz, U., Smith, B[36] Schwarz, U., Smith, B., Ontological Relations., Ontological Relations, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 219, Applied Ontology An Introduction, pp 219--234, 234, Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.Transaction Books, Rutgers University, NJ, 2008.

[37] Stenzhorn, H. et al[37] Stenzhorn, H. et al, , Towards a TopTowards a Top--Domain Ontology for Linking Biomedical Ontologies,Domain Ontology for Linking Biomedical Ontologies, Studies Studies in health technology and informatics, 2007. in health technology and informatics, 2007.

[38[38--40] Deleted.40] Deleted.

[41] [41] Joint Chiefs Staff J7 Joint Capability Areas portal: Joint Chiefs Staff J7 Joint Capability Areas portal: http://www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfare/cap_areas.htmhttp://www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfare/cap_areas.htm

[42] [42] CJCSM 3170.01 Series, CJCSM 3170.01 Series, ““Operations of the Joint Capabilities Integrated Development SystOperations of the Joint Capabilities Integrated Development Systemem””, , May 2007.May 2007.

[43] [43] CJCSM 3500.04E, CJCSM 3500.04E, Universal Joint Task ManualUniversal Joint Task Manual, 25 Aug 2008., 25 Aug 2008.

[44] Universal Core (Ucore) portal: [44] Universal Core (Ucore) portal: https://https://collab.core.gov/CommunityBrowser.aspx?idcollab.core.gov/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=18954&lang=en=18954&lang=en--USUS

[45] [45] Military Domains: An EvaluationMilitary Domains: An Evaluation. MITRE Technical Report 04B000006, Sep 2004.[45] Semi, S., . MITRE Technical Report 04B000006, Sep 2004.[45] Semi, S., Pulvermacher, M., Obrst, L. : Pulvermacher, M., Obrst, L. : Toward the Use of an Upper Ontology for U.S. Government and U.S.Toward the Use of an Upper Ontology for U.S. Government and U.S.

[46] Joint Consultation Command and Control Information Exchange[46] Joint Consultation Command and Control Information Exchange

Data Model (JC3IEDM) Data Model (JC3IEDM) specification, specification, http://www.miphttp://www.mip--site.org/publicsite/04site.org/publicsite/04--Baseline_3.0/JC3IEDMBaseline_3.0/JC3IEDM--

Joint_C3_Information_Exchange_Data_Model/Joint_C3_Information_Exchange_Data_Model/

[47] NATO Open Systems Working Group: NATO C3 Technical Architec[47] NATO Open Systems Working Group: NATO C3 Technical Architecture Volumes 1ture Volumes 1--5, Version 5, Version 7.0, 15 December 2005. 7.0, 15 December 2005.

[48] Dorion, e. Et al.: [48] Dorion, e. Et al.: Towards a Formal Ontology for Military Coalition OperationsTowards a Formal Ontology for Military Coalition Operations, 10th International , 10th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium, June 2005Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium, June 2005..

ReferencesReferences

[49] Matheus, C., Olicny, B.: [49] Matheus, C., Olicny, B.: On the Automatic Generation of an OWL Ontology Based on the JoinOn the Automatic Generation of an OWL Ontology Based on the Joint t C3 Information Exchange Data ModelC3 Information Exchange Data Model, 12th International Command and Control Research and , 12th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium, June 2007.Technology Symposium, June 2007.

[50] [50] TurnitsaTurnitsa, C. and Tolk, A.. 2005. , C. and Tolk, A.. 2005. Evaluation of the C2IEDM as an InteroperabilityEvaluation of the C2IEDM as an Interoperability--Enabling Enabling OntologyOntology, Proceedings of the European Simulation Interoperability Worksh, Proceedings of the European Simulation Interoperability Workshop, Toulouse, France, op, Toulouse, France, 2005.2005.

[51] Wartik, S. : [51] Wartik, S. : A JC3IEDM OWLA JC3IEDM OWL--DL OntologyDL Ontology, Briefing at the C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, , Briefing at the C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, National Center for Ontological Research (NCOR), Buffalo, NY, USNational Center for Ontological Research (NCOR), Buffalo, NY, USA, January 15A, January 15--16, 2009.16, 2009.

[52] Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks a[52] Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration/Department nd Information Integration/Department of Defense Chief Information Officer, of Defense Chief Information Officer, Guidance for Implementing NetGuidance for Implementing Net--Centric Data SharingCentric Data Sharing, DoD , DoD Directive 8320.02b, April 2006.Directive 8320.02b, April 2006.

[53] Department of Defense Architecture Framework Working Group,[53] Department of Defense Architecture Framework Working Group,

Office of the Assistance Office of the Assistance Secretary of Defense (Networks and Information Integration): DoDSecretary of Defense (Networks and Information Integration): DoD

Architectural Framework Version Architectural Framework Version 1.0, 9 Feb 2004.1.0, 9 Feb 2004.

[54] NATO NC3 Board: NATO Architecture Framework (NAF) Ver 3, AC[54] NATO NC3 Board: NATO Architecture Framework (NAF) Ver 3, AC/322(SC/1/322(SC/1--WG/1)N(2007)004, WG/1)N(2007)004, 28 Jun 2007.28 Jun 2007.

[55] U.S. Joint Forces Command, [55] U.S. Joint Forces Command, Joint Common Systems Functions ListJoint Common Systems Functions List, , https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/419489https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/419489, , Sep 2008.Sep 2008.

[56] NATO Research and Technology Organization, [56] NATO Research and Technology Organization, Exploring New Command and Control Concepts Exploring New Command and Control Concepts and Capabilitiesand Capabilities, TR, TR--SASSAS--050, April 2007.050, April 2007.

[57] Ceusters, W.: [57] Ceusters, W.: Use of Ontologies in a World in FluxUse of Ontologies in a World in Flux, Briefing at the C2 Ontology Technical , Briefing at the C2 Ontology Technical Exchange, National Center for Ontological Research (NCOR), BuffaExchange, National Center for Ontological Research (NCOR), Buffalo, NY, USA, January 15lo, NY, USA, January 15--16, 200916, 2009

[58] Ceusters, W., Smith, B.: [58] Ceusters, W., Smith, B.: Tracking Referents in Electronic Health RecordsTracking Referents in Electronic Health Records, Journal of Biomedical , Journal of Biomedical Informatics, Volume 39 Issue 3, pp 362Informatics, Volume 39 Issue 3, pp 362--378, June 2006.378, June 2006.

[59] Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S. Department of D[59] Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S. Department of Defense: efense: ““Joint Publication 1Joint Publication 1--02, DoD 02, DoD Dictionary of Military and Associated TermsDictionary of Military and Associated Terms””, as amended through 17 OCT 2008. Also, , as amended through 17 OCT 2008. Also, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddicthttp://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict

[60] Joint Electronic Library, [60] Joint Electronic Library, http://http://www.dtic.milwww.dtic.mil/doctrine//doctrine/