Semantic Interoperability and Coherent Cooperative Games

The junction of semantic interoperability and game theory

Royalty Free image. Victor Morgante and Grok.

This article positions Semantic Interoperability under Coherent Cooperative Games.

…where Semantic Interoperability is defined as:

The ability of computer systems to exchange data with unambiguous, shared meaning.

and where I define Coherent Cooperative Games (CCGs) as:

“If you play, there is only one type of play or move which is that on each move you play the other player wins in their subjective view. The rules of the game are open and coherently known to each player. Play tokens are defined by the rules and may be the rules themselves.” [here]

Within a CCG, you can’t win unless all players have a shared alignment (shared meaning) of what winning means to each player. In data exchange that means that one’s interpretation of the data being exchanged is the same as all other players within the Coherent Cooperative Game.

Let’s face it, computer systems don’t write themselves, and the use of data is not a passive exercise. Either a person or AI wrote the software using the data and CCGs position use (or exchange) of data as moves in a cooperative game. Any divergence from the shared meaning results in the ambiguity that Semantic Interoperability fights the entropy of.

Framework for Semantic Interoperability

If we accept that data exchanged are tokens of a Coherent Cooperative Game where maximal and mutual payoff is achieved when we achieve semantic interoperability under a CCG, CCGs provide a framework for Semantic Interoperability, where different or divergent interpretations of the data are handled under what I call a Differential Interpretation Game (DIG), where one or more plays diverge as to the meaning of the data.

The CCG framework has a State Transition Diagram which caters for the different states of play or any one player, visualised as:

A DIG is where differential interpretations are resolved, resulting in Not Participating, or reengagement within the overall CCG, or a new CCG where all players once again agree on the meaning of the data exchanged.

I would argue that semantic interoperability is not limited to computer systems, and where shared meaning of data/information is a prerequisite of many facets of life, however semantic interoperability has come to be heavily used within the IT/Information Industry over a broad range of enterprises/industries, including Health Care, Finance and Banking, Government/Public Sector/Military/Aerospace, Retail and Logistics, Energy and Utilities and Manufacturing.

Picturing semantic interoperability as a game with a framework, under CCGs, provides a framework for getting to a position where all players within the CCG win when they have a shared interpretation with other players that allows the other players to win on each data exchange because of that shared interpretation. Data, then, becomes as if game tokens withing a cooperative game, rather than a zero-sum (win-lose) game such as chess. Electronic systems then become players within that CCG.

More on Semantic Interoperability

Semantic interoperability refers to the ability of diverse systems to exchange information not just syntactically but with a shared understanding of meaning, ensuring that data is interpreted consistently across boundaries. This is crucial in fields like healthcare, where patient records must be comprehensible across different electronic health record (EHR) systems, or in smart cities, where Internet of Things (IoT) devices need to collaborate seamlessly. The idea is to foster more robust, cooperative digital ecosystems.

Semantic interoperability has roots in the early days of computing, but its urgency amplified with the rise of distributed systems. The term “interoperability” itself emerged where systems needed to “operate together.” Semantic adds the layer of meaning: it’s not enough for data to be transferred; it must be understood in the same way. For instance, if one system records “BP” as blood pressure and another as business partner, misinterpretation could lead to catastrophic errors.

For instance, ISO/IEC 2382 standard (Information Technology — Vocabulary), interoperability is “the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged.” Semantic Interoperability builds on this by ensuring ontological alignment with shared vocabularies and concepts. Ontologies, formalized through languages like OWL (Web Ontology Language) and RDF (Resource Description Framework) are designed to assist in that interoperability. The Semantic Web, pioneered by Tim Berners-Lee in the early 2000s, aims to enable machines to reason about data semantically.

The EHR4CR project in healthcare, for instance, demonstrated how semantic resources can federate Electronic Health Records across borders, allowing phenotype identification in clinical trials. By mapping terms like “diabetes” to standardized ontologies such as SNOMED CT (multilingual clinical healthcare terminology), systems achieve coherence.

Get Victor Morgante’s stories in your inbox

Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.

Remember me for faster sign in

Ontology mismatches in the sphere of Semantic Interoperability contribute to fiscal and temporal costs, which in the case of healthcare can result in serious consequences. So, a framework for resolving and governing semantic interoperability is the focus of concentrated effort, including regular conferences and targeted IT systems and consultancies.

Syntactic interoperability (e.g., via APIs) is easier than semantic, where ambiguity comes into play. Natural language processing (NLP) tools help, but cultural and contextual differences complicate global systems. I.e. We need to consider that players in the game.

The Intersection: Semantic Interoperability as a Coherent Cooperative Game

Semantic interoperability can be modelled as a CCG. Systems are players exchanging data (tokens) under shared rules (ontologies). Coherence requires isomorphic semantic structures. E.g., aligned ontologies ensure every “move” (data exchange) is mutually beneficial, avoiding misinterpretation.

It can’t be easier than that. Either players are engaged in a Coherent Cooperative Game, Not Participating or engaged in a Differential Interpretation game, under a framework that positions Semantic Interoperability under Coherent Cooperative Games.

Thank you for reading. As time permits I will write more on Semantic Interoperability and Coherent Cooperative Games.

More research in this area:

1. The Genesis of Coherent Cooperative Games;
2. Coherent Cooperative Games — Described;
3. Coherent Cooperative Games and the Law;
4. Formal Logic — And Coherent Cooperative Games;

….and…

1. The Atoms of Knowledge;
2. All of Logic is a Game;
3. What is Formal Logic;
4. Applied Use of Ehrenfeucht Fraisse Games;
5. What is a Graph Database;

…and…

1. The Atoms of Knowledge;
2. The Richmond Architecture;

…and where it all started:

1. Morphing Conceptual Models.

============End=============