FAIR data representation in times of eScience: a comparison of instance-based and class-based semantic representations of empirical data using phenotype descriptions as example

Journal of Biomedical Semantics

Lars Vogt¹ 

[1] TIB Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology, Welfengarten 1B, 30167, Hanover, Germany;

关键词: Phenotype data;    Phenotype knowledge graph;    Semantic phenotype;    Ontology;    Knowledge management;    Semantic graph;    Data representation;    FAIR data;    ABox expression;    TBox expression;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13326-021-00254-0

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe size, velocity, and heterogeneity of Big Data outclasses conventional data management tools and requires data and metadata to be fully machine-actionable (i.e., eScience-compliant) and thus findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR). This can be achieved by using ontologies and through representing them as semantic graphs. Here, we discuss two different semantic graph approaches of representing empirical data and metadata in a knowledge graph, with phenotype descriptions as an example. Almost all phenotype descriptions are still being published as unstructured natural language texts, with far-reaching consequences for their FAIRness, substantially impeding their overall usability within the life sciences. However, with an increasing amount of anatomy ontologies becoming available and semantic applications emerging, a solution to this problem becomes available. Researchers are starting to document and communicate phenotype descriptions through the Web in the form of highly formalized and structured semantic graphs that use ontology terms and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) to circumvent the problems connected with unstructured texts.ResultsUsing phenotype descriptions as an example, we compare and evaluate two basic representations of empirical data and their accompanying metadata in the form of semantic graphs: the class-based TBox semantic graph approach called Semantic Phenotype and the instance-based ABox semantic graph approach called Phenotype Knowledge Graph. Their main difference is that only the ABox approach allows for identifying every individual part and property mentioned in the description in a knowledge graph. This technical difference results in substantial practical consequences that significantly affect the overall usability of empirical data. The consequences affect findability, accessibility, and explorability of empirical data as well as their comparability, expandability, universal usability and reusability, and overall machine-actionability. Moreover, TBox semantic graphs often require querying under entailment regimes, which is computationally more complex.ConclusionsWe conclude that, from a conceptual point of view, the advantages of the instance-based ABox semantic graph approach outweigh its shortcomings and outweigh the advantages of the class-based TBox semantic graph approach. Therefore, we recommend the instance-based ABox approach as a FAIR approach for documenting and communicating empirical data and metadata in a knowledge graph.

【 授权许可】

CC BY