Jointly creating digital abstracts: dealing with synonymy and polysemy

BMC Research Notes

Martin Kuiper¹  Steven Vercruysse¹ 

[1] Systems Biology group, Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Høgskoleringen 5, 7491 Trondheim, Norway

关键词: Controlled vocabulary;    Ontology;    Community curation;    Biocuration;    Structured digital abstract;   

Others  :  1165344
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-5-601

 received in 2012-05-19, accepted in 2012-10-23,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Ideally each Life Science article should get a ‘structured digital abstract’. This is a structured summary of the paper’s findings that is both human-verified and machine-readable. But articles can contain a large variety of information types and contextual details that all need to be reconciled with appropriate names, terms and identifiers, which poses a challenge to any curator. Current approaches mostly use tagging or limited entry-forms for semantic encoding.

Findings

We implemented a ‘controlled language’ as a more expressive representation method. We studied how usable this format was for wet-lab-biologists that volunteered as curators. We assessed some issues that arise with the usability of ontologies and other controlled vocabularies, for the encoding of structured information by ‘untrained’ curators. We take a user-oriented viewpoint, and make recommendations that may prove useful for creating a better curation environment: one that can engage a large community of volunteer curators.

Conclusions

Entering information in a biocuration environment could improve in expressiveness and user-friendliness, if curators would be enabled to use synonymous and polysemous terms literally, whereby each term stays linked to an identifier.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Vercruysse and Kuiper; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Blaschke C, Leon EA, Krallinger M, Valencia A: Evaluation of BioCreAtIvE assessment of task 2. BMC Bioinformat 2005, 6(Suppl 1):S16. BioMed Central Full Text
• [2]Krallinger M, Morgan A, Smith L, Leitner F, Tanabe L, Wilbur J, Hirschman L, Valencia A: Evaluation of text-mining systems for biology: overview of the Second BioCreative community challenge. Genome Biol 2008, 9(Suppl 2):S1. BioMed Central Full Text
• [3]Baumgartner WA Jr, Cohen KB, Fox LM, Acquaah-Mensah G, Hunter L: Manual curation is not sufficient for annotation of genomic databases. Bioinformatics 2007, 23(13):i41-i48.
• [4]Mons B, Ashburner M, Chichester C, van Mulligen E, Weeber M, den Dunnen J, van Ommen GJ, Musen M, Cockerill M, Hermjakob H, Mons A, Packer A, Pacheco R, Lewis S, Berkeley A, Melton W, Barris N, Wales J, Meijssen G, Moeller E, Roes PJ, Borner K, Bairoch A: Calling on a million minds for community annotation in WikiProteins. Genome Biol 2008, 9(5):R89. BioMed Central Full Text
• [5]Kelder T, van Iersel MP, Hanspers K, Kutmon M, Conklin BR, Evelo CT, Pico AR: WikiPathways: building research communities on biological pathways. Nucleic Acids Res 2012, 40(Database issue):D1301-D1307.
• [6]Pico AR, Kelder T, van Iersel MP, Hanspers K, Conklin BR, Evelo C: WikiPathways: pathway editing for the people. PLoS Biol 2008, 6(7):e184.
• [7]Ceol A, Chatr-Aryamontri A, Licata L, Cesareni G: Linking entries in protein interaction database to structured text: the FEBS letters experiment. FEBS Lett 2008, 582(8):1171-1177.
• [8]Leitner F, Valencia A: A text-mining perspective on the requirements for electronically annotated abstracts. FEBS Lett 2008, 582(8):1178-1181.
• [9]Seringhaus M, Gerstein M: Manually structured digital abstracts: a scaffold for automatic text mining. FEBS Lett 2008, 582(8):1170.
• [10]Fuchs NE, Schwertel U, Schwitter R: Attempto controlled English (ACE) language manual, version 3.0. Zurich: University of Zurich; 1999. [Department of computer science]
• [11]Kuhn T, Royer L, Fuchs N, Schroeder M: Improving text mining with controlled natural language: a case study for protein interactions. In Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on data integration in the life sciences. 20-22 July 2006. Edited by Leser U, Naumann F, Eckman B. Hinxton: Springer; 2006:66-81.
• [12]Sowa JF: [http://www.jfsowa.com/clce/specs.htm] webciteCommon logic controlled English specifications.
• [13]BEL Framework[http://belframework.org/] webcite
• [14]Vercruysse S, Kuiper M: WordVis: JavaScript and animation to visualize the WordNet relational dictionary. In Proc Third Inter Conf Intel Human Comp Interac 2013, 179(3):137-145. 29-31 August 2011; Prague. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing
• [15]Vercruysse S, Venkatesan A, Kuiper M: OLSVis: an animated. interactive visual browser for bio-ontologies. BMC Bioinforma 2012, 13:116. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Arighi CN, Roberts PM, Agarwal S, Bhattacharya S, Cesareni G, Chatr-Aryamontri A, Clematide S, Gaudet P, Giglio MG, Harrow I, Huala E, Krallinger M, Leser U, Li D, Liu F, Lu Z, Maltais LJ, Okazaki N, Perfetto L, Rinaldi F, Sætre R, Salgado D, Srinivasan P, Thomas PE, Toldo L, Hirschman L, Wu CH: BioCreative III interactive task: an overview. BMC Bioinforma 2011, 12(Suppl 8):S4. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Leitner F, Chatr-aryamontri A, Mardis SA, Ceol A, Krallinger M, Licata L, Hirschman L, Cesareni G, Valencia A: The FEBS Letters/BioCreative II.5 experiment: making biological information accessible. Nat Biotechnol 2010, 28(9):897-899.
• [18]TAIR: [http://www.arabidopsis.org] webciteThe Arabidopsis Information Resource.
• [19]HUGO: [http://www.genenames.org] webciteGene nomenclature committee.
• [20]NCBI: [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] webciteNational center for biotechnology information.
• [21]PO: [http://www.plantontology.org] webcitePlant ontology consortium.
• [22]OLS: [http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ontology-lookup] webciteOntology lookup service.
• [23]Côté RG, Jones P, Apweiler R, Hermjakob H: The Ontology Lookup Service, a lightweight cross-platform tool for controlled vocabulary queries. BMC Bioinforma 2006, 7:97. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Eyre TA, Ducluzeau F, Sneddon TP, Povey S, Bruford EA, Lush MJ: The HUGO gene nomenclature database, 2006 updates. Nucleic Acids Res 2006, 34(Database issue):D319-D321.
• [25]Jaiswal P, Avraham S, Ilic K, Kellogg EA, McCouch S, Pujar A, Reiser L, Rhee SY, Sachs MM, Schaeffer M, Stein L, Stevens P, Vincent L, Ware D, Zapata F: Plant ontology (PO): a controlled vocabulary of plant structures and growth stages. Comp Funct Genomics 2005, 6(7–8):388-397.
• [26]Pearson H: Biology’s name game. Nature 2001, 411(6838):631-632.
• [27]NCBO: [http://bioportal.bioontology.org] webciteNational Center for Biomedical Ontology, BioPortal.