Tobias Kuhn

Memes are the cultural equivalent of genes that spread across human culture by means of imitation. What makes a meme and what distinguishes it from other forms of information, however, is still poorly understood. Our analysis of memes in the scientific literature reveals that they are governed by a surprisingly simple relationship between frequency of occurrence and the degree to which they propagate along the citation graph. We propose a simple formalization of this pattern and validate it with data from close to 50 million publication records from the Web of Science, PubMed Central, and the American Physical Society. Evaluations relying on human annotators, citation network randomizations, and comparisons with several alternative approaches confirm that our formula is accurate and effective, without a dependence on linguistic or ontological knowledge and without the application of arbitrary thresholds or filters.

Making available and archiving scientific results is for the most part still considered the task of classical publishing companies, despite the fact that classical forms of publishing centered around printed narrative articles no longer seem well-suited in the digital age. In particular, there exist currently no efficient, reliable, and agreed-upon methods for publishing scientific datasets, which have become increasingly important for science. Here we propose to design scientific data publishing as a Web-based bottom-up process, without top-down control of central authorities such as publishing companies. We present a protocol and a server network to decentrally store and archive data in the form of nanopublications, an RDF-based format to represent scientific data with formal semantics. We show how this approach allows researchers to produce, publish, retrieve, address, verify, and recombine datasets and their individual nanopublications in a reliable and trustworthy manner, and we argue that this architecture could be used for the Semantic Web in general. Our evaluation of the current small network shows that this system is efficient and reliable, and we discuss how it could grow to handle the large amounts of structured data that modern science is producing and consuming.

The existing Semantic Web languages have a very technical focus and fail to provide good usability for users with no background in formal methods. We argue that controlled natural languages like Attempto Controlled English (ACE) can solve this problem. ACE is a subset of English that can be translated into various logic based languages, among them the Semantic Web standards OWL and SWRL. ACE is accompanied by a set of tools, namely the parser APE, the Attempto Reasoner RACE, the ACE View ontology and rule editor, the semantic wiki AceWiki, and the Protune policy framework. The applications cover a wide range of Semantic Web scenarios, which shows how broadly ACE can be applied. We conclude that controlled natural languages can make the Semantic Web better understandable and more usable.

Attempto Controlled English (ACE) is a controlled natural language, i.e. a precisely defined subset of English that can automatically and unambiguously be translated into first-order logic. ACE may seem to be completely natural, but is actually a formal language, concretely it is a first-order logic language with an English syntax. Thus ACE is human and machine understandable. ACE was originally intended to specify software, but has since been used as a general knowledge representation language in several application domains, most recently for the semantic web. ACE is supported by a number of tools, predominantly by the Attempto Parsing Engine (APE) that translates ACE texts into Discourse Representation Structures (DRS), a variant of first-order logic. Other tools include the Attempto Reasoner RACE, the AceRules system, the ACE View plug-in for the Protégé ontology editor, AceWiki, and the OWL verbaliser.

This collaborative report highlights the properties and prospects of Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs). The report poses a range of questions concerning the goals of the CNL, the design, the linguistic aspects, the relationships and evaluation of CNLs, and the application tools. In posing the questions, the report attempts to structure the field of CNLs and to encourage further systematic discussion by researchers and developers.