Methods Inf Med 2009; 48(02): 184-189
DOI: 10.3414/ME9221
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

Granularity Issues in the Alignment of Upper Ontologies

S. Schulz
1   Institute of Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany
,
M. Boeker
1   Institute of Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany
,
H. Stenzhorn
1   Institute of Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Freiburg, Germany
,
J. Niggemann
2   CompuGROUP Holding AG, Koblenz, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

18 February 2009

Publication Date:
17 January 2018 (online)

Summary

Objectives: The application of upper ontologies has been repeatedly advocated for to support the interoperability between different domain ontologies for facilitating the shared use of data within and across disciplines. BioTop is an upper domain ontology that aims at aligning more specialized biomolecular and biomedical ontologies. The integration of BioTop and the upper ontology Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) is the objective of this study.

Methods: BFO was manually integrated into BioTop, observing both its free text and formal definitions. BioTop classes were attached to BFO classes as children and BFO classes were reused in the formal definitions of BioTop classes. A description logics reasoner was used to check the logical consistency of this integration. The domain adequacy was checked manually by domain experts.

Results: Logical inconsistencies were found by the reasoner when applying the BFO classes for fiat and aggregated objects in some of the BioTop class definitions. We discovered that the definition of those particular classes in BFO was dependent on the notion of physical connectedness. Hence we suggest ignoring a BFO subbranch in order not to hinder cross-granularity integration.

Conclusion: Without introducing a more sophisticated theory of granularity, the described problems cannot be properly dealt with. Whereas we argue that an upper ontology should be granularity-independent, we illustrate how granularity-dependent domain ontologies can still be embedded into the framework of BioTop in combination with BFO.

 
  • References

  • 1 Bodenreider O. The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS): integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic Acids Res 2004; 32: 267-270.
  • 2 IHTSDO (International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation).. Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine – Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT), 2008. Available from: http://www.//ihtsdo.org/snomed-ct. Accessed September 1 2008
  • 3 Smith B, Ashburner M, Rosse C, Bard J, Bug W, Ceusters W, Goldberg L, Eilbeck K, Ireland A, Mungall C, OBI Consortium. Leontis N, Rocca-Serra P, Ruttenberg A, Sansone S, Scheuermann R, Shah N, Whetzel P, Lewis S. The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotechnol 2007; 25 (11) 1251-1255.
  • 4 Ku’nierczyk W. Nontological engineering. International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, 11, 2006. Proceedings… Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2006. pp 39-50.
  • 5 Schulz S, Stenzhorn H, Boeker M, Klar R, Smith B. Clinical ontologies interfacing the real world. In: 3rd International Conference on Semantic Technologies (i-semantics 2007), Graz, Austria: September 2007. pp 356-363.
  • 6 Gruber T. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition (Special issue: Current issues in knowledge modelling), v. 5, n. 2, pp 199-200, 1993
  • 7 Quine O. On what there is. In: Gibson R. Quintessence – Basic Readings from the Philosophy of W. V. Quine. Cambridge: Belknap Press, Harvard University; 2004
  • 8 Hofweber T. Logic and Ontology, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 2004. Available from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-ontology. Accessed September 1, 2008
  • 9 Obrst L, Cassidy P, Ray S, Smith B, Soergel D, West M, Yim P. The 2006 Upper Ontology Summit Joint Communique. Applied Ontology 2006; 1 (02) 203-211.
  • 10 McCray A, Yang Y, Patil R. The UMLS Semantic Network. In: Proc. of the 13th Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care; 1989 pp 503-507.
  • 11 Rector A, Rogers J, Pole P. The GALEN High Level Ontology. In: Proc. of the 14th International Congress of the European Federation for Medical Informatics 1996 pp 174-178.
  • 12 Gangemi A, Guarino N, Masolo C, Oltramari A. Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In: Proc. of the Internat. Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW); 2002
  • 13 Heller B, Herre H. Ontological categories in GOL. Axiomathes 2004; 14 (01) 57-76.
  • 14 Grenon P, Smith B, Goldberg L. Biodynamic ontology: applying BFO in the biomedical domain. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Medical Ontologies; 2004 pp 20-38.
  • 15 Rector A, Stephens R, Rogers J. Simple Bio Upper Ontology,. http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~rectorontologies/sample-top-bio. Last accessed: August 15, 2008
  • 16 Höhndorf R. GFO-Bio: A biomedical core ontology. http://onto.eva.mpg.de/gfo-bio.html. Last accessed: October 15, 2007
  • 17 Stenzhorn H, Beisswanger E, Schulz S. Towards a top-domain ontology for linking biomedical ontologies. In: Proc. of the 12th World Congress on Medical Informatics 2007 pp 1225-1229.
  • 18 Schulz S, Hahn U. Towards the ontological foundations of symbolic biological theories. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 2007; 39 (03) 237-250.
  • 19 Schulz S, Stenzhorn H. BioTop Website: http://purl.org/biotop. Accessed September 1, 2008
  • 20 Smith B, Varzi A. Fiat and bona fide boundaries. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 2000; 60 (02) 401-420.
  • 21 Smith M, Welty C, McGuiness D. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide, W3C Recommendation, 2004. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide. Accessed September 1, 2008
  • 22 Knublauch H, Dameron O, Musen M. Weaving the biomedical Semantic Web with the Protege OWL Plugin. In: Hahn U, Schulz S, Cornet R. editors. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Formal Biomedical Knowledge Representation (KRMED 2004);. 2004. pp 39-47.
  • 23 Sirin E, Parsia B, Grau B, Kalyanpur A, Katz Y. Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics 2007; 5 (02) 51-53.
  • 24 Tsarkov D, Horrocks I. FaCT++ Description Logic Reasoner: System Description. International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, 8, 2006. Proceedings… Heidelberg: Springer; 2006. pp 292-297.
  • 25 BFO/MedO: Basic Formal Ontology and Medical Ontology.. Draft 0.0005. http://ontology.buffalo.edu/bfo/BFO.pdf.
  • 26 Keet CM, Artale A. Representing and Reasoning over a Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relations. Applied Ontology Special Issue on Ontological Foundations for Conceptual Models 2007 2 (4): in print.
  • 27 Keet CM. (2006a). A taxonomy of types of granularity. IEEE Conference in Granular Computing (GrC2006), May 10-12, 2006, Atlanta, USA: IEEE Computer Society; (ISBN 1-4244–0134–8)/IEEE Xplore, 1, pp 106-111.
  • 28 Keet CM, Kumar A. Applying partitions to infectious diseases. XIX International Congress of the European Federation for Medical Informatics (MIE2005), August 28-31, 2005, Geneva, Switzerland. 2005. In: Engelbrecht R, Geissbuhler A, Lovis C, Mihalas G. (eds.) Connecting Medical Informatics and bioinformatics, Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2005. pp 1236-1241.
  • 29 Varzi A. Mereological commitments. Dialectica 2000; 54: 283-305.