An OWL-based decision support framework for PET trade-offs in MaaS data sharing
Résumé fourni par la source
Backend data-sharing in Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) ecosystems involves multiple business entities—including MaaS providers, mobility operators, payment processors, and regulators—coordinating real-time services across organizational boundaries [2–4]. Privacy-Enhancing Technologies (PETs) such as Federated Learning, Secure Multi-Party Computation, and Differential Privacy offer technical solutions for safeguarding sensitive data in these workflows, but they introduce complex trade-offs in performance, cost, utility, and compliance [2, 3]. Existing PET literature often emphasizes user-facing or cloud-level applications, leaving a gap in structured decision support for inter-organizational PET selection in B2B environments [7]. This paper presents an ontology-based framework for modeling PET trade-offs in MaaS backend flows [2]. Our contributions include: (1) the formalization of PET-related trade-offs and stakeholder priorities, (2) the development of a Web Ontology Language (OWL)-based ontology supporting PET reasoning, and (3) two use cases—’booking flow’ and ’federated coordination’—illustrating how the ontology enables structured decision support across stakeholder roles and data-sharing scenarios [2].This work addresses a gap identified in prior MaaS and PET literature: the absence of structured decision-support for backend, multi-stakeholder data sharing. The proposed ontology is intended as a foundation for simulation-based and empirical validation in future studies.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- An OWL-based decision support framework for PET trade-offs in MaaS data sharing
- Date Crossref
- 01/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.