RE: [HCLS] Bridging Ontology...An Automated Approach?

Don,

I like this formulation of the ontology mapping process.
It seems to have two aspects to it:

1. Specification of a mapping is like specifying a hypothesis.
   As the data generated from these mappings is validated, this strengthens
   these mappings. Otherwise, it weakens them.
2. Each mapping may influence other mappings, i.e., adjustment of weights.
   Some kind of fixed point computation may be done.

The interesting similarities with this formulation are:
- The second aspect is similar to the way Google computes page rank at least
conceptually.
- The notion of integration/mapping becomes closer to the notion of
provenance....

Just my 2 cents....

Don, Look forward to discussing this on the Telcon tomorrow.

Cheers,

---Vipul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Donald Doherty
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3:43 PM
> To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
> Subject: [HCLS] Bridging Ontology...An Automated Approach?
> 
> 
> I'm thinking out loud here. Just let me know if I should stop...
> 
> Here's an idea:
> 
> Creating explicit connections between all similar and/or identical entries
> in two schemas is an arduous task that is impractical to do manually.
> 
> To contrast, compare, and reconcile at the data level I must make these
> explicit connections.
> 
> When I do so mentally, I make a tentative connection, test it for
> validity,
> and then maintain the connection or throw it out based on the result.
> (This
> is also what is done physiologically through mechanisms like Long Term
> Potentiation in the brain.)
> 
> Automate connections between synonyms, antonyms, etcetera based on local
> analysis of elements.
> 
> What do I mean by "local analysis of elements?" I'm making the following
> up
> but we could make it more concrete by looking at the CoCoDat and NeuronDB
> schemas.
> 
> Say DB1 has a term "segment." We look at the schema to see the "segment"
> associated with "cell body."
> 
> Say DB2 has a term "initial segment." We see that "initial segment" is
> part
> of "axon."
> 
> Is "segment" in DB1 equivalent to "initial segment" in DB2? We should be
> able to automate an interrogation that may see "axon" in DB1. Or maybe it
> finds "dendrite"...
> 
> This is rough but a potential approach to automating the formation of
> connections?
> 
> Don
> 
> -----
> Donald Doherty, Ph.D.
> Brainstage Research, Inc.
> www.brainstage.com
> donald.doherty@brainstage.com
> 412-478-4552
>

Received on Monday, 21 August 2006 23:04:47 UTC