Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ontologies”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing and Testing a Common Space Systems Ontology using the Ontological Modeling Language

This paper describes the development and testing of the initial version of a common space systems ontology (CoSSO) for use by the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. The ontology provides a shared conceptualization of concepts of interest to the ACO for modeling aerospace systems concepts in a pre-phase A context to aid with the transition to a more model-based paradigm. The ontological concepts and relations, as well as the anticipated use cases, were developed through interactions with the relevant subject matter experts at the ACO and implemented in the Ontological Modeling Language (OML). The ontology builds on the Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) and the Common Core Ontologies (CCO). While most of the ontology is still in the initial stages, an Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) ontology is being built on top of the main CoSSO and heavily developed as a proof of concept. The ECLSS ontology is designed with different use cases in mind, namely predicting and diagnosing errors in ECLS systems on long-duration missions, with a focus on the Four-Bed CO$_2$ carbon dioxide scrubber currently on board the ISS. The ECLSS ontology is being developed in a similar manner to the CoSSO, and designed to be compatible with it. The current state of both ontologies is presented and discussed, along with plans for future development and testing.

Conceptual Design↗
DOE OSTI2021

Metadata Schemas and Ontologies for Building Energy Applications: A Critical Review and Use Case Analysis

With the increasing digitalization of processes throughout the lifecycle of buildings, data exchanged between stakeholders and between building systems has grown significantly. However, a lack of semantic interoperability between data in different systems is still prevalent, hindering the development of applications that can be reused across buildings and limiting the scalability of innovative solutions. Semantics refers to the description of the meaning of the data in a way that can be consistently understood by applications. Recently, several competing initiatives have been developing metadata schemas and ontologies to express this semantic information for different applications in the building domain. This paper systematically reviews these schemas and conducts an analysis of five of them to evaluate their applicability to three high-value use cases for building operations: energy audits, automated fault detection and diagnostics and optimal control. The survey finds 40 schemas published in the last 10 years but but their actual use in industry is difficult to estimate. Among the five selected ontologies, several gaps are highlighted in relation to the three use cases. Recommendations for the future include better harmonization of these initiatives, more centralized repositories and search engines for these schemas as well as better industry engagement to facilitate their adoption.

Smart Building, Sematic, Metadata, Ontology, Data ↗
DOE OSTI2022

Ontology Development Kit: a toolkit for building, maintaining and standardizing biomedical ontologies

Similar to managing software packages, managing the ontology life cycle involves multiple complex workflows such as preparing releases, continuous quality control checking and dependency management. To manage these processes, a diverse set of tools is required, from command-line utilities to powerful ontology-engineering environmentsr. Particularly in the biomedical domain, which has developed a set of highly diverse yet inter-dependent ontologies, standardizing release practices and metadata and establishing shared quality standards are crucial to enable interoperability. The Ontology Development Kit (ODK) provides a set of standardized, customizable and automatically executable workflows, and packages all required tooling in a single Docker image. In this paper, we provide an overview of how the ODK works, show how it is used in practice and describe how we envision it driving standardization efforts in our community.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Introduction to Metadata and Ontologies: Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Metadata and Ontologies (But Were Afraid to Ask)

Metadata are contextual data about your experimental data. Metadata are the who, what, when, where, and why of these data. Metadata puts these data into context. In microbiome research, metadata includes information about the sample: when it was collected, where it was collected from, what kind of sample it is, and what were the properties of the environment or experimental condition from which the sample was taken. Information about sample processing is also metadata: methods used to extract and purify molecules (e.g., DNA) from the sample, type of DNA sequencing or other ’omics analyses done, and where the raw experimental data are located. This documentation includes information on the following topics: What are metadata? What kinds of metadata are there? Why are metadata important? Why should metadata be standardized? Why should metadata be machine readable? What is an ontology? Why are ontologies important? What are some examples of ontologies? The documentation also includes further resources on metadata guides and tools and tips for formatting metadata for maximum utility.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Term Matrix: a novel Gene Ontology annotation quality control system based on ontology term co-annotation patterns

Biological processes are accomplished by the coordinated action of gene products. Gene products often participate in multiple processes, and can therefore be annotated to multiple Gene Ontology (GO) terms. Nevertheless, processes that are functionally, temporally and/or spatially distant may have few gene products in common, and co-annotation to unrelated processes probably reflects errors in literature curation, ontology structure or automated annotation pipelines. We have developed an annotation quality control workflow that uses rules based on mutually exclusive processes to detect annotation errors, based on and validated by case studies including the three we present here: fission yeast protein-coding gene annotations over time; annotations for cohesin complex subunits in human and model species; and annotations using a selected set of GO biological process terms in human and five model species. For each case study, we reviewed available GO annotations, identified pairs of biological processes which are unlikely to be correctly co-annotated to the same gene products (e.g. amino acid metabolism and cytokinesis), and traced erroneous annotations to their sources. To date we have generated 107 quality control rules, and corrected 289 manual annotations in eukaryotes and over 52 700 automatically propagated annotations across all taxa.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2019

Orbital Debris Ontology, Terminology, and Knowledge Modeling

The looming threat orbital debris poses to assets in orbit demands solutions. As the orbital population grows, so does this hazard, but so does the sea of data. The problem is also an opportunity for interdisciplinary innovation and cooperation. This paper focuses on the data and information management aspect of developing solutions for a sustainable and safe orbital space environment. The corresponding author’s in-progress work to develop an orbital debris domain ontology is summarized in order to discuss knowledge modeling for this domain. Methodological approaches of this effort can also contribute to standards efforts and address terminological and policy questions. Leveraging the growing volumes of orbital debris and space situational awareness (SSA) data will create a more complete picture of the orbital space environment. Part of the solution will be: consistent and correct data interpretation, sharing orbital debris and SSA data in one form or another, terminology development & harmonization, and knowledge or domain modeling. To facilitate this, [Rovetto, 2015/16] discussed ontology development for the orbital debris domain. This paper lists concepts from that paper, and subsequently developed concepts [2-9]. Ontology engineering is an interdisciplinary field related to knowledge representation and reasoning in artificial intelligence, semantic technologies and the so-called semantic web. An ontology is effectively a computable and semantically rich terminology that presents a knowledge or domain model for a topic area. Expressions of knowledge or assertions are stored using formally defined term. This knowledge base is reasoned over to yield answers to queries, among other things. Ontologies have been developed in knowledge-based projects across various disciplines, and used for such things as search engines, chatbots, enterprise knowledge graphs, etc. Ontologies support: interoperability, automated reasoning, data sharing and integration, data search and retrieval, and communicating the meaning of data. The Orbital Debris Ontology (ODO), and related ontologies [Rovetto & Kelso 2016] [Rovetto 2016, 2017], were proposed to help achieve this. ODO, for instance, is intended as a domain ontology that can be used across federated databases, offering an explicitly specified set of concepts describing the orbital debris domain. Its meaning-rich taxonomy will provide a sharable semantics for orbital debris data to, in part, consistently communicate the meaning of data to both humans and machines, and tag data elements in space object catalogs to help afford inference tasks, decision support, knowledge discovery, and information integration. ODO and the SSA ontology (SSAO) is part of the overall Orbital Space Domain Ontology concept, which is conceived as a broader domain reference ontology. It aims to provide a knowledge representation structure of the orbital space environment, a common semantic model, and develop a sharable terminology. Collectively this will provide common meaning for datasets, a high-level taxonomy or classification for orbital space objects, and thus means to characterize space objects. Ongoing efforts have included using visualizations, R, JSON-LD, and contemporary semantic technologies. Potential applications and interdisciplinary partnerships include web-based platforms, web apps, visualizations, and academia projects. Community input and participation may yield a more widely understood domain model as well as facilitate terminological standards. For example, the proposed conceptual, terminological and ontological analysis may contribute to such efforts as the Space Debris Mitigation Requirements in the International Standards Organization by developing more precise, consistent and coherent terms and definitions. Projects that seek to develop in-house ontologies can use ODO and related ontologies as domain reference ontologies. This paper was developed independent of author affiliations. Readers are encouraged to contact corresponding author(1) with general interest and potential opportunities to support or realize the described project.

Robert J. Rovetto↗
DOE OSTI2025

BioPortal: an open community resource for sharing, searching, and utilizing biomedical ontologies

Abstract BioPortal (https://bioportal.bioontology.org) is the world’s most comprehensive repository of biomedical ontologies. It provides infrastructure for finding, sharing, searching, and utilizing biomedical ontologies. Launched in 2005, BioPortal now includes 1549 ontologies (1182 of them public). Its open, freely accessible website enables anyone (i) to browse the ontology library, (ii) to search for terms across ontologies, (iii) to browse mappings between terms, (iv) to see popularity ratings and recommendations on which ontologies are most relevant to their use cases, (v) to annotate text with ontology terms, (vi) to submit an ontology, and (vii) to request ontology changes. The library of ontologies can be accessed programmatically via a REST application programming interface (API). Recent enhancements include a BioPortal knowledge graph that integrates knowledge from multiple ontologies; a unified data model for interoperability with other knowledge sources; ontology popularity ratings and recommendations for relevant ontologies; and the ability to request ontology changes via a simple user interface that automatically converts user change requests to GitHub Pull Requests that specify the edits that will be made to the ontology upon approval.

Vendetti, Jennifer↗
DOE OSTI2024

Dynamic Retrieval Augmented Generation of Ontologies using Artificial Intelligence (DRAGON-AI)

Ontologies are fundamental components of informatics infrastructure in domains such as biomedical, environmental, and food sciences, representing consensus knowledge in an accurate and computable form. However, their construction and maintenance demand substantial resources and necessitate substantial collaboration between domain experts, curators, and ontology experts. We present Dynamic Retrieval Augmented Generation of Ontologies using AI (DRAGON-AI), an ontology generation method employing Large Language Models (LLMs) and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG). DRAGON-AI can generate textual and logical ontology components, drawing from existing knowledge in multiple ontologies and unstructured text sources.We assessed performance of DRAGON-AI on de novo term construction across ten diverse ontologies, making use of extensive manual evaluation of results. Our method has high precision for relationship generation, but has slightly lower precision than from logic-based reasoning. Our method is also able to generate definitions deemed acceptable by expert evaluators, but these scored worse than human-authored definitions. Notably, evaluators with the highest level of confidence in a domain were better able to discern flaws in AI-generated definitions. We also demonstrated the ability of DRAGON-AI to incorporate natural language instructions in the form of GitHub issues.These findings suggest DRAGON-AI's potential to substantially aid the manual ontology construction process. However, our results also underscore the importance of having expert curators and ontology editors drive the ontology generation process.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Materials Data Science Ontology(MDS-Onto): Unifying Domain Knowledge in Materials and Applied Data Science

Ontologies have gained popularity in the scientific community as a way to standardize terminologies in organizations’ data. Although certain cohorts have created frameworks with rules and guidelines on creating ontologies, there exist significant variations in how Materials Science ontologies are currently developed. We seek to provide guidance in the form of a unified automated framework for developing interoperable and modular ontologies for Materials Data Science that simplifies the ontology terms matching by establishing a semantic bridge up to the Basic Formal Ontology(BFO). This framework provides key recommendations on how ontologies should be positioned within the semantic web, what knowledge representation language is recommended, and where ontologies should be published online to boost their findability and interoperability. Two fundamental components of the MDS-Onto framework are the bilingual package called FAIRmaterials for ontology creation and FAIRLinked, for FAIR data creation. To showcase the practical capabilities of FAIRmaterials, we present two exemplar domain ontologies of MDS-Onto: Synchrotron X-Ray Diffraction and Photovoltaics.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

OBO Foundry in 2021: operationalizing open data principles to evaluate ontologies

Biological ontologies are used to organize, curate and interpret the vast quantities of data arising from biological experiments. While this works well when using a single ontology, integrating multiple ontologies can be problematic, as they are developed independently, which can lead to incompatibilities. The Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) Foundry was created to address this by facilitating the development, harmonization, application and sharing of ontologies, guided by a set of overarching principles. One challenge in reaching these goals was that the OBO principles were not originally encoded in a precise fashion, and interpretation was subjective. Here, we show how we have addressed this by formally encoding the OBO principles as operational rules and implementing a suite of automated validation checks and a dashboard for objectively evaluating each ontology’s compliance with each principle. This entailed a substantial effort to curate metadata across all ontologies and to coordinate with individual stakeholders. We have applied these checks across the full OBO suite of ontologies, revealing areas where individual ontologies require changes to conform to our principles. Our work demonstrates how a sizable, federated community can be organized and evaluated on objective criteria that help improve overall quality and interoperability, which is vital for the sustenance of the OBO project and towards the overall goals of making data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR).

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY AND REPRODUCIBILITY OF SPACE RADIATION SCIENCE: THE RADIATION BIOLOGY ONTOLOGY

Among the primary objectives of the Open/Open-Source Science paradigm are making scientific investigation data transparent and results reproducible [1], objectives shared by the FAIR principles [2]. To accomplish this, the conceptual framework that includes all the investigation objects needs to be accurately captured and communicated to all data consumers. A large part of this requires using metadata standards to annotate data collected. These standards should be readily accessible, informed by scientific community consensus and sufficiently specific to encompass all of the important aspects of the investigation. Starting in 2020 we have been co-leading an open consortium to develop a new metadata standard, the Radiation Biology Ontology (RBO), through the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) Foundry [3]. We began by transforming many of the terms from the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement into concepts that can be formally related to existing OBO Foundry classes or attributes. We then identified and imported into the RBO existing OBO Foundry classes that have obvious relevance for radiation biomedicine (for example, concepts from the Environment Ontology that describe radiative processes, and concepts from the Gene Ontology dealing with molecular and cellular responses to radiation). Finally, we scrutinized datasets from investigations of radiation effects held in NASA GeneLab and LSDA repositories and added additional classes, instances, and attributes into the RBO that should be used to annotate these data. We developed the RBO using the open-source tools of GitHub and publish the RBO periodically through the NIH/NCBI BioPortal website, so systems worldwide can leverage the knowledge it contains [4]. This initial phase of concept modeling has yielded an RBO that at present has more than 300 declared concepts, with more than 3500 additional concepts imported from other OBO Foundry ontologies. While this first phase has focused on concepts for annotating samples, environments, exposures, and measurements, the next phase will center on supporting annotation of results and findings, such as concept models of molecular, cellular and tissue effects. The value of the RBO will be determined in part by our ability to engage the community in its development, and we have established a Radiobiology Informatics Consortium with unrestricted membership as the owner of the RBO in order to encourage investigators, system owners and other to join in this effort. Anyone can report issues or request new concept modeling or other features directly on GitHub. By using the BioPortal application programming interface, systems can pose dynamic queries to the latest version of the RBO for information on individual classes or entire hierarchies; this design eliminates the need for systems to be updated in order to use newer versions of the RBO. We hope to contribute to the advancement of open radiobiological science through the continued, open development of the RBO, that will provide more precise, machine-interpretable descriptions of investigations, as well as support data meta-analysis through machine learning or other artificial intelligence methods. REFERENCES [1] Open science in space. Nature Medicine, 2021. 27(9): p. 1485-1485. [2] Wilkinson, M.D., et al., The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data, 2016. 3: p. 160018. [3] Smith, B., et al., The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotechnol, 2007. 25(11): p. 1251-5. [4] Whetzel, P.L., et al., BioPortal: enhanced functionality via new Web services from the National Center for Biomedical Ontology to access and use ontologies in software applications. Nucleic Acids Res, 2011. 39(Web Server issue): p. W541-5.

informatics↗
NASA NTRS1990

IDEF5 Ontology Description Capture Method: Concept Paper

The results of research towards an ontology capture method referred to as IDEF5 are presented. Viewed simply as the study of what exists in a domain, ontology is an activity that can be understood to be at work across the full range of human inquiry prompted by the persistent effort to understand the world in which it has found itself - and which it has helped to shape. In the contest of information management, ontology is the task of extracting the structure of a given engineering, manufacturing, business, or logistical domain and storing it in an usable representational medium. A key to effective integration is a system ontology that can be accessed and modified across domains and which captures common features of the overall system relevant to the goals of the disparate domains. If the focus is on information integration, then the strongest motivation for ontology comes from the need to support data sharing and function interoperability. In the correct architecture, an enterprise ontology base would allow th e construction of an integrated environment in which legacy systems appear to be open architecture integrated resources. If the focus is on system/software development, then support for the rapid acquisition of reliable systems is perhaps the strongest motivation for ontology. Finally, ontological analysis was demonstrated to be an effective first step in the construction of robust knowledge based systems.

Menzel, Christopher P.↗
DOE OSTI2020

The Ontologies Community of Practice: A CGIAR Initiative for Big Data in Agrifood Systems

Heterogeneous and multidisciplinary data generated by research on sustainable global agriculture and agrifood systems requires quality data labeling or annotation in order to be interoperable. As recommended by the FAIR principles, data, labels, and metadata must use controlled vocabularies and ontologies that are popular in the knowledge domain and commonly used by the community. Despite the existence of robust ontologies in the Life Sciences, there is currently no comprehensive full set of ontologies recommended for data annotation across agricultural research disciplines. In this paper, we discuss the added value of the Ontologies Community of Practice (CoP) of the CGIAR Platform for Big Data in Agriculture for harnessing relevant expertise in ontology development and identifying innovative solutions that support quality data annotation. The Ontologies CoP stimulates knowledge sharing among stakeholders, such as researchers, data managers, domain experts, experts in ontology design, and platform development teams.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
NASA NTRS2024

Decision Space Modeling: Trade Space Ontology

As the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) works to develop a crewed Moon to Mars Architecture, it is dealing with a large decision space consisting of the overlay of human exploration architectures for both the Moon and for Mars. Efforts are underway to enable reasoning, analysis, and deliberation on this decision space. A critical first step is to develop a model of the decision space, which will then allow for various methods and techniques to be applied in support of the larger architecture decision-making process. The Trade Space Ontology consists of a set of terminologies and relations (an ontology) and a MagicDraw resource that enables documentation of decisions and alternatives. It also provides a means by which decisions and alternatives can be traced to other Systems Engineering artifacts. For documenting alternatives, the Trade Space Ontology adapts the Morphological Matrix methodology to The Systems Modeling Language (SysML) through a profile; custom diagrams are also implemented to simplify the profile's use. With the profile and custom diagrams, system architects can specify options for architecture attributes, as well as compatibility between them, in a compact visual format. While the approach shares similarities to a trade tree, the emphasis at this stage is less on enumerating specific combinations of options and instead on specifying the options and their compatibility. Enumeration of alternatives is performed by an external analysis that operates on an output file from a model constructed using the Trade Space Ontology. For decisions, the Trade Space Ontology provides a way to model generic precedence relationships as well as documenting inputs and outputs. These may include what alternatives, criteria, and rationale are understood to be relevant for each decision. Importantly, the decision-making side of the Trade Space Ontology is defined at a more general level, such that it can be adapted to the specific terms in use by projects and programs at NASA. However, this adaptability also means that less capability is provided ``out-of-the-box'' from installation. Currently the resource includes plugin functionality to enumerate paths through generic precedence relationships between decisions and to export these paths to a spreadsheet. Custom dependency stereotypes are included in the profile to indicate the cross-cutting relationships between the trade space and the architecture decisions, providing a means to map which parts of the trade space enumerate alternatives for a decision, and to identify how the output of a decision may modify the trade space through pruning or down-selection. While the motivating use case for this resource is in human exploration architectures, the broad applicability of the Morphological Matrix methodology indicates that the Trade Space Ontology should also be useful for other activities and tasks at the agency.

Trade Tree↗
DOE OSTI2025

A change language for ontologies and knowledge graphs

Ontologies and knowledge graphs (KGs) are general-purpose computable representations of some domain, such as human anatomy, and are frequently a crucial part of modern information systems. Most of these structures change over time, incorporating new knowledge or information that was previously missing. Managing these changes is a challenge, both in terms of communicating changes to users and providing mechanisms to make it easier for multiple stakeholders to contribute. To fill that need, we have created KGCL, the Knowledge Graph Change Language (https://github.com/INCATools/kgcl), a standard data model for describing changes to KGs and ontologies at a high level, and an accompanying human-readable Controlled Natural Language (CNL). This language serves two purposes: a curator can use it to request desired changes, and it can also be used to describe changes that have already happened, corresponding to the concepts of “apply patch” and “diff” commonly used for managing changes in text documents and computer programs. Another key feature of KGCL is that descriptions are at a high enough level to be useful and understood by a variety of stakeholders—e.g. ontology edits can be specified by commands like “add synonym ‘arm’ to ‘forelimb’” or “move ‘Parkinson disease’ under ‘neurodegenerative disease’.” We have also built a suite of tools for managing ontology changes. These include an automated agent that integrates with and monitors GitHub ontology repositories and applies any requested changes and a new component in the BioPortal ontology resource that allows users to make change requests directly from within the BioPortal user interface. Overall, the KGCL data model, its CNL, and associated tooling allow for easier management and processing of changes associated with the development of ontologies and KGs.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Artificial Intelligence Ontology: LLM-Assisted Construction of AI Concept Hierarchies

The Artificial Intelligence Ontology (AIO) is a systematization of artificial intelligence (AI) concepts, methodologies, and their interrelations. Developed via manual curation, with the additional assistance of large language models (LLMs), AIO aims to address the rapidly evolving landscape of AI by providing a comprehensive framework that encompasses both technical and ethical aspects of AI technologies. The primary audience for AIO includes AI researchers, developers, and educators seeking standardized terminology and concepts within the AI domain. We use the term “branches” for classes, and their subclasses, in our ontology that are subclasses of owl:Thing. AIO contains eight branches: Bias, Layer, Machine Learning Task, Mathematical Function, Model, Network, Preprocessing, and Training Strategy, each designed to support the modular composition of AI methods and facilitate a deeper understanding of deep learning architectures and ethical considerations in AI. AIO uses the Ontology Development Kit (ODK) for its creation and maintenance, with its content being more easily updated through AI-driven curation support. This approach not only ensures the ontology's relevance amidst the fast-paced advancements in AI but also significantly enhances its utility for researchers, developers, and educators by simplifying the integration of new AI concepts and methodologies. The ontology's utility is demonstrated through the annotation of AI methods data in a catalog of AI research publications and the integration into the BioPortal ontology resource, highlighting its potential for cross-disciplinary research. The AIO ontology is open source and is available on GitHub ( https://w3id.org/aio/ ) and BioPortal ( https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/AIO ).

Joachimiak, Marcin P. [Biosystems Data Science Dep↗