The role of foundational relations in the alignment of biomedical ontologies

Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Volumn 107, Issue , 2004, Pages 444-448

  Smith, Barry ^a,b   Rosse, Cornelius ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioinformatics; Foundational Model of Anatomy; Gene Ontology; Logic; Mereology; Ontology; Taxonomy; UMLS

Indexed keywords

BIOINFORMATICS; TAXONOMIES; GENE ONTOLOGY; MEDICAL INFORMATICS;

FOUNDATIONAL MODEL OF ANATOMY; GENE ONTOLOGY; LOGIC; MEREOLOGY; UMLS; BIOMEDICAL ONTOLOGIES; HUMAN BODIES; MACROSCOPIC LEVELS; ONTOLOGY'S; STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION;

ONTOLOGY; TAXONOMIES;

ADOPTION; BIOINFORMATICS; CONFERENCE PAPER; GENE ONTOLOGY; HUMAN; LOGIC; MEDICAL ONTOLOGY; NOMENCLATURE; TAXONOMY; UNIFIED MEDICAL LANGUAGE SYSTEM;

EID: 47949090260     PISSN: 09269630     EISSN: 18798365     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.3233/978-1-60750-949-3-444     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Rosse C, Mejino JLV. A reference ontology for biomedical informatics: the Foundational Model of Anatomy. JBiomed Inform. 2003;36:478-500.
2. Rosse C, Mejino JL, Modayur BR, Jakobovits R, Hinshaw KP, Brinkley JF. Motivation and organizational principles for anatomical knowledge representation: the Digital Anatomist Symbolic Knowledge Base. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1998; 5: 17-40.
3. Grenon P, Smith B. SNAP and SPAN: Towards dynamic spatial ontology. Spatial Cognition and Comput. In press.
4. Smith B. The logic of biological classification. D Westers-tahl (ed.): Proc 10th Int Conf Logic Methodology Philosophy of Science, Oviedo, Spain, 2003 (in press).
5. Simons PM. Parts. An essay in ontology. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.
6. Cocchiarella N. On the logic of natural kinds. Philosophy oj Science, 1976; 43: 202-222.
7. Buck RC, Hull DL. The logical structure of the Linnaean hierarchy. Sys Zoology, 1966; 15: 97-111.
8. Schulz S, Hahn U. Necessary parts and wholes in bio-ontologies. Proc KR 2002; 387-394.
9. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/META3.HTML.
10. Smith B. Mereotopology: a theory of parts and boundaries. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 1996;20:287-303.
11. Smith B, Varzi AC. Surrounding space: the ontology of organism-environment relations, Theory in Biosciences, 2002; 121: 139-162.
12. Smith B, Brogaard B. Quantum mereotopology. Ann Math Artificial Intelligence 2002; 35: 153-175.
13. Agoncillo A, Mejino JLV, Rosse C. Influence of Digital Anatomist Foundational model on traditional representations of anatomical concepts. ProcAMIA Symp 1999;2-6.
14. Aristotle. The categories. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1973.
15. Michael J, Mejino JLV, Rosse C. The role of definitions in biomedical concept representation. ProcAMIA Symp 2001; 463-467.
16. Bittner T, Smith B. A theory of granular partitions. Foundations of Geographic Information Science, M Duckham et al. (eds.). London: Taylor & Francis, 2003: 117-151.
17. Smith B. Fiat objects. Topoi, 2001; 20: 131-148.
18. Smith B, Varzi AC. Fiat and bona fide boundaries. Phil Phenomenol Res, 2000; 60: 401-420.
19. http://www.geneontology.org (Version as at 1.9. 2003)
20. Smith B, Kohler J, Kumar A. On application of formal principles to life science data. Proc DILS 2004 (in press).
21. Smith B, Williams J, Schulze-Kremer S. The ontology of the Gene Ontology. ProcAMIA Symp 2003, 609-613.