Geotechnical Geospatial Semantics and Interoperable GIS : the Case of <i>GeoSeism</i> for Automated Seismic Microzonation Studies


  • Maria Apostolos Papadopoulou 1 Department of Civil Engineering, Alexander University of Applied Sciences of Thessaloniki, Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece 2 Thessaly Region Local Government, Larissa, Greece



Geotechnical Engineering, Geographical Information System (GIS), Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model (LCIM), Seismic Microzonation, Semantic Interoperability, Semantic Interpreter (SI)


GeoSeism is a GIS-based application software which is intended to provide more automated seismic microzonation studies by utilizing the interoperable GIS technology. Proving the applicability of the LCIM (Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model), it portrays an implemented combination of technical along with semantic and conceptual interoperability maturity, in which the modelling level of interoperability consists of more than one data end-users. Based on the experiences distilled from an extensive case study, this case faces problems of data inconsistency related to semantics. Inconsistency restricts the capability to derive geotechnical meanings from the employed geospatial data. The role of the semantic interoperability level is to appropriately process the meanings of the exchanged data so that the end-users can efficiently use these data. Otherwise, data are not fully applicable on geotechnical methodologies. The interoperation with the expert knowledge algorithm Semantic Interpreter Pythia (SI) proved especially helpful to undertake the role to improve the semantic interoperability in an automated manner. It modeled the semantics of data prior to data exchange. This innovative type of semantic interpretation is not related to the conventional search processes but to the spatial data process and the overcoming of a variety of many semantic-related data inconsistency. Distributed systems could evolve into geotechnical interoperable GIS combining typical application software with an SI. GeoSeism implemented a first concept of interoperable GIS which can model geotechnical semantics to ensure semantic interoperability, as well as allows for current or future interchange of geotechnical operations and applicable data for the benefit of engineers and GIS.


Papadopoulou M. A., Ioannidis G. S., “Mobilizing the Semantic Interpreter Pythia – Teaching Engineering Students to Integrate GIS and Soil Data During In Situ Measurementsâ€, In: Auer M., Tsiatsos T. (eds) Interactive Mobile Communication Technologies and Learning. IMCL 2017 (Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing), vol. 725, Springer, Cham, 2018 a. DOI

Papadopoulou Maria. A. (2018b), “Semantic Interpreter Pythia : GIS-based Expert Knowledge Algorithm for Automated Geotechnical Soil Profiling of Applicable Dataâ€, Asian Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 6, No. 6 (ISSN: 2321 – 2462).

Kramer S. L., “Geotechnical earthquake engineeringâ€, In: Prentice-Hall international series in civil engineering and engineering mechanicsâ€, Prentice-Hall New Jersey, 1996.

Turnitsa, C. D., “Extending the Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Modelâ€, Proceedings IEEE Summer Computer Simulation Conference, IEEE CS Press, 2005.

IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), “Standard Computer Dictionary: A Compilation of IEEE Standard Computer Glossariesâ€, New York, NY: 1990.(iftikahr)

Wikipedia, “Interoperabilityâ€

Berners-Lee Tim, Fischetti Mark., and Dertouzos T. Michael., “Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by its Inventorâ€, Harper, San Francisco, 1999.

ESRI, “Spatial Data Standards and GIS Interoperabilityâ€, An ESRI White Paper, January 2003.

Laurini R., Yétongnon K., Benslimane D., “GIS interoperability, from problems to solutionsâ€, Advanced Geographic Information Systems, Vol. II, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS).

Goodchild Michael , Egenhofer Max , Fegeas Robin , Kottman Cliff , “Interoperating Geographic Information Systemsâ€, (Book), 1991. DOI

Marr J. Andrew, Pascoe T. Richard, and Benwell L. George, “Interoperable GIS and Spatial Process Modellingâ€, Proceedings of GeoComputation ‘97 & SIRC ’97, 1997.

ISO/TC 211, “Geographic_information/Geomaticsâ€, “Geographic_data_and_informationâ€.

Maheshwari D. et al., “Developing measures for benchmarking the interoperability of public organizationsâ€, Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on eGovernment (ECEG), 2011.

Bishr A.Y., Pundt H., Kuhn W., Radwan M., “Probing the Concept of Information Communities-A First Step Toward Semantic Interoperabilityâ€, In: Goodchild M., Egenhofer M., Fegeas R., Kottman C. (eds) (Interoperating Geographic Information Systems), The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 495. Springer, Boston, MA, 1999.

Tolk, A. and Muguira, J.A., “The Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model (LCIM)â€, Proceedings IEEE Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop, IEEE CS Press, 2003.

Page, E.H., Briggs, R., and Tufarolo, J.A., “Toward a Family of Maturity Models for the Simulation Interconnection Problemâ€, Proceedings IEEE Spring Simulation Interoperability Workshop, IEEE CS Press, 2004.

Guédria Wided, Naudet Yannick, and Chen David, “Interoperability Maturity Models – Survey and Comparisonâ€, R. Meersman, Z. Tari, and P. Herrero (Eds.): OTM 2008 Workshops, LNCS 5333, pp. 273–282, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.

Tolk Andreas, Diallo Y. Saikou, Turnitsa Charles, “Applying the Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model in Support of Integratabilityâ€, Interoperability , and Composability for System-of-Systems Engineering, 2013.

Geographic Information Systems, "GIS Design: A Review of Current Issues in Interoperability", Geography Compass. 3: 1105–1124. doi:10.1111/j.1749-8198.2009.00241.x.

Tolk Andreas, "What Comes After the Semantic Web - PADS Implications for the Dynamic Web", PADS, pp. 55-62, 20th Workshop onPrinciples of Advanced and Distributed Simulation (PADS'06), 2006.

Janssen M., “Measuring and Benchmarking the Back-end of E-Government: A Participative Self-assessment Approachâ€, In: Wimmer M.A., Chappelet JL., Janssen M., Scholl H.J. (eds) Electronic Government. EGOV 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6228. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010.

Thoen B., “Interactive Mapping and GIS Thrive on the Webâ€, GIS world, 8(10): 58-59, 1995.

Davis P. K., and Anderson R. H., “Improving the Composability of Department of Defense Models and Simulationsâ€, RAND Corporation, 2003.

Wikipedia, “Semantic Interoperabilityâ€

Kulhawy F. H., and Mayne P. W., “Manual on estimating soil properties for foundation designâ€, Report EL6800. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, 306 p, 1990.

Papadopoulou Maria. A., “Automated methodology for seismic hazard microzonation studies of interoperable geographic information systems – the case study of a Hellenic city†(Doctoral Thesis), Department of Civil Engineering, University of Thessaly, Greece, 2017. (in Greek at

SDGEE. Research Unit of Soil Dynamics and Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, “Microzonationâ€.

Papadopoulou Maria. A. (under review). “HelGeoRDaS_uTH: A Multi-Thematic Geotechnical Database System About The Subsurface Soil And Underground Infrastructures In Thessaly (Greece)â€, International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research (




How to Cite

Papadopoulou, M. A. (2019). Geotechnical Geospatial Semantics and Interoperable GIS : the Case of <i>GeoSeism</i> for Automated Seismic Microzonation Studies. Asian Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(1).