Towards a Semantic Knowledge Treasure for Military Intelligence

  • Sanju MishraEmail author
  • Sarika Jain
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 755)


Information integration is essentially important for military operations because the range of relevant information sources is significantly distinct and dynamic. This work aims to develop a semantic knowledge treasure comprising of military resource ontology and procedures, as a model for better interoperability of heterogeneous resources of Indian Military. This model can interpret and govern the context of military information automatically, thereby facilitating the military commanders with decision making in several operations, such as command and control, weapon selection, situation awareness and many more. To design the military resource ontology, we specify the key concepts of the ontology. These concepts are based on terms extracted from heterogeneous resources. We develop an intelligent tool “QueryOnto” as an interface to the military resource ontology that provides a commander’s decision support service and demonstrates how to apply the military ontology in practice. Web Ontology Language (OWL) and SPARQL query are used to implement the complete task.


Military resource ontology Semantic knowledge treasure OWL SPARQL 



This work was supported by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO, New Delhi) followed by the grant no ERIP/ER/1506048/M/01/1611. The work presented in this paper is done at NIT Kurukshetra, India, where the authors are affiliated to the Department of Computer Applications.


  1. 1.
    Noy, N.F., McGuinness, D.L.: Ontology development 101: a guide to creating your first ontology, Stanford knowledge systems. Laboratory technical report KSL-01-05 and Stanford medical informatics technical report SMI-2001-0880 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ra, M., Yoo, D., No, S.: Construction and applicability of military ontology for semantic data processing. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Web Intelligence Mining and Semantics (WIMS’13), 12–14 June 2013, Madrid, Spain (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Matheus, C.J., Kokar, M.M., Baclawski, K.: A core ontology for situation awareness. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information Fusion, Australia (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Army Net-Centric Data Strategy: C4ISR Data Ontology Supports Army Net-Centric Data Strategy.
  5. 5.
    Dianic, A.: The need for scalability in network centric warfare—it’s all in the semantics. SEC BSSD Bull. (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stoutenberg, S., Obrst, L., McCandless, D., Nichols, D., Franklin, P., Prausa, R., Sward, R.: Ontologies for rapid integration of heterogeneous data for command, control and intelligence. In: Ontology for the Intelligence Community (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith, B., Mietinen, K., Mandrivk, W.: The ontology of command and control. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nguyen, D.N., Kopena, J.B., Loo, B.T., Regli, W.C.: Ontologies for distributed command and control messaging. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS) (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Valentina, D.: Developing a core ontology to improve military intelligence analysis. Int. J. Knowl.-Based Intell. Eng. Syst. 17, 29–36 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Emily, L., Nguyen, D.N., Marcello, B., William, C.R., Joseph, B.K., Thomas, W.: Military ontologies for information dissemination at the tactical edge. JOWO@ IJCAI (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, X.H., Zhang, D.Q., Gu, T., Pung, H.K.: Ontology based context modeling and reasoning using OWL. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Annual Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smart, P.R., Russell, A., Shadbolt, N., Schraefel, M.C., Carr, L.A.: AKTiveSA: a technical demonstrator system for enhanced situation awareness in military operations other than war. Comput. J. 50, 703–716 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yoo, D., No, S., Ra, M.: A practical military ontology construction for the intelligent army tactical command information system. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 9(1), 93–100 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dorion, E., Matheus, C.J., Kokar, M.M.: Towards a formal ontology for military coalition operations. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    MIP: Multilateral interoperability programme, overview of the c2 information exchange data model (C2IEDM) (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee, C.H.: Phase I Report for Plan Ontology. DSO National Labs, Singapore (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Heerden, R.V., Chan, P., Leenen, L., Theron, J.: Using an ontology for network attack planning. Int. J. Cyber Warfare Terror. 6(3) (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mishra, S., Malik, S., Jain, N.K., Jain, S.: A realist framework for ontologies and the semantic web. J. Procedia Comput. Sci. 70(2), 483–490 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knublauch, H., Fergerson, R., Noy, N.F., Musen, M.: The prot´eg´e OWL plugin: an open development environment for semantic web applications. In: Proceedings of ISWC 2004, number 3298 in LNCS, pp. 229–243 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    Matuszek, C., Cabral, J., Witbrock, M., DeOliveira, J.: An introduction to the syntax and content of Cyc. In: AAAI Spring Symposium (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Niles, I., Pease, A.: Towards a standard upper ontology. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS) (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A., Schneider, L.: Sweetening ontologies with dolce. In: Proceedings of the European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling, and Management (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jain, S., Mehla, S., Mishra, S.: An ontology for natural disasters with exceptions. In: International Conference System Modeling & Advancement in Research Trends IEEE-Explore, pp. 232–237 (2016)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mishra, S., Jain, S.: A study of various approaches and tools on ontology. In: IEEE Conference CICT 2015 in ABES College of Engineering, pp. 57–61 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Technology KurukshetraKurukshetraIndia

Personalised recommendations