Based Search," by Peter Clark, John Thompson, Heather Holmback, and Lizbeth Duncan of the Boeing Co., demonstrated a concept-based search engine using an AI thesaurus with unambiguous control terms and relationships for ontology links for finding relevance when searching for human experts in the field.

The Workshop on Intelligent Information Integration (III), organized in conjunction with the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, was held on 31 July 1999 in Stockholm, Sweden. Approximately 40 people participated, and nearly 20 papers were presented. This packed workshop schedule resulted from a large number of submissions that made it difficult to reserve discussion time without rejecting an unproportionately large number of papers. Participants included scientists and practitioners from industry and academia. Topics included query planning, applications of III, mediator architectures, and the use of ontologies for III.

Twenty-six people participated, and 16 papers were presented. The first day was devoted to paper presentations and discussions. The second (half) day, a joint session was held with two other workshops: (1) Building, Maintaining, and Using Organizational Memories and (2) Intelligent Information Integration. The reason for the joint session was that in all three workshops, ontologies play a prominent role, and the goal was to bring together researchers working on related issues in different communities.

The Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods (PSMs), held in conjunction with the Thirteenth Biennial European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-98), was held on 24 to 25 August 1998. Twenty-six people participated, and 16 papers were presented. Participants included scientists and practitioners from both the ontology and PSM communities. The first day was devoted to paper presentations and discussions. The second (half) day, a joint session was held with two other workshops: (1) Building, Maintaining, and Using Organizational Memories and (2) Intelligent Information Integration. The reason for the joint session was that in all three workshops, ontologies play a prominent role, and the goal was to bring together researchers working on related issues in different communities. The workshop ended with a discussion about the added value of a combined ontologies-PSM workshop compared to separate workshops.

This article presents an experiment of expertise capitalization in road traffic-accident analysis. We study the integration of models of expertise from different members of an organization into a coherent corporate expertise model. We present our elicitation protocol and the generic models and tools we exploited for knowledge modeling in this context of multiple experts. Finally, we discuss the results of our experiment from a knowledge capitalization viewpoint.

This article presents an experiment of expertise capitalization in road traffic-accident analysis. We study the integration of models of expertise from different members of an organization into a coherent corporate expertise model. We present our elicitation protocol and the generic models and tools we exploited for knowledge modeling in this context of multiple experts. We compare the knowledge models obtained for seven experts in accidentology and their representation through conceptual graphs. Finally, we discuss the results of our experiment from a knowledge capitalization viewpoint.

To remain competitive, enterprises must become increasingly agile and integrated across their functions. Enterprise models play a critical role in this integration, enabling better designs for enterprises, analysis of their performance, and management of their operations. This article motivates the need for enterprise models and introduces the concepts of generic and deductive enterprise models. It reviews research to date on enterprise modeling and considers in detail the Toronto virtual enterprise effort at the University of Toronto.

We have selected 10 specific projects for this study, including general ontologies, domain-specific ones, and one knowledge representation system. The comparison framework includes general characteristics, such as the purpose of an ontology, its coverage (general or domain specific), its size, and the formalism used. Characteristics that describe the content of an ontology include taxonomic organization, types of concept covered, top-level divisions, internal structure of concepts, representation of part-whole relations, and the presence and nature of additional axioms. By identifying the similarities and differences among existing ontologies, we clarify the range of alternatives in creating a standard framework for ontology design.

It comprises activities Systems, Knowledge Representation managing an interaction. On the focused on the organization, acquiring and Reasoning, and Knowledge Discovery. Wide Web and will remain available in any system that aims to tutor users The KM community has been at ksi.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/AIKM97. Cross-language text retrieval (CLTR) is the problem of matching a query in The presentations made at this symposium This symposium brought together one language to related documents in dealt with vastly different environments, researchers in natural language processing other languages. As internet resources ranging from digital libraries (NLP) from both academia such as the World Wide Web have and broadcast news archives to virtual and industry, including service become global networks, many new reality and, of course, the web.

In this article, we develop a framework for comparing ontologies and place a number of the more prominent ontologies into it. We have selected 10 specific projects for this study, including general ontologies, domain-specific ones, and one knowledge representation system. The comparison framework includes general characteristics, such as the purpose of an ontology, its coverage (general or domain specific), its size, and the formalism used. It also includes the design process used in creating an ontology and the methods used to evaluate it. Characteristics that describe the content of an ontology include taxonomic organization, types of concept covered, top-level divisions, internal structure of concepts, representation of part-whole relations, and the presence and nature of additional axioms. Finally, we consider what experiments or applications have used the ontologies. Knowledge sharing and reuse will require a common framework to support interoperability of independently created ontologies. Our study shows there is great diversity in the way ontologies are designed and the way they represent the world. By identifying the similarities and differences among existing ontologies, we clarify the range of alternatives in creating a standard framework for ontology design.