首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Biomedical Semantics >Comparative analysis of knowledge representation and reasoning requirements across a range of life sciences textbooks
【24h】

Comparative analysis of knowledge representation and reasoning requirements across a range of life sciences textbooks

机译:各种生命科学教科书中知识表示和推理要求的比较分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Using knowledge representation for biomedical projects is now commonplace. In previous work, we represented the knowledge found in a college-level biology textbook in a fashion useful for answering questions. We showed that embedding the knowledge representation and question-answering abilities in an electronic textbook helped to engage student interest and improve learning. A natural question that arises from this success, and this paper’s primary focus, is whether a similar approach is applicable across a range of life science textbooks. To answer that question, we considered four different textbooks, ranging from a below-introductory college biology text to an advanced, graduate-level neuroscience textbook. For these textbooks, we investigated the following questions: (1) To what extent is knowledge shared between the different textbooks? (2) To what extent can the same upper ontology be used to represent the knowledge found in different textbooks? (3) To what extent can the questions of interest for a range of textbooks be answered by using the same reasoning mechanisms? Results Our existing modeling and reasoning methods apply especially well both to a textbook that is comparable in level to the text studied in our previous work (i.e., an introductory-level text) and to a textbook at a lower level, suggesting potential for a high degree of portability. Even for the overlapping knowledge found across the textbooks, the level of detail covered in each textbook was different, which requires that the representations must be customized for each textbook. We also found that for advanced textbooks, representing models and scientific reasoning processes was particularly important. Conclusions With some additional work, our representation methodology would be applicable to a range of textbooks. The requirements for knowledge representation are common across textbooks, suggesting that a shared semantic infrastructure for the life sciences is feasible. Because our representation overlaps heavily with those already being used for biomedical ontologies, this work suggests a natural pathway to include such representations as part of the life sciences curriculum at different grade levels.
机译:背景技术现在,在生物医学项目中使用知识表示法已经很普遍了。在以前的工作中,我们以对回答问题有用的方式表示了大学级生物学教科书中的知识。我们表明,将知识表示和问答能力嵌入电子教科书中有助于提高学生的兴趣并改善学习。这种成功以及本文的主要重点是一个自然的问题,即类似的方法是否适用于一系列生命科学教科书。为了回答这个问题,我们考虑了四种不同的教科书,从入门级的大学生物学教科书到高级的研究生级神经科学教科书。对于这些教科书,我们研究了以下问题:(1)不同教科书之间的知识共享程度如何? (2)同一上本体可以在多大程度上代表不同教科书中的知识? (3)通过使用相同的推理机制,可以在多大程度上回答一系列教科书所关注的问题?结果我们现有的建模和推理方法特别适用于水平与我们先前工作中研究的文本(即入门级文本)相当的教科书,以及水平较低的教科书,表明具有较高的发展潜力便携程度。即使对于在教科书中发现的重叠知识,每本教科书所涵盖的详细程度也有所不同,这要求必须为每本教科书自定义表示形式。我们还发现,对于高级教科书而言,代表模型和科学推理过程尤为重要。结论通过一些额外的工作,我们的表示方法将适用于一系列教科书。知识表达的要求在教科书中很常见,这表明生命科学的共享语义基础结构是可行的。由于我们的表示形式与已经用于生物医学本体的表示形式有很多重叠,因此这项工作提出了一条自然的途径,可以将这些表示形式包括在不同年级的生命科学课程中。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号