Hearing (Knowledge) Graphs

[This post is based on Enya Nieland‘s Msc Thesis “Generating Earcons from Knowledge Graphs” ]

Three earcons with varying pitch, rythm and both pitch and rythm

Knowledge Graphs are becoming enormously popular, which means that users interacting with such complex networks are diversifying. This requires new and innovative ways of interacting. Several methods for visualizing, summarizing or exploring knowledge have been proposed and developed. In this student project we investigated the potential for interacting with knowledge graphs through a different modality: sound.

The research focused on the question how to generate meaningful sound or music from (knowledge) graphs. The generated sounds should provide users some insights into the properties of the network. Enya framed this challenge with the idea of “earcons” the auditory version of an icon.

Enya eventually developed a method that automatically produces these types of earcon for random knowledge graphs. Each earcon consist of three notes that differ in pitch and duration. As example, listen to the three earcons which are shown in the figure on the left.

Earcon where pitch varies
Earcon where note duration varies
Earcon where both pitch and rythm vary

The earcon parameters are derived from network metrics such as minimum, maximum and average indegree or outdegree. A tool with user interface allowed users to design the earcons based on these metrics.

The pipeline for creating earcons

The different variants were evaluated in an extensive user test of 30 respondents to find out which variants were the most informative. The results show that indeed, the individual elements of earcons can provide insights into these metrics, but that combining them is confusing to the listener. In this case, simpler is better.

Using this tool could be an addition to a tool such as LOD Laundromat to provide an instant insight into the complexity of KGs. It could additionally benefit people who are visually impaired and want to get an insight into the complexity of Knowledge Graphs

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

Virtual Human Rights Lawyer project

The Virtual Human Rights Lawyer is a joint project of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Netherlands Office of the Public International Law & Policy Group to help victims of serious human rights violations obtain access to justice at the international level. It enables users to find out how and where they can access existing global and regional human rights mechanisms in order to obtain some form of redress for the human rights violations they face or have faced.

In the video above Marieke de Hoon of VU’s Law faculty and Charlotte Gerritsen (Artificial Intelligence) talk about the goals for the project.

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

Interconnect Project kickoff

On 1 October 2019, the Horizon2020 Interconnect project has started. The goal of this huge and ambitious project is to achieve a relevant milestone in the democratization of efficient energy management, through a flexible and interoperable ecosystem where distributed energy resources can be soundly integrated with effective benefits to end-users.

To this end, its 51 partners (!) will develop an interoperable IOT and smart-grid infrastructure, based on Semantic technologies, that includes various end-user services. The results will be validated using 7 pilots in EU member states, including one in the Netherlands with 200 appartments.

The role of VU is to develop in close collaboration with TNO extend and validating the SAREF ontology for IOT as well as and other relevant ontologies. VU will lead a task on developing Machine Learning solutions on Knowledge graphs and extend the solutions towards usable middle layers for User-centric ML services in the pilots, specifically in the aforementioned Dutch pilot, where VU will collaborate with TNO and VolkerWessel iCity and Hyrde.

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

Semantics2019 trip report

Last week, I attended the SEMANTiCS2019 conference in Karlsruhe, Germany. This was the 15th edition of the conference that brings together Academia and Industry around the topic of Knowledge Engineering and Semantic Technologies and the good news was that this year’s conference was the biggest ever with 426 unique participants.

Closing Session – The Power Of #KnowledgeGraphs & #SemanticAI:#SemanticsConf 2019 Says Thank You For Your AMAZING Contributions, Participations and Sponsorships!#DataScience #BigData #ML #MachineLearning #SemanticWeb #Semantics #blockchain #AI #KI #IoT #tech #OpenData https://t.co/GBhui4ZCqt

— SEMANTiCS Conference (@SemanticsConf) September 11, 2019

I was not able to join the workshop day or the dbpedia day on monday and thursday respectively, but was there for the main programme. The first day opened with a keynote from Oracle’s Michael J. Sullivan about Hybrid Knowledge Management Architecture and how Oracle is betting on Semantic Technology to work in combination with data lake architectures.

The vision of FAIR and hope for the future @micheldumontier #SEMANTICS2019 #semanticsconf pic.twitter.com/Tm54yPgBt8

— CMP Content Services (@CmpContent) September 10, 2019

The 2nd keynote by Michel Dumontier of Maastricht University covered the principles of FAIR publishing of data and current avances in actually measuring FAIRness of datasets.

Robin Keskisärkkä, @evabl444, Kelli Lind and @olafhartig win best Paper Award for RSP-QL* . Congratulations! #Semantics2019 pic.twitter.com/7lRF5jigfj

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

During one of the parallel sessions I attended the presentation of the eventual best paper winner Robin Keskisärkkä, Eva Blomqvist, Leili Lind, and Olaf Hartig. RSP-QL*: Enabling Statement-Level Annotations in RDF Streams . This was a very nice talk for a very nice and readable paper. The paper describes the combination of current RDF stream reasoning language RSP-QL and how it can be extended with the principles of RDF* that allow for statements about statements without traditional re-ification. The paper nicely mixes formal semantics, an elegant solution, working code, and a clear use case and evaluation. Congratulations to the winners.

Other winners included the best poster, which was won by our friends over at UvA.

Amsterdam success with a best poster win for Anthi Symeonidou, Viachaslau Sazonau and @pgroth! #semantics2019 pic.twitter.com/cwhrRSZYRc

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

The second day for me was taken up by the Special Track on Cultural Heritage and Digital Humanities, which consisted of research papers, use case presentations and posters that relate to the use of Semantic technologies in this domain. The program was quite nice, as the embedded tweets below hopefully show.

@victordeboer openning special track on cultural heritage and digital humanities at #Semantics2019 pic.twitter.com/cK5UkHKxoE

— Artem Revenko (@revenkoartem) September 11, 2019

The #Semantics2019 special track on Cultural Heritage and #DigitalHumanities starts with a use case talk on KG-based @museodelprado project by Ricardo Alonso Mariana of GLOSS pic.twitter.com/H43NPGtSfM

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

up next: #LinkedSaeima which publishes Latvia's parliamentary debates as LOD. #semantics2019 pic.twitter.com/BJ6y5xrrel

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

The always amazing @vpresutti talks about knives and what we know about them in her #semantics2019 keynote on commonsense knowledge. pic.twitter.com/u52Vmv6y2Q

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

Victoria Eyharabide kicks off the last session of our Special Track with a talk about a #KnowledgeGraph on medieval #music and #iconography. #Semantics2019 @albertmeronyo #digitalhumanities @SorbonneParis1 pic.twitter.com/QFtlTT1tX4

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

#semantics2019 @heikopaulheim talks extracting numbers from Wikipedia abstracts to enrich #dbpedia. pic.twitter.com/kB0AUVmWRl

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

The winners of the #codingdavinci Hackathon close the #Semantics2019 special track on #digitalhumanities and #CulturalHeritage with #schmankerl Time machine! pic.twitter.com/n61RTToq5l

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) September 11, 2019

All in all, this years edition of SEMANTICS was a great one, I hope next year will be even more interesting (I will be general chairing it).

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

Linked Art Provenance

In the past year, together with Ingrid Vermeulen (VU Amsterdam) and Chris Dijkshoorn (Rijksmuseum Amsterdam), I had the pleasure to supervise two students from VU, Babette Claassen and Jeroen Borst, who participated in a Network Institute Academy Assistant project around art provenance and digital methods. The growing number of datasets and digital services around art-historical information presents new opportunities for conducting provenance research at scale. The Linked Art Provenance project investigated to what extent it is possible to trace provenance of art works using online data sources.

Caspar Netscher, the Lacemaker, 1662, oil on canvas. London: the Wallace Collection, P237

In the interdisciplinary project, Babette (Art Market Studies) and Jeroen (Artificial Intelligence) collaborated to create a workflow model, shown below, to integrate provenance information from various online sources such as the Getty provenance index. This included an investigation of potential usage of automatic information extraction of structured data of these online sources.

This model was validated through a case study, where we investigate whether we can capture information from selected sources about an auction (1804), during which the paintings from the former collection of Pieter Cornelis van Leyden (1732-1788) were dispersed. An example work , the Lacemaker, is shown above. Interviews with various art historian validated the produced workflow model.

The workflow model also provides a basic guideline for provenance research and together with the Linked Open Data process can possibly answer relevant research questions for studies in the history of collecting and the art market.

More information can be found in the Final report

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

Trip Report: SIGMOD/PODS 2019

It’s not so frequently that you get a major international conference in your area of interest around the corner from your house. Luckily for me, that just happened. From June 30th – July 5th, SIGMOD/PODS was hosted here in Amsterdam. SIGMOD/PODS is one of the major conferences on databases and data management. Before diving into the event itself, I really wanted to thank  Peter Boncz, Stefan Manegold, Hannes Mühleisen and the whole organizing team (from @CWI_DA and the NL DB community) for getting this massive conference here:

#SIGMOD2019-Opening: This is the 2nd biggest #SIGMOD ever, there are 1050 other participants (up to now) // @SIGMOD2019 pic.twitter.com/GOBthVTbiw

— Benjamin Hättasch (@bhaettasch_cs) July 2, 2019

and pulling off things like this:

A successful #SIGMOD2019 reception at van Gogh museum last night by #MonetDB and @cwi_da, adding a healthy dose of culture to the DBMS community @ACTiCLOUD @FashionBrain1 @ExaNeSt_H2020 pic.twitter.com/J73vk7kSok

— MonetDB Team (@MonetDB) July 3, 2019

Oh and really nice badges too:BKBnl49c.jpgGood job!


Surprisingly, this was the first time I’ve been at SIGMOD. While I’m pretty acquainted with the database literature, I’ve always just hung out in different spots. Hence, I had some trepidation attending wondering if I’d fit in? Who would I talk to over coffee? Would all the papers be about join algorithms or implications of cache misses on some new tree data structure variant? Now obviously this is all pretty bogus thinking, just looking at the proceedings would tell you that. But there’s nothing like attending in person to bust preconceived notions. Yes, there were papers on hardware performance and join algorithms – which were by the way pretty interesting – but there were many papers on other data management problems many of which we are trying to tackle (e.g. provenance, messy data integration).  Also, there were many colleagues that I knew (e.g. Olaf & Jeff above). Anyway, perceptions busted! Sorry DB friends you might have to put up with me some more 😀.

I was at the conference for the better part of 6 days – that’s a lot of material – so I definitely missed a lot but here are the four themes I took from the conference.

  1. Data management for machine learning
  2. Machine learning for data management
  3. New applications of provenance
  4. Software & The Data Center Computer

Data Management for Machine Learning


Matei Zaharia (Stanford/Databricks) on the need for data management for ML

The success of machine learning has rightly changed computer science as a field. In particular, the data management community writ large has reacted trying to tackle the needs of machine learning practitioners with data management systems. This was a major theme at SIGMOD.

Really interesting – using a variety of knowledge to do weak supervision at scale – check out the lift #sigmod https://t.co/Pjiz2XyLBw pic.twitter.com/ahPqV3nvad

— Paul Groth (@pgroth) July 2, 2019

There were a number of what I would term holistic systems that helped manage and improve the process of building ML pipelines including using data. Snorkel DryBell provides a holistic system that lets engineers employ external knowledge (knowledge graphs, dictionaries, rules) to reduce the number of needed training examples needed to create new classifiers. Vizier provides a notebook data science environment backed fully by a provenance data management environment that allows data science pipelines to be debugged and reused.  Apple presented their in-house system for helping data management specifically designed for machine learning – from my understanding all their data is completely provenance enabled – ensuring that ML engineers know exactly what data they can use for what kinds of model building tasks.

I think the other thread here is the use of real world datasets to drive these systems. The example that I found the most compelling was Alpine Meadow++ to use knowledge about ML datasets (e.g. Kaggle) to improve the suggestion on new ML pipelines in an AutoML setting. rsfZ2iZO.jpeg

On a similar note, I thought the work of Suhail Rehman from the University of Chicago on using over 1 million juypter  notebooks to understand data analysis workflows was particularly interesting. In general, the notion is that we need to taking a looking at the whole model building and analysis problem in a holistic sense inclusive of data management . This was emphasized by the folks doing the Magellan entity matching project in their paper on Entity Matching Meets Data Science.


Machine Learning for Data Management

On the flip side, machine learning is rapidly influencing data management itself. The aforementioned Megellan project has developed a deep learning entity matcher. Knowledge graph construction and maintenance is heavily reliant on ML. (See also the new work from Luna Dong & colleagues which she talked about at SIGMOD). Likewise, ML is being used to detect data quality issues (e.g. HoloDetect).

ML is also impacting even lower levels of the data management stack.


Tim Kraska list of algorithms that are or are being MLified

I went to the tutorial on Learned Data-intensive systems from Stratos Idreos and Tim Kraska. They overviewed how machine learning could be used to replace parts or augment of the whole database system and when that might be useful.

KbYGVEA2.jpegIt was quite good, I hope they put the slides up somewhere. The key notion for me is this idea of instance optimality: by using machine learning we can tailor performance to specific users and applications whereas in the past this was not cost effective because the need for programmer effort. They suggested 4 ways to create instance optimized algorithms and data structures:

  1. Synthesize traditional algorithms using a model
  2. Use a CDF model of the data in your system to tailor the algorithm
  3. Use a prediction model as part of your algorithm
  4. Try to to learn the entire algorithm or data structure

They had quite the laundry list of recent papers tackling this approach and this seems like a super hot topic.

Another example was SkinnerDb which uses reinforcement learning to on the fly to learn optimal join ordering. I told you there were papers on joins that were interesting.


New Provenance Applications

There was an entire session of SIGMOD devoted to provenance, which was cool.  What I liked about the papers was that that they had several new applications of provenance or optimizations for applications beyond auditing or debugging.

In addition to these new applications, I saw some nice new provenance capture systems:

Software & The Data Center Computer

This is less of a common theme but something that just struck me. Microsoft discussed their upgrade or overhaul of the database as a service that they offer in Azure. Likewise, Apple discussed FoundationDB – the mult-tenancy database that underlines CloudKit.


JD.com discussed their new file system to deal with containers and ML workloads across clusters with tens of thousands of servers. These are not applications that are hosted in the cloud but instead they assume the data center. These applications are fundamentally designed with the idea that they will be executed on a big chunk of an entire data center. I know my friends at super computing have been doing this for ages but I always wonder how to change one’s mindset to think about building applications that big and not only building them but upgrading & maintaining them as well.


Overall, this was a fantastic conference. Beyond the excellent technical content, from a personal point of view, it was really eye opening to marinate in the community. From the point of view of the Amsterdam tech community, it was exciting to have an Amsterdam Data Science Meetup with over 500 people.

Excited that #SIGMOD2019 is meeting the local Amsterdam data science community @ams_ds pic.twitter.com/NuDUHxCegx

— Paul Groth (@pgroth) July 4, 2019

If you weren’t there, video of much of the event is available.

Random Notes

G. Gottlob presenting his 2009 PODS paper “A General Datalog-based Framework for Tractable Query Answering” which receives the Test of time award. One of the first papers I read when in my PhD Great to see all the theory & how they have taken it to practice w/ Vadalog #sigmod2019 pic.twitter.com/zlfLYi4gnc

— Juan Sequeda (@juansequeda) July 1, 2019



Source: Think Links

Posted in Paul Groth, Staff Blogs

Remembering Maarten van Someren

Last week, while abroad, I received the very sad news that Maarten van Someren passed away. Maarten was one of the core teachers and AI researchers at Universiteit van Amsterdam for 36 years and for many people in AI in the Netherlands, he was a great teacher and mentor. For me personally, as my co-promotor he was one of the persons who shaped me into the AI researcher and teacher I am today.

Maarten van Someren at my PhD defense (photo by Jochem Liem)

Before Maarten asked me to do a PhD project under his and Bob Wielinga‘s supervision, I had known him for several years as UvA’s most prolific AI teacher. Maarten was involved in many courses, (many in Machine Learning) and in coordinating roles. I fondly look back at Maarten explaining Decision Trees, the A* algorithm and Vapnik–Chervonenkis dimensions. He was one of the staff members who really was a bridge between research and education and gave students the idea that we were actually part of the larger AI movement in the Netherlands.

After I finished my Master’s at UvA in 2003, I bumped into Maarten in the UvA elevator and he asked me whether I would be interested in doing a PhD project on Ontology Learning. Maarten explained that I would start out being supervised by both him and Bob Wielinga, but that after a while one of them would take the lead, depending on the direction the research took. In the years that followed, I tried to make sure that direction was such that both Bob and Maarten remained my supervisors as I felt I was learning so much from them. From Maarten I learned how to always stay critical about the assumptions in your research. Maarten for example kept insisting that I explain why we would need semantic technologies in the first place, rather than taking this as an assumption. Looking back, this has tremendously helped me sharpen my research and I am very thankful for his great help. I was happy to work further with him as a postdoc on the SiteGuide project before moving to VU.

In the last years, I met Maarten several times at shared UvA-VU meetings and I was looking forward to collaborations in AI education and research. I am very sad that I will no longer be able to collaborate with him. AI in the Netherlands has lost a very influential person in Maarten.

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

Trip Report: ESWC 2019

From June 2 – 6, I had the pleasure of attending the Extended Semantic Web Conference 2019 held in Portorož, Solvenia. After ESWC, I had another semantic web visit with Axel Polleres, Sabrina Kirrane and team in Vienna. We had a great time avoiding the heat and talking about data search and other fun projects. I then paid the requisite price for all this travel and am just now getting down to emptying my notebook. Note to future self, do your trip reports at the end of the conference.

It’s been awhile since I’ve been at ESWC so it was nice to be back. The conference I think was down a bit in terms the number of attendees but the same community spirit and interesting content (check out the award winners) was there.  Shout out to Miriam Fernandez and the team for making it an invigorating event:

BIG THX everyone for all the lovely moments at #eswc2019! Thx to all authors 4 the exciting work and presentations, SPC & PC members, keynote speakers, sponsors, … but specially to an absolutely amaizing OC team! Thanks to all of your for making the SW community so special 🙂 pic.twitter.com/LNtdxHvZcH

— Miriam Fernandez (@miriam_fs) June 7, 2019

So what was I doing there. I was presenting work at the Deep Learning for Knowledge Graph workshop on trying to see if we could answer structured (e.g. SPARQL) queries over text (paper):

The workshop itself was packed. I think there were about 30-40 people in the room.  In addition to the presenting the workshop paper, I was also one of the mentors for the doctoral consortium. It was really nice to see the next up and coming students who put a lot of work into the session: a paper, a revised paper, a presentation and a poster. Victor and Maria-Esther did a fantastic job organizing this.

So what were my take-aways from the conference. I had many of the same thoughts coming out of this conference that I had when I was at the recent AKBC 2019 especially around the ideas of polyglot representation and scientific literature understanding as an important domain driver (e.g. a Predicting Entity Mentions in Scientific Literature and Mining Scholarly Data for Fine-Grained Knowledge Graph Construction. ) but there were some additional things as well.

Target Schemas

The first was a notion that I’ll term “target schemas”. Diana Maynard in her keynote talked about this. These are little conceptually focused ontologies designed specifically for the application domain. She talked about how working with domain experts to put together these little ontologies that could be the target for NLP tools was really a key part of building these domain specific analytical applications.   I think this notion of simple schemas is also readily apparent in many commercial knowledge graphs.

The notion of target schemas popped up again in an excellent talk by Katherine Thornton on the use of ShEx. In particular, I would call out the introduction of an EntitySchema part of Wikidata. (e.g. Schema for Human Gene or Software Title). These provide these little target schemas that say something to the effect of “Hey if you match this kind of schema, I can use them in my application”. I think this is a really powerful development.

Katherine Thornton presenting shex schema sharing on @wikidata since last Tuesday #eswc2019 pic.twitter.com/nYurHqiZtn

— Paul Groth (@pgroth) June 5, 2019

The third keynote by Daniel Quercia was impressive. The Good City Life project about applying data to understand cities just makes you think. You really must check it out. More to this point of target schemas, however, was the use of these little conceptual descriptions in the various maps and analytics he did. By, for example, thinking about how to define urban sounds or feelings on a walking route, his team was able to develop these fantastic and useful views of the city.

Impressive data insights into cities from @danielequercia https://t.co/hfGMovdsDS #eswc2019 pic.twitter.com/wrg6WhkUke

— Paul Groth (@pgroth) June 6, 2019

I think the next step will be to automatically generate these target schemas. There was already some work headed into that direction. One was Generating Semantic Aspects for Queries , which was about how to use document mining to select which attributes for entities one should show for an entity. Think of it as selecting what should show up in a knowledge graph entity panel. Likewise, in the talk on Latent Relational Model for Relation Extraction, Gaetano Rossiello talked about how to think about using analogies between example entities to help extract these kind of schemas for small domains:


I think this notion is worth exploring more.

Feral Spreadsheets

What more can I say:

Great term – feral spreadsheets – @dianamaynard #eswc2019 pic.twitter.com/maSrOt2DCV

— Paul Groth (@pgroth) June 5, 2019

We need more here. Things like MantisTable. Data wrangling is the problem. Talking to Daniel about the data behind his maps just confirmed this problem as well.

Knowledge Graph Engineering

This was a theme that was also at AKBC – the challenge of engineering knowledge graphs. As an example, the Knowledge Graph Building workshop was packed. I really enjoyed the discussion around how to evaluate the effectiveness of data mapping languages led by Ben de Meester especially with emphasis around developer usability. The experiences shared by the team from the industrial automation from Festo were really insightful. It’s amazing to see how knowledge graphs have been used to accelerate their product development process but also the engineering effort and challenges to get there.


Likewise, Peter Haase in his audacious keynote (no slides – only a demo) showed how far we’ve come in the underlying platforms and technology to be able to create commercially useful knowledge graphs. This is really thanks to him and the other people who straddle the commercial/research line. It was neat to see the Open PHACTS style biomedical knowledge graph being built using SPARQL and api service wrappers:


However, still these kinds of wrappers need to be built, the links need to be created and more importantly the data needs to be made available. A summary of challenges:

#eswc2019 Industry presentation by @Siemens Very interesting analysis of the challenges of constructing and using Knowledge Graphs. @eswc_conf pic.twitter.com/4veU79x0CH

— Miriam Fernandez (@miriam_fs) June 4, 2019

Overall, I really enjoyed the conference. I got a chance to spend sometime with a bunch of members of the community and it’s exciting to see the continued excitement and the number of new research questions.

Random Notes


Source: Think Links

Posted in Paul Groth, Staff Blogs

Exploring Automatic Recognition of Labanotation Dance Scores

[This post describes the research of Michelle de Böck and is based on her MSc Information Sciences thesis.]

Digitization of cultural heritage content allows for the digital archiving, analysis and other processing of that content. The practice of scanning and transcribing books, newspapers and images, 3d-scanning artworks or digitizing music has opened up this heritage for example for digital humanities research or even for creative computing. However, with respect to the performing arts, including theater and more specifically dance, digitization is a serious research challenge. Several dance notation schemes exist, with the most established one being Labanotation, developed in 1920 by Rudolf von Laban. Labanotation uses a vertical staff notation to record human movement in time with various symbols for limbs, head movement, types and directions of movements.

Generated variations of movements used for training the recognizers

Where for musical scores, good translations to digital formats exist (e.g. MIDI), for Lanabotation, these are lacking. While there are structured formats (LabanXML, MovementXML), the majority of content still only exists either in non-digitized form (on paper) or in scanned images. The research challenge of Michelle de Böck’s thesis therefore was to identify design features for a system capable of recognizing Labanotation from scanned images.

Examples of Labanotation files used in the evaluation of the system.

Michelle designed such a system and implemented this in MATLAB, focusing on a few movement symbols. Several approaches were developed and compared, including approaches using pre-trained neural networks for image recognition (AlexNet). This approach outperformed others, resulting in a classification accuracy of 78.4%. While we are still far from developing a full-fledged OCR system for Labanotation, this exploration has provided valuable insights into the feasibility and requirements of such a tool.

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer

The ESWC2019 PhD Symposium

As part of the ESWC 2019 conference program, the ESWC PhD Symposium was held in wonderful Portoroz, Slovenia. The aim of the symposium, this year organized by Maria-Esther Vidal and myself, is to provide a forum for PhD students in the area of Semantic Web to present their work and discuss their projects with peers and mentors.

Jana Vatascinova talks about the all-important challenge of ontology matching in the biomedical domain. #ESWC2019 pic.twitter.com/EwY2gPhf13

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) June 2, 2019

Even though this year, we received 5 submissions, all of the submissions were of high quality, so the full day symposium featured five talks by both early and middle/late stage PhD students. The draft papers can be found on the symposium web page and our opening slides can be found here. Students were mentored by amazing mentors to improve their papers and presentation slides. A big thank you to those mentors: Paul Groth, Rudi Studer, Maria Maleshkova, Philippe Cudre-Mauroux,  and Andrea Giovanni Nuzzolese.

Stefan Schlobach is our keynote speaker in the #ESWC2019 PhD symposium. pic.twitter.com/XMflRJSLIl

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) June 2, 2019

The program also featured a keynote by Stefan Schlobach, who talked about the road to a PhD “and back again”. He discussed a) setting realistic goals, b) finding your path towards those goals and c) being a responsible scientist and person after the goal is reached.

#eswc2019 Doctoral Consortium. Very interesting list on how not to get a PhD, or things you should not do if you want to get a PhD. Check the TED talk about procrastination 😉 @Stefan Schlobach pic.twitter.com/nwelUYssCN

— Miriam Fernandez (@miriam_fs) June 2, 2019

Students also presented their work through a poster session and the posters will also be found at the main conference poster session on tuesday 4 June.

No time for an after-lunch dip! Markus Schröder from DFKI started his presentation on semantic enrichment of enterprise data. #ESWC2019 phd symposium pic.twitter.com/BBftLtwgbr

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) June 2, 2019

Want to see what the next wave of #semanticweb researchers are working on? Come see us *now* at the #eswc2019 PhD symposium poster session. pic.twitter.com/ojQFXrY94Q

— Victor de Boer (@victordeboer) June 2, 2019

Share This:

Source: Victor de Boer

Posted in Staff Blogs, Victor de Boer