Skip to main content
Log in

An ontological architecture for orbital debris data

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Earth Science Informatics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This article has been updated

Abstract

The orbital debris problem presents an opportunity for international cooperation toward the mutually beneficial goals of orbital debris prevention, mitigation, remediation, and improved space situational awareness (SSA). Achieving these goals requires sharing orbital debris and other SSA data. Toward this, I present an ontological architecture for the orbital debris and related domains, taking steps in the creation of an orbital debris ontology. The purpose of the ontology is to capture general scientific domain knowledge; formally represent the entities within the domain; form, structure, and standardize (where needed) orbital and SSA terminology; and foster semantic interoperability and data-exchange. In doing so I hope to offer a scientifically accurate ontological representation of the orbital domain; contribute to research in astroinformatics, space ontology, and space data management; and improve spaceflight safety by providing a means to capture and communicate informaiton associated with space debris.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 23 February 2021

    The author's contact information has been updated.

Notes

  1. Interoperability, the problems thereof, and the role of ontologies, have been recently discussed in Thanos (2014).

  2. I am primarily concerned with ameliorating the orbital debris situation and ensuring safe space travel, rather than advocating a particular method toward that goal. If ontological approaches prove to be insufficient or simply unhelpful, then there should be no quarrel with seeking alternatives.

  3. The theory of parts and wholes.

  4. I would, however, argue that this depends not only on the requirements, goals of (and problems solved by) the ontology being developed, but whether the reused (or imported) classes accurately reflect the entities in the domain in question.

  5. Pronounced: oh-dough

  6. Mentioned in task 2 from section 4

  7. See: http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/?glossary&term=ephemeris

  8. At the time of this writing I have a philosophical and formal analysis of the category of Orbit in progress.

  9. See also: http://swfound.org/media/6575/swf_iridium_cosmos_collision_fact_sheet_updated_2012.pdf, and http://celestrak.com/events/collision/

  10. Each data element in the TLE can be decomposed into sub-parts as needed.

References

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the journal reviewers and editors for their constructive feedback. Thanks also to Stefano Borgo of ISTC CNR (Italy) and David Vallado of AGI (USA) for their comments and questions on earlier drafts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert J. Rovetto.

Additional information

Communicated by: H. A. Babaie

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rovetto, R.J. An ontological architecture for orbital debris data. Earth Sci Inform 9, 67–82 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-015-0233-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-015-0233-3

Keywords

Navigation