presenting provenance based on user roles
DESCRIPTION
Presenting Provenance Based on User Roles. Experiences with a Solar Physics Data Ingest System. Patrick West, James Michaelis, Peter Fox, Stephan Zednik, Deborah McGuinness – Tetherless World Constellation (http://tw.rpi.edu) – Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (http://www.rpi.edu). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
Presenting ProvenanceBased on User Roles
Experiences with a Solar Physics Data Ingest System
Patrick West, James Michaelis, Peter Fox,Stephan Zednik, Deborah McGuinness – Tetherless World Constellation (http://tw.rpi.edu) – Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (http://www.rpi.edu)
AGUFM2010-IN43C-05
2
Outline of Presentation
• Prior Work in Selective Provenance Presentation• Rationale for User Roles in Presentation• Our Focus Area:
• Semantic Provenance Capture in Data Ingest Systems (SPCDIS)
• Advanced Coronal Observing System (ACOS)• Applying user roles to provenance
3
Prior Work• Significant prior work on provenance views +
abstractions (Moreau, 2009)• Two kinds approaches:
• Expanding Abstract Provenance (Hunter, 2007)• Start with abstract provenance, expand to fine
grained• Abstracting Fine Grained Provenance (Davidson,
2008)• Start with fine-grained, select desired
components, then abstract away unwanted detail
• Common goal: manage complexity of provenance
4
Complexity
5
Kinds of Users
• In context of a Solar Physics Data System, two kinds of expertise:
• Scientific (Astro/Solar Physics)• Technical (Pipeline + components)
• Kinds of Users:• Project coordinators
• Knowledgeable in both science and technical• Outside Domain Experts• Citizen Scientists
6
Rationale for User Roles• Different backgrounds for different users
• E.g., Domain Experts versus Citizen Scientists• Abstract -> Fine-grained: can be time intensive
process• Fine-grained -> Abstract: requires background to
know what you’re looking for• Key idea: Initial presentation of provenance
components can be important for end-users• Finer grained components for experts• Abstract components for novices
Multiple-domain knowledgebase
• Objective: Use Semantic Web technologies to combine provenance from different sources in an interoperable fashion.
7
Provenance Ontology
Solar Physics Domain
DataProcessing
Domain
Extension of work on Virtual Solar
Terrestrial Observatory
http://www.vsto.org
Good/Bad/Ugly (GBU) ratings,
Trust, Quality flags
Proof MarkupLanguage (PML)http://inference-web.org
8
Advanced CoronalObserving System
Mauna Loa Solar Observatory (MLSO)Hawaii
Intensity Images (GIF)
• Raw Image Data
Raw Image DataCaptured by CHIPChromosphericHelium-I ImagePhotometer
• Raw Data Capture
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Data Center.Boulder, CO
Velocity Images (GIF)
• Follow-up Processing on Raw Data • Quality Checking (Images Graded: GOOD, BAD, UGLY)
Publishes
9
Provenance View –Citizen Scientist
Data Capture (MLSO)
Data Processing (NCAR)
Quality Check (NCAR) Good/Bad/
UglyRating
• Raw Image Data
• Calibrated Image Data
10
Provenance View –Domain Expert
Data Capture (MLSO)
Flat Field Calibration
Good/Bad/Ugly Rating
Hot Pixel Correction
Centering/Trimming/Clipping
Compute Sample Means
Determine Test Channel
Assign GBU Rating
Data Processing
Quality Check
11
Use Cases• Different users wish to get overview of provenance
for quality rating.• Citizen Scientist:
• Sees high-level provenance.• Wishes to know more about how Good/Bad/Ugly rating
created• Expands Quality Check node.
• Domain Expert:• Starts with fine-grained provenance view,
generates abstraction exposing quality check processes:
• Compute Sample Means• Determine Test Channel• Assign Good/Bad/Ugly Rating
12
Applying user roles
• Semantic Web (RDFS/OWL) Ontologies for defining domain knowledge needed. Specifically for defining:• Workflow components.• User roles.• Component-Role Mapping.
RDFs – Resource Description Framework schemaOWL – Web Ontology Language
13
Ongoing Issues• Some inherent challenges
• Deciding on how to map components to roles.• Will a given user necessarily fit into one of the pre-
defined roles?• Key research question pursued
• For preserving provenance interface usability, what a good middle ground between:• Going from abstract to fine-grained provenance• As well as fine-grained to abstract provenance
14
Summary• Managing complexity is an important activity for
presenting provenance.• Just providing drill-down from abstract to more
detailed views or fine-grained selection is not enough.
• The user can be provided an initial presentation of content based on their level of knowledge, from general interest to domain expert.
• What is needed is an approach that provides the right level of initial explanation based on the user’s role.
15
References• L. Moreau, 2009. “The foundations for provenance
on the web.”• K. Cheung, J. Hunter, and Lashtabeg, A. and J.
Drennan “SCOPE: a scientific compound object publishing and editing system.” International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(2), 2008.
• S. Cohen-Boulakia, O. Biton, S. Cohen and S. Davidson “Addressing the provenance challenge using ZOOM.” Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 20(5), p. 497-506, 2008.