4 research outputs found

    Liberating host–virus knowledge from biological dark data

    Get PDF
    Connecting basic data about bats and other potential hosts of SARS-CoV-2 with their ecological context is crucial to the understanding of the emergence and spread of the virus. However, when lockdowns in many countries started in March, 2020, the world's bat experts were locked out of their research laboratories, which in turn impeded access to large volumes of offline ecological and taxonomic data. Pandemic lockdowns have brought to attention the long-standing problem of so-called biological dark data: data that are published, but disconnected from digital knowledge resources and thus unavailable for high-throughput analysis. Knowledge of host-to-virus ecological interactions will be biased until this challenge is addressed. In this Viewpoint, we outline two viable solutions: first, in the short term, to interconnect published data about host organisms, viruses, and other pathogens; and second, to shift the publishing framework beyond unstructured text (the so-called PDF prison) to labelled networks of digital knowledge. As the indexing system for biodiversity data, biological taxonomy is foundational to both solutions. Building digitally connected knowledge graphs of host–pathogen interactions will establish the agility needed to quickly identify reservoir hosts of novel zoonoses, allow for more robust predictions of emergence, and thereby strengthen human and planetary health systems.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

    Avenues into Integration: Communicating taxonomic intelligence from sender to recipient

    No full text
    “What is crucial for your ability to communicate with me… pivots on the recipient’s capacity to interpret—to make good inferential sense of the meanings that the declarer is able to send” (Rescher 2000, p148).Conventional approaches to reconciling taxonomic information in biodiversity databases have been based on string matching for unique taxonomic name combinations (Kindt 2020, Norman et al. 2020). However, in their original context, these names pertain to specific usages or taxonomic concepts, which can subsequently vary for the same name as applied by different authors. Name-based synonym matching is a helpful first step (Guala 2016, Correia et al. 2018), but may still leave considerable ambiguity regarding proper usage (Fig. 1). Therefore, developing "taxonomic intelligence" is the bioinformatic challenge to adequately represent, and subsequently propagate, this complex name/usage interaction across trusted biodiversity data networks. How do we ensure that senders and recipients of biodiversity data not only can share messages but do so with “good inferential sense” of their respective meanings?Key obstacles have involved dealing with the complexity of taxonomic name/usage modifications through time, both in terms of accounting for and digitally representing the long histories of taxonomic change in most lineages. An important critique of proposals to use name-to-usage relationships for data aggregation has been the difficulty of scaling them up to reach comprehensive coverage, in contrast to name-based global taxonomic hierarchies (Bisby 2011). The Linnaean system of nomenclature has some unfortunate design limitations in this regard, in that taxonomic names are not unique identifiers, their meanings may change over time, and the names as a string of characters do not encode their proper usage, i.e., the name “Genus species” does not specify a source defining how to use the name correctly (Remsen 2016, Sterner and Franz 2017). In practice, many people provide taxonomic names in their datasets or publications but not a source specifying a usage. The information needed to map the relationships between names and usages in taxonomic monographs or revisions is typically not presented it in a machine-readable format. New approaches are making progress on these obstacles. Theoretical advances in the representation of taxonomic intelligence have made it increasingly possible to implement efficient querying and reasoning methods on name-usage relationships (Chen et al. 2014, Chawuthai et al. 2016, Franz et al. 2015). Perhaps most importantly, growing efforts to produce name-usage mappings on a medium scale by data providers and taxonomic authorities suggest an all-or-nothing approach is not required. Multiple high-profile biodiversity databases have implemented internal tools for explicitly tracking conflicting or dynamic taxonomic classifications, including eBird using concept relationships from AviBase (Lepage et al. 2014); NatureServe in its Biotics database; iNaturalist using its taxon framework (Loarie 2020); and the UNITE database for fungi (Nilsson et al. 2019). Other ongoing projects incorporating taxonomic intelligence include the Flora of Alaska (Flora of Alaska 2020), the Mammal Diversity Database (Mammal Diversity Database 2020) and PollardBase for butterfly population monitoring (Campbell et al. 2020)

    The Automated Taxonomic Concept Reasoner

    No full text
    We present a visual and interactive taxonomic Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool, the Automated Taxonomic Concept Reasoner (ATCR), whose graphical web interface is under development and will also become available via an Application Programming Interface (API). The tool employs automated reasoning (Beeson 2014) to align multiple taxonomies visually, in a web browser, using user or expert-provided taxonomic articulations, i.e. "Region Connection Calculus (RCC-5) relationships between taxonomic concepts, provided in a specific logical language (Fig. 1). It does this by representing the problem of taxonomic alignment under these constraints in terms of logical inference, while performing these inferences computationally and leveraging the powerful Microsoft Z3 Satisfiability Modulo Theory (SMT) solver (de Moura and Bjørner 2008). This tool represents further development of utilities for the taxonomic concept approach, which fundamentally addresses the challenge of robust biodiversity data aggregation in light of multiple conflicting sources (and source classifications) from which primary biodiversity data almost invariably originate. The approach has proven superior to aggregation, based just on the syntax and semantics provided by the Darwin Core standard Franz and Sterner 2018).Fig. 1 provides an artificial example of such an alignment. Two taxonomies, A and B, are shown. There are five taxonomic concepts, A.One, A.Two, A.Three, B.One and B.Two. A.Two and A.Three are sub-concepts (children) of A.One, and B.Two is a sub-concept (child) of B.One. These are represented by the direction of the grey arrows. The undirected mustard-coloured lines represent relationships, i.e., the articulations referred to in the previous paragraph. These may be of five kinds: congruent (==), includes (), overlap (><), and disjointness. These five relationships are known in the AI literature as the Region Connection Calculus-5 (RCC-5) (Randell et al. 1992, Bennett 1994, Bennett 1994), and taken exclusively and in conjunction with each other, have certain desirable properties with respect to the representation of spatial relationships. The provided relationship (i.e. the articulation) may also be an arbitrary disjunction of these five fundamental kinds, thus allowing for representation of some degree of logical uncertainty. Then, and under three assumptions that:"sibling" concepts are disjoint in their instances,all instances of a parent concept are instances of at least one of its child concepts, andevery concept has at least one instance - the SMT-based automated reasoner is able to deduce the relationships represented by the undirected green lines. It is also able to deduce disjunctive relationships where these are logically implied.ATCR is related to Euler/X (Franz et al. 2015), an existing tool for the same kinds of taxonomic alignment problems, which was used, for example, to obtain an alignment of two influential primate classifications (Franz et al. 2016). It differs from Euler/X in that it employs a different logical encoding that enables more efficient and more informative computational reasoning, and also in that it provides a graphical web interface, which Euler/X does not

    Combining Machine Learning & Reasoning for Biodiversity Data Intelligence

    No full text
    The current crisis in global natural resource management makes it imperative that we better leverage the vast data sources associated with taxonomic entities (such as recognized species of plants and animals), which are known collectively as biodiversity data. However, these data pose considerable challenges for artificial intelligence: while growing rapidly in volume, they remain highly incomplete for many taxonomic groups, often show conflicting signals from different sources, and are multi-modal and therefore constantly changing in structure. In this paper, we motivate, describe, and present a novel workflow combining machine learning and automated reasoning, to discover patterns of taxonomic identity and change - i.e. “taxonomic intelligence” - leading to scalable and broadly impactful AI solutions within the bio-data realm
    corecore