![](bg8.png)
tags for new documents. These new tags are in-
cluded in its own concept lattice, but it may be pos-
sible old documents should be re-tagged with the
new tag. The re-tagging process would be carried
out by means of the classical completion procedure
and implemented as an agent behaviour. The formal
result that supports this behaviour was presented in
(Alonso-Jim
´
enez et al., 2008) (definability in formal
contexts) in FCA. The new tag will appear as a sug-
gested tag in the user’s older documents preserving
old SB. Thus it completes older tagging by using the
new tag and also preserving the original Stem basis.
Lastly, Users’s Knowledge Conciliation aims to
exploit an important benefit of the Web 2.0, the
sharing of information and knowledge among users.
A potential threat is that semantic techniques are
adapted to each user. Over time, user’s knowledge
can vary a great deal, and this difference could cre-
ate knowledge incompatibility issues. This is because
ontologies evolve with the each user, and not in a
joint manner. In order to navigate through the set
of tags and documents from different users, SinNet
has delegated to agents to make these different con-
ceptualizations compatible. The agent-based concili-
ation algorithm was presented in (Aranda-Corral and
Borrego-D
´
ıaz, 2010). This algorithm’s foundations
are on the basis that conceptual structure associated to
tags gives more information on the user’s tagging (as
in (J
¨
aschke et al., 2008)). Once finished the process,
the agents will get a common context. So they can
extract new concepts and suggestions from a common
context, and therefore, ashared conceptualization.
6 CONCLUSIONS
SinNet is a MW2.0 platform that uses the MMS/SMS
channel for social relationship (WWW platform is
not the user main reference), in its pure mobile ver-
sion, and thus it may avoid the use of Mobile In-
ternet. Most important semantic/reasoning activities
carry out from user’s mobile devices to a MAS. Cog-
nitive tasks performance by agents represented an ef-
fort of agent’s behaviour design.
As MW2.0 project, SinNet seems similar to
SeeMeTV (launched by the mobile network oper-
ator Hutchison 3G UK) using MMS channel for
sharing content. SinNet also shares some fea-
tures with the mobile extension of German video-
sharing platform Clipfish (http://www.clipfish.com)
called ”Handy Clipfish”, as a stand-alone mobile por-
tal. However, SinNet’s basic idea differs from both
ones. Authors do not know of any MW2.0 platforms
based on MMS/SMS channel and semantic features
implemented. SinNet’s tag reasoning is unique. To
the best of our knowledge, no other MW2.0, inten-
sively using FCA tools, exists.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Supported by TIN2009-09492 Spanish Ministry of
Science and Innovation project, co-financed with
FEDER founds. Technological infrastructure was
provided by Minerva project co-financed by Junta de
Andaluc
´
ıa and Vodafone.
REFERENCES
Alonso-Jim
´
enez, J. A., Aranda-Corral, G. A., Borrego-
D
´
ıaz, J., Fern
´
andez-Lebr
´
on, M. M., and Hidalgo-
Doblado, M. J. (2008). Extending attribute explo-
ration by means of boolean derivatives. In Proc.
6th. Conf. Concept Lattices and Their Applications
(CLA2008), pages 121–132.
Aranda-Corral, G. A. and Borrego-D
´
ıaz, J. (2010). Rec-
onciling knowledge in social tagging web services.
In Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on Hybrid AI Systems (HAIS
2010), volume 6077 of Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, pages 383–390.
Aranda-Corral, G. A., Borrego-D
´
ıaz, J., and G
´
omez-Mar
´
ın,
F. (2009). Toward semantic mobile web 2.0 through
multiagent systems. In Proc. 3th KES International
Symposium on Agent and Multi-Agent Systems, Lec-
ture Notes in Computer Science, pages 400–409.
Armstrong, W. W. (1974). Dependency structures of data
base relationships. In IFIP Congress, pages 580–583.
Damme, C. V., Hepp, M., and Siorpaes, K. (2007). Folk-
sontology: An integrated approach for turning folk-
sonomies into ontologies. In Proc. ESWC Workshop
“Bridging the Gap between Semantic Web and Web
2.0” (SemNet 2007), pages 57–70.
Ganter, B. and Wille, R. (1999). Formal Concept Analysis:
Mathematical Foundations. Springer.
Gruber, T. (2007). Ontology of folksonomy: A mash-up of
apples and oranges. Int’l Journal on Semantic Web &
Information Systems, 3(2).
J
¨
aschke, R., Hotho, A., Schmitz, C., Ganter, B., and Stum,
G. (2008). Discovering shared conceptualizations in
folksonomies. Journal Web Semant., 6:38–53.
Kim, H. L., Scerri, S., Breslin, J. G., Decker, S., and Kim,
H. G. (2008). The state of the art in tag ontologies:
a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies. In
Proc. Int. Conf. Dublin Core and Metadata Applica-
tions, pages 128–137.
Martignoni, R. and Stanoevska-Slabeva, K. (2007). Mobile
web 2.0. In Proc. 20th Bled eConference, pages 1–18.
CONCEPTUAL-BASED REASONING IN MOBILE WEB 2.0 BY MEANS MULTIAGENT SYSTEMS - Knowledge
Engineering Notes
183