IoT Semantic Interoperability for Active and Healthy Ageing
325
This chapter describes an AHA use case in which semantic interoperability is
provided in order to improve different systems and service availability, in addition to
allowing the exchange of devices and services between different platforms, as well as
the incorporation of new services and platforms. The European project ACTIVAGE
[15] aims to multiply the benefits obtained through the use of IoT in Elderly Smart
Homes by enabling semantic interoperability and co-operation across these Smart
Home clusters located in 12 different cities and regions across Europe. In this way,
services from other clusters can be employed, multiplying the number of available
services, current services can be enhanced, and new services can be built fruit of this
interoperability. The enablement of semantic interoperability across these systems
leads to a significant enhancement of the quality of life of aged population living at
their smart homes.
Current methods that enable IoT interoperability are explained in this chapter, as
well as the interoperability solution employed in this AHA case study. Technically,
the interoperability solution applied is mainly composed by a semantic translator that
performs translations to/from a central AHA ontology, managing real-time streams of
data. Additionally, other elements are necessary: a syntactic translator and a communication broker. The syntactic translator transforms the message syntactic format of
the message into a serialization of RDF to feed the semantic translator. The broker
handles the communication of real-time data flows of data between platforms. By
these means, communication and a common semantic understanding of the information are established between different IoT systems. This technical solution is
described in a following section.
Moreover, an overview of the AHA case study is provided, as well as a description of the application of the semantic framework in the ACTIVAGE ecosystem,
explaining its implication in the AHA systems and the benefits that provides. Finally,
conclusions of this chapter are presented.
2 Semantic Interoperability
There are different levels of interoperability (namely, technical, syntactic and
semantic), being the semantic interoperability the highest level or layer, which
requires the fulfilment of the other types (technical and syntactic) (Fig. 1).
Technical interoperability refers to the capability to establish communication
between different systems or applications to the extent of enabling message exchange,
but without implying correct understanding of the content or even being able to read
the data received [16]. This type of interoperability generally requires the enablement
of machine-to-machine (M2M) communication. Network connectivity is therefore a
requirement [17].
Syntactic interoperability refers to the system capability to appropriately interpret the message structure of information received from other system or external
element. This fact implies the ability to read the message content, but not necessarily
understanding the meaning of the information contained [18]. For example, syntactic
325
This chapter describes an AHA use case in which semantic interoperability is
provided in order to improve different systems and service availability, in addition to
allowing the exchange of devices and services between different platforms, as well as
the incorporation of new services and platforms. The European project ACTIVAGE
[15] aims to multiply the benefits obtained through the use of IoT in Elderly Smart
Homes by enabling semantic interoperability and co-operation across these Smart
Home clusters located in 12 different cities and regions across Europe. In this way,
services from other clusters can be employed, multiplying the number of available
services, current services can be enhanced, and new services can be built fruit of this
interoperability. The enablement of semantic interoperability across these systems
leads to a significant enhancement of the quality of life of aged population living at
their smart homes.
Current methods that enable IoT interoperability are explained in this chapter, as
well as the interoperability solution employed in this AHA case study. Technically,
the interoperability solution applied is mainly composed by a semantic translator that
performs translations to/from a central AHA ontology, managing real-time streams of
data. Additionally, other elements are necessary: a syntactic translator and a communication broker. The syntactic translator transforms the message syntactic format of
the message into a serialization of RDF to feed the semantic translator. The broker
handles the communication of real-time data flows of data between platforms. By
these means, communication and a common semantic understanding of the information are established between different IoT systems. This technical solution is
described in a following section.
Moreover, an overview of the AHA case study is provided, as well as a description of the application of the semantic framework in the ACTIVAGE ecosystem,
explaining its implication in the AHA systems and the benefits that provides. Finally,
conclusions of this chapter are presented.
2 Semantic Interoperability
There are different levels of interoperability (namely, technical, syntactic and
semantic), being the semantic interoperability the highest level or layer, which
requires the fulfilment of the other types (technical and syntactic) (Fig. 1).
Technical interoperability refers to the capability to establish communication
between different systems or applications to the extent of enabling message exchange,
but without implying correct understanding of the content or even being able to read
the data received [16]. This type of interoperability generally requires the enablement
of machine-to-machine (M2M) communication. Network connectivity is therefore a
requirement [17].
Syntactic interoperability refers to the system capability to appropriately interpret the message structure of information received from other system or external
element. This fact implies the ability to read the message content, but not necessarily
understanding the meaning of the information contained [18]. For example, syntactic