Abstract |
There are few successful applications of automated reasoning over OWL-formalised bio-ontologies, and requirements are often unclearly formulated. Of what is available, usage and prospective scenarios of automated reasoning is often different from the straightforward classification and satisfiability. We list nine types of scenarios and specify the requirements in more detail. Several of these requirements are already possible in practice or at least in theory, others are in need of further research, in particular regarding the linking of the OWL ontology to data, reasoning over roles, and dynamically linking modular ontologies
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories |
No categories specified (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Relations in Biomedical Ontologies.Barry Smith, Werner Ceusters, Bert Klagges, Jacob Köhler, Anand Kuma, Jane Lomax, Chris Mungall, , Fabian Neuhaus, Alan Rector & Cornelius Rosse - 2005 - Genome Biology 6 (5):R46.
Towards a Reference Terminology for Ontology Research and Development in the Biomedical Domain.Barry Smith, Waclaw Kusnierczyk, Daniel Schober, & Werner Ceusters - 2006 - In Proceedings of KR-MED, CEUR, vol. 222. pp. 57-65.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents.Peter J. Taylor - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304-310.
The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments.Dale Hample, Bing Han & David Payne - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (4):405-421.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-01-28
Total views
23 ( #495,069 of 2,517,923 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #409,045 of 2,517,923 )
2009-01-28
Total views
23 ( #495,069 of 2,517,923 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #409,045 of 2,517,923 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads