Ontologies for Neuroscience: What are they and What are they Good for?

Current information technology practices in neuroscience make it difficult to understand the organization of the brain across spatial scales. Subcellular junctional connectivity, cytoarchitectural local connectivity, and long-range topographical connectivity are just a few of the relevant data domains that must be synthesized in order to make sense of the brain. However, due to the heterogeneity of the data produced within these domains, the landscape of multiscale neuroscience data is fragmented. A standard framework for neuroscience data is needed to bridge existing digital data resources and to help in the conceptual unification of the multiple disciplines of neuroscience. Using our efforts in building ontologies for neuroscience as an example, we examine the benefits and limits of ontologies as a solution for this data integration problem. We provide several examples of their application to problems of image annotation, content-based retrieval of structural data, and integration of data across scales and researchers

The Foundational Model of Anatomy Ontology

Anatomy is the structure of biological organisms. The term also denotes the scientific discipline devoted to the study of anatomical entities and the structural and developmental relations that obtain among these entities during the lifespan of an organism. Anatomical entities are the independent continuants of biomedical reality on which physiological and disease processes depend, and which, in response to etiological agents, can transform themselves into pathological entities. For these reasons, hard copy and in silico information resources in virtually all fields of biology and medicine, as a rule, make extensive reference to anatomical entities. Because of the lack of a generalizable, computable representation of anatomy, developers of computable terminologies and ontologies in clinical medicine and biomedical research represented anatomy from their own more or less divergent viewpoints. The resulting heterogeneity presents a formidable impediment to correlating human anatomy not only across computational resources but also with the anatomy of model organisms used in biomedical experimentation. The Foundational Model of Anatomy (FMA) is being developed to fill the need for a generalizable anatomy ontology, which can be used and adapted by any computer-based application that requires anatomical information. Moreover it is evolving into a standard reference for divergent views of anatomy and a template for representing the anatomy of animals. A distinction is made between the FMA ontology as a theory of anatomy and the implementation of this theory as the FMA artifact. In either sense of the term, the FMA is a spatial-structural ontology of the entities and relations which together form the phenotypic structure of the human organism at all biologically salient levels of granularity. Making use of explicit ontological principles and sound methods, it is designed to be understandable by human beings and navigable by computers. The FMA’s ontological structure provides for machine-based inference, enabling powerful computational tools of the future to reason with biomedical data

Semantic adaptability for the systems interoperability

In the current global and competitive business context, it is essential that enterprises adapt their knowledge resources in order to smoothly interact and collaborate with others. However, due to the existent multiculturalism of people and enterprises, there are different representation views of business processes or products, even inside a same domain. Consequently, one of the main problems found in the interoperability between enterprise systems and applications is related to semantics. The integration and sharing of enterprises knowledge to build a common lexicon, plays an important role to the semantic adaptability of the information systems. The author proposes a framework to support the development of systems to manage dynamic semantic adaptability resolution. It allows different organisations to participate in a common knowledge base building, letting at the same time maintain their own views of the domain, without compromising the integration between them. Thus, systems are able to be aware of new knowledge, and have the capacity to learn from it and to manage its semantic interoperability in a dynamic and adaptable way. The author endorses the vision that in the near future, the semantic adaptability skills of the enterprise systems will be the booster to enterprises collaboration and the appearance of new business opportunities

On the ontological assumptions of the medical model of psychiatry: philosophical considerations and pragmatic tasks

Abstract A common theme in the contemporary medical model of psychiatry is that pathophysiological processes are centrally involved in the explanation, evaluation, and treatment of mental illnesses. Implied in this perspective is that clinical descriptors of these pathophysiological processes are sufficient to distinguish underlying etiologies. Psychiatric classification requires differentiation between what counts as normality (i.e.- order), and what counts as abnormality (i.e.- disorder). The distinction(s) between normality and pathology entail assumptions that are often deeply presupposed, manifesting themselves in statements about what mental disorders are. In this paper, we explicate that realism, naturalism, reductionism, and essentialism are core ontological assumptions of the medical model of psychiatry. We argue that while naturalism, realism, and reductionism can be reconciled with advances in contemporary neuroscience, essentialism - as defined to date - may be conceptually problematic, and we pose an eidetic construct of bio-psychosocial order and disorder based upon complex systems' dynamics. However we also caution against the overuse of any theory, and claim that practical distinctions are important to the establishment of clinical thresholds. We opine that as we move ahead toward both a new edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, and a proposed Decade of the Mind, the task at hand is to re-visit nosologic and ontologic assumptions pursuant to a re-formulation of diagnostic criteria and practice.</p