MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021074129 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154556

The Ontology for Biomedical Investigations

2016· article· en· W2021074129 on OpenAlexaff
Anita Bandrowski, Ryan R. Brinkman, Mathias Brochhausen, Matthew Brush, Bill Bug, Marcus C. Chibucos, Kevin Clancy, Mélanie Courtot, Dirk Derom, Michel Dumontier, Liju Fan, Jennifer Fostel, Gilberto Fragoso, F. Gibson, Alejandra González-Beltrán, Melissa Haendel, Yongqun He, Mervi Heiskanen, Tina Hernandez‐Boussard, Mark Jensen, Yu Lin, Allyson Lister, Phillip Lord, James Malone, Elisabetta Manduchi, Monnie McGee, Norman Morrison, James A. Overton, Helen Parkinson, Bjoern Peters, Philippe Rocca‐Serra, Alan Ruttenberg, Susanna‐Assunta Sansone, Richard H. Scheuermann, Daniel Schober, Barry Smith, Larisa Soldatova, Christian J. Stoeckert, Chris Taylor, Carlo Torniai, Jessica A. Turner, Randi Vita, Patricia L. Whetzel, Jie Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesDivision of Biological InfrastructureNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Human Genome Research InstituteEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute on Drug AbuseCalifornia Institute for Regenerative MedicineNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOpen Biomedical OntologiesOntologyComputer scienceProcess ontologyData scienceUpper ontologyInteroperabilityBiological databaseOntology-based data integrationWorld Wide WebInformation retrievalSemantic WebSuggested Upper Merged OntologyBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ontology for Biomedical Investigations (OBI) is an ontology that provides terms with precisely defined meanings to describe all aspects of how investigations in the biological and medical domains are conducted. OBI re-uses ontologies that provide a representation of biomedical knowledge from the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) project and adds the ability to describe how this knowledge was derived. We here describe the state of OBI and several applications that are using it, such as adding semantic expressivity to existing databases, building data entry forms, and enabling interoperability between knowledge resources. OBI covers all phases of the investigation process, such as planning, execution and reporting. It represents information and material entities that participate in these processes, as well as roles and functions. Prior to OBI, it was not possible to use a single internally consistent resource that could be applied to multiple types of experiments for these applications. OBI has made this possible by creating terms for entities involved in biological and medical investigations and by importing parts of other biomedical ontologies such as GO, Chemical Entities of Biological Interest (ChEBI) and Phenotype Attribute and Trait Ontology (PATO) without altering their meaning. OBI is being used in a wide range of projects covering genomics, multi-omics, immunology, and catalogs of services. OBI has also spawned other ontologies (Information Artifact Ontology) and methods for importing parts of ontologies (Minimum information to reference an external ontology term (MIREOT)). The OBI project is an open cross-disciplinary collaborative effort, encompassing multiple research communities from around the globe. To date, OBI has created 2366 classes and 40 relations along with textual and formal definitions. The OBI Consortium maintains a web resource (http://obi-ontology.org) providing details on the people, policies, and issues being addressed in association with OBI. The current release of OBI is available at http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/obi.owl.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0150.021
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations385
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207