Order:
Disambiguations
Ron Rudnicki [4]Ronald Rudnicki [1]
  1. An Ontological Approach to Representing the Product Life Cycle.J. Neil Otte, Dimitris Kiritsi, Munira Mohd Ali, Ruoyu Yang, Binbin Zhang, Ron Rudnicki, Rahul Rai & Barry Smith - 2019 - Applied Ontology 14 (2):1-19.
    The ability to access and share data is key to optimizing and streamlining any industrial production process. Unfortunately, the manufacturing industry is stymied by a lack of interoperability among the systems by which data are produced and managed, and this is true both within and across organizations. In this paper, we describe our work to address this problem through the creation of a suite of modular ontologies representing the product life cycle and its successive phases, from design to end of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2. What Particulars Are Referred to in EHR Data? A Case Study in Integrating Referent Tracking Into an Electronic Health Record Application.Ron Rudnicki, Werner Ceusters, Shaid Manzoo & Barry Smith - 2007 - In Proceedings of the Annual Symposium of the American Medical Informatics Association, Chicago, IL. Washington, DC: AMIA. pp. 630-634.
    Referent Tracking (RT) advocates the use of instance unique identifiers to refer to the entities comprising the subject matter of patient health records. RT promises many benefits to those who use health record data to improve patient care. To further the adoption of the paradigm we provide an illustration of how data from an EHR application needs to be decomposed in order to make it accord with the tenets of RT. We describe the ontological principles on which this decomposition is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. The Space Object Ontology.Alexander Cox, Christopher Nebelecky, Ronald Rudnicki, William Tagliaferri, John L. Crassidis & Barry Smith - 2016 - In 19th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION 2016). IEEE.
    Achieving space domain awareness requires the identification, characterization, and tracking of space objects. Storing and leveraging associated space object data for purposes such as hostile threat assessment, object identification, and collision prediction and avoidance present further challenges. Space objects are characterized according to a variety of parameters including their identifiers, design specifications, components, subsystems, capabilities, vulnerabilities, origins, missions, orbital elements, patterns of life, processes, operational statuses, and associated persons, organizations, or nations. The Space Object Ontology provides a consensus-based realist framework (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Joint Doctrine Ontology: A Benchmark for Military Information Systems Interoperability.Peter Morosoff, Ron Rudnicki, Jason Bryant, Robert Farrell & Barry Smith - 2015 - In Semantic Technology for Intelligence, Defense and Security (STIDS). CEUR vol. 1325. pp. 2-9.
    When the U.S. conducts warfare, elements of a force are drawn from different services and work together as a single team to accomplish an assigned mission. To achieve such unified action, it is necessary that the doctrines governing the actions of members of specific services be both consistent with and subservient to joint Doctrine. Because warfighting today increasingly involves not only live forces but also automated systems, unified action requires that information technology that is used in joint warfare must be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  46
    Controlled and Uncontrolled English for Ontology Editing.Brian Donohue, Douglas Kutach, Robert Ganger, Ron Rudnicki, Tien Pham, Geeth de Mel, Dave Braines & Barry Smith - 2015 - Semantic Technology for Intelligence, Defense and Security 1523:74-81.
    Ontologies formally represent reality in a way that limits ambiguity and facilitates automated reasoning and data fusion, but is often daunting to the non-technical user. Thus, many researchers have endeavored to hide the formal syntax and semantics of ontologies behind the constructs of Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs), which retain the formal properties of ontologies while simultaneously presenting that information in a comprehensible natural language format. In this paper, we build upon previous work in this field by evaluating prospects of implementing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark