A framework for analyzing changes in health care lexicons and nomenclatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontologies play a crucial role in current web-based biomedical applications for capturing contextual knowledge in the domain of life sciences. Many of the so-called bio-ontologies and controlled vocabularies are known to be seriously defective from both terminological and ontological perspectives, and do not sufficiently comply with the standards to be considered formai ontologies. Therefore, they are continuously evolving in order to fix the problems and provide valid knowledge. Moreover, many problems in ontology evolution often originate from incomplete knowledge about the given domain. As our knowledge improves, the related definitions in the ontologies will be altered. This problem is inadequately addressed by available tools and algorithms, mostly due to the lack of suitable knowledge representation formalisms to deal with temporal abstract notations, and the overreliance on human factors. Also most of the current approaches have been focused on changes within the internal structure of ontologies, and interactions with other existing ontologies have been widely neglected. In this research, alter revealing and classifying some of the common alterations in a number of popular biomedical ontologies, we present a novel agent-based framework, RLR (Represent, Legitimate, and Reproduce), to semi-automatically manage the evolution of bio-ontologies, with emphasis on the FungalWeb Ontology, with minimal human intervention. RLR assists and guides ontology engineers through the change management process in general, and aids in tracking and representing the changes, particularly through the use of category theory. Category theory has been used as a mathematical vehicle for modeling changes in ontologies and representing agents' interactions, independent of any specific choice of ontology language or particular implementation. We have also employed rule-based hierarchical graph transformation techniques to propose a more specific semantics for analyzing ontological changes and transformations between different versions of an ontology, as well as tracking the effects of a change in different levels of abstractions. Thus, the RLR framework enables one to manage changes in ontologies, not as standalone artifacts in isolation, but in contact with other ontologies in an openly distributed semantic web environment. The emphasis upon the generality and abstractness makes RLR more feasible in the multi-disciplinary domain of biomedical Ontology change management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".