Schulz Stefan, Stenzhorn Holger, Boeker Martin, Smith Barry
Institute for Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Rev Electron Comun Inf Inov Saude. 2009 Mar 1;3(1):31-45. doi: 10.3395/reciis.v3i1.241en.
We propose a typology of representational artifacts for health care and life sciences domains and associate this typology with different kinds of formal ontology and logic, drawing conclusions as to the strengths and limitations for ontology of different kinds of logical resources, with a focus on description logics.The four types of domain representation we consider are: (i) lexico-semantic representation, (ii) representation of types of entities, (iii) representations of background knowledge, and (iv) representation of individuals.We advocate a clear distinction of the four kinds of representation in order to provide a more rational basis for using of ontologies and related artifacts to advance integration of data and interoperability of associated reasoning systems.We highlight the fact that only a minor portion of scientifically relevant facts in a domain such as biomedicine can be adequately represented by formal ontologies when the latter are conceived as representations of entity types. In particular, the attempt to encode default or probabilistic knowledge using ontologies so conceived is prone to produce unintended, erroneous models.
我们提出了一种针对医疗保健和生命科学领域的代表性工件类型学,并将这种类型学与不同种类的形式本体和逻辑相关联,得出关于不同种类逻辑资源在本体方面的优势和局限性的结论,重点是描述逻辑。我们考虑的四种领域表示类型是:(i)词汇语义表示,(ii)实体类型表示,(iii)背景知识表示,以及(iv)个体表示。我们主张明确区分这四种表示,以便为使用本体和相关工件推进数据集成及相关推理系统的互操作性提供更合理的基础。我们强调这样一个事实,当形式本体被视为实体类型的表示时,在诸如生物医学等领域中,只有一小部分与科学相关的事实能够被形式本体充分表示。特别是,使用如此构想的本体对默认或概率知识进行编码的尝试容易产生意想不到的错误模型。