Vipul Kashyap, National Library of Medicine kashyapnlm.nih.gov - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 18
About This Presentation
Title:

Vipul Kashyap, National Library of Medicine kashyapnlm.nih.gov

Description:

The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS ) The UMLS ... Left Phrenic. Nerve. Heart. Valves. Fetal. Heart. Medias- tinum. Saccular. Viscus. Angina. Pectoris ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:86
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: vipulk
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Vipul Kashyap, National Library of Medicine kashyapnlm.nih.gov


1

The UMLS? Semantic Network and the
Semantic Web
  • Vipul Kashyap, National Library of
    Medicinekashyap_at_nlm.nih.gov
  • November 11, 2003
  • AMIA 2003 Annual Symposium
  • Washington, DC

2
Outline
  • The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS)
  • The UMLS? Semantic Network
  • Motivation Formal Representations of Biomedical
    Knowledge
  • DAMLOIL/OWL An Ontology Language for the
    Semantic Web
  • Vanilla Representation of the Semantic Network
  • Requirements of the Semantic Network
  • Blocking Inheritance
  • Ad-hoc Polymorphisms
  • Conclusions and Future Work

3
The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS)
Anatomical Structure
Semantic Types in theSemantic Network
Disease or Syndrome
Population Group
Pharmacologic Substance
Body Part, Organ or Organ Component
Metathesaurus Concepts
Saccular Viscus
Medias-tinum
Angina Pectoris
Esophagus
Heart
Cardiotonic Agents
Left PhrenicNerve
Tissue Donors
Heart Valves
Fetal Heart
Thesauri/Vocabulary/ Classifications

4
The UMLS Semantic Network (Partial View)
5
Motivation Formal Representations of Biomedical
Knowledge
  • Improved Specification of Queries for Medical
    Information Retrieval
  • (Mumps/CO AND Pancreatitis/ET)
    ?complication.Mumps ? ?etiology.Pancreatitis
  • Precise specifications of MeSH expressions using
    OWL concepts
  • Use of DL-type inferences to improve search
    results
  • Semantic Vocabulary Interoperation Project
  • http//cgsb2.nlm.nih.gov/kashyap/projects/SVIP
  • Translations of concepts across multiple
    biomedical vocabularies
  • Inferring concept equivalence and inconsistency
    for vocabulary merging
  • Determination of semantic position of a concept
    in a DAG structure
  • Subsumption checking
  • Consistency of biomedical terminologies

6
DAMLOIL/OWL An Ontology Language for the
Semantic Web
  • Describes the structure of a domain
  • Classes and properties
  • Axioms assert characteristics of these classes
    and properties
  • A very expressive Description Logic (DL)
  • Classes Names (URIs) or Expressions
  • Class and property constructors for building
    Class Expressions
  • unionOf, intersectionOf, complementOf, one of
  • toClass, hasClass, minCardinalityQ,
    maxCardinality
  • Axioms
  • Assert subsumption or equivalence of classes
    (names or expressions)
  • Assert disjointness or non-equivalence of classes
    (names or expressions)
  • Assert domains and ranges of properties

7
DAMLOIL/OWL Notation
  • DL Notation Bacterium ? Virus
  • OWL NotationltowlClassgt ltowlunionOf
    rdfparseTypeCollectiongt ltowlClass
    rdfaboutBacterium/gt ltowlClass
    rdfaboutVirus/gt lt/owlunionOfgtlt/owlCl
    assgt
  • Domain/Range Notationdomain(process_of)
    BiologicFunctionrange(process_of) Organism
  • OWL NotationltowlObjectProperty
    rdfIDprocess_ofgt ltrdfsdomain
    rdfresourceBiologicFunctiongt
    ltrdfsrange rdfresourceOrganismgtlt/owlObjec
    tPropertygt

8
DAMLOIL/OWL Constructs
9
Vanilla Representation using DAMLOIL/OWL
  • Semantic Types ? DAMLOIL/OWL Classes
  • Fungus ? Organism
  • Virus ? Organism
  • Semantic Relationships ? OWL properties
  • part_of ? physically_related_to
  • contains ? physically_related_to
  • Domains and Ranges of Relationships Later
  • Properties of Semantic Network Relationships
  • Asymmetric relationships
  • has_part part_of?
  • Symmetric relationships
  • adjacent_to adjacent_to?

10
Requirements of the Semantic Network
  • Consider the association
  • process_of(BiologicFunction, Organism)
  • Domain inheritance
  • process_of is inherited by descendants of
    BiologicFunction
  • E.g., process_of(MentalProcess, Organism)
  • Range inheritance
  • process_of is inherited to descendants of
    Organism
  • E.g., process_of(BiologicFunction, Plant)
  • Inheritance blocking
  • process_of(MentalProcess, Plant) is inherited
    from process_of(BiologicFunction, Organism)
  • Undesirable inference, needs to be blocked !
  • Ad-hoc polymorphism
  • Multiple domains or ranges of associations
  • Multiple domains (or ranges) not related by is-a
    relationship (NOT sub-type polymorphism)

11
Blocking Inheritance Domain Blocking
  • domain(process_of) BiologicFunctionrange(proces
    s_of) Organism
  • To prevent inference of process_of(MentalProcess,
    Plant)
  • Block the inheritance of process_of from
    BiologicFunction to MentalProcess
  • domain(process_of) BiologicFunction ?
    ?MentalProcess
  • ?process_of.T ? BiologicFunction ?
    ?MentalProcess
  • MentalProcess ? ? 0 process_of
  • MentalProcess ? ? 0 process_of Plant

12
Blocking Inheritance Range Blocking
  • domain(process_of) BiologicFunctionrange(proces
    s_of) Organism
  • To prevent inference of process_of(MentalProcess,
    Plant)
  • Block the inheritance of process_of from Organism
    to Plant
  • range(process_of) Organism ? ?Plant
  • T ? ?process_of.Organism ? ?Plant
  • Plant ? ? 0 process_of?
  • Plant ? ? 0 has_process
  • Plant ? ? 0 has_process MentalProcess

13
Ad-hoc Polymorphism
  • Consider the following associations
  • contains(BodySpaceOrJunction,
    BodyPartOrganOrOrganComponent)contains(EmbryonicS
    tructure, BodySubstance)
  • IFdomain(contains) BodySpaceOrJunction ?
    EmbryonicStructurerange(contains)
    BodyPartOrganOrOrganComponent ? BodySubstance
  • THEN, we might miss contains(x, y), wherex ?
    BodySpaceOrJunction ? ?EmbryonicStructurey ?
    BodyPartOrganOrOrganComponent ? ?BodySubstance
  • AND IF the intersections are empty, we may
    even get an empty association!
  • IFdomain(contains) BodySpaceOrJunction ?
    EmbryonicStructurerange(contains)
    BodyPartOrganOrOrganComponent ? BodySubstance
  • THEN we might introduce spurious contains(x,y)
    wherex ? BodySpaceOrJunction, y ? BodySubstance
    OR
  • x ? EmbryonicStructure, y ? BodyPartOrganorOrga
    nComponent

14
Ad-hoc Polymorphism Domain/Range Factorization
  • Consider
  • analyzes(DiagnosticProcedure,
    BodySubstance)analyzes(LaboratoryProcedure,
    BodySubstance)analyzes(DiagnosticProcedure,
    Chemical)analyzes(LaboratoryProcedure, Chemical)
  • Each domain type is associated with each range
    type!
  • domain(analyzes) DiagnosticProcedure ?
    LaboratoryProcedure
  • range(analyzes) BodySubstance ? Chemical

15
Ad-hoc Polymorphism Property Renaming
  • define contains1domain(contains1)
    BodySpaceOrJunctionrange(contains1)
    BodyPartOrganOrOrganComponent
  • define contains2domain(contains2)
    EmbryonicStructurerange(contains2)
    BodySubstance
  • Assert the following axioms
  • contains1 ? contains contains2 ? contains
    contains ? contains1 ? contains2

16
Adhoc Polymorphism Property Restrictions
  • BodySpaceJunction ? ?contains.BodyPartOrganOrOrgan
    Component
  • EmbryonicStructure ? ?contains.BodySubstance
  • For any class C, that is not a subclass of
    BodySpaceJunction or EmbryonicStructure
  • C ? ? 0 contains
  • Questions
  • Does it mean that other classes are not allowed
    to participate in the relationship?
  • What about other interpretations?
  • EmbryonicStructure ? ?contains.BodySubstance ?
  • There is at least some EmbryonicStructures
    related to BodySubstances via the contains
    association

17
Interesting Questions and Issues
  • Can/should something be inferred from absence of
    a link?
  • A ? ?P.B doesnt prohibit ?A from being related
    to B
  • Should relationships be inferred to be asymmetric
    by default?
  • Automatically assert ?(P ? P?)
  • Are the is-a children disjoint?
  • Untangling of ontologies
  • Is it important to detect inconsistency in the
    ontology?
  • Are P(A, B) and P(A, C) inconsistent if B ? C ? ?
    ?
  • A ? ?P.B will not detect inconsistency unless we
    assert A ? ?P.T
  • Limit the types of axioms if questions asked by
    an application do not require it.
  • E.g. axioms regarding asymmetric relationships
  • Are there approximations to concepts and axioms?
  • Assert P1 ? P, P2 ? P instead of P ? P1 ? P2

18
Conclusions and Future Work
  • Have presented experiences in representing a real
    world ontology using a widely publicized
    standard DAMLOIL/OWL
  • Caution It is not as straightforward as it seems
  • Identified the requirements of the UMLS? Semantic
    Network
  • Investigated the various alternatives in
    DAMLOIL/OWL to capture these requirements
  • Discussed issues and criteria that need to be
    considered for representing bio-medical knowledge
    using DAMLOIL/OWL
  • Future Work
  • Investigate representation of UMLS Metathesaurus
    using DAMLOIL/OWL
  • Issues related to representation of BT/NT or
    Parent/Child Relationships
  • Use of DAMLOIL/OWL
  • Semantic Vocabulary Interoperability
  • Enhanced Information Retrieval
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com