Re: Vocab AND Ontology?

From: Frederic V. Hessman <Hessman-at-Astro.physik.Uni-Goettingen.DE>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:30:30 +0200


Last corrections implemented, as listed below.

By and large a simple exercise, particularly since many already exist, but one sees how this process has to asymptotically converge BY DEFINITION, not by time or effort. May I suggest that the state of the Vocabulary/Thesaurus be fixed by the end of this week - last chance for last-minute additions! Whatever you can't find after that must not have been very important.

Can we find appropriate mathematical, physical and/or chemical vocabularies out there? We could unload a lot of baggage.... In the long term, surely there will be available vocabularies for the semantic web - everyone can't be expected to re-invent the circle or the logarithm. On the other hand, we don't want to use a vocabulary from www.viagra.tv - doesn't the IVOA maintain any contacts to some international Math/Physics/Chemistry/.... organizations? Isn't there an International Virtual Mathematics Chalkboard Association? or an International Virtual Testtube Association?

Rob's suggestion of splitting things into the original thesaurus (or at least a corrected version of the old thesaurus - mixed cases, underbars, and lots of tokens shifted into ALTs) and new additions would be a pain, given the amount of cleaning up we've done, but if ya'll want it that way and as long as it means that the WG makes a decision about how to handle multiple vocabularies: ivorn formats, normative file formats, suggested translation infrastructure (e.g. references to math:ellipses). If this will take too long, I vote for one giant starting vocabulary based upon the IAU but with all the present corrections/additions.

Wait a minute - a great idea: wouldn't the IAU/IVOA thesaurus be a GREAT place to put all the STC shortcuts?! How else are we to know where to find them? Or create a STC shortcut vocabulary as a new, practical, and exemplary example.

On 8 Oct 2007, at 7:01 pm, Ed Shaya wrote:

> Some additional terms:
>
> absorption line system

        "absorption_line_systems" BT "absorption_lines" RT "quasars"
> Lyman alpha absorption system

        "Lyman_alpha_forest" (exists, but needed to be NT "absorption_line_systems")
> supergalactic coordinate system

        "supergalactic_coordinate_system" BT "coordinate_systems" RT "galaxy_cluters"
> supergalactic longitude

        "supergalactic_longitude" BT "longitude" RT "supergalactic_coordinate_system"
> supergalactic latitude

        (~Ibid).
> carbon star

        "carbon_stars" (exists)
> Hicks group

        "Hickson_compact_groups" BT "groups_of_galaxies" ALT "HCG"
> equation of state

        "equation_of_state" RT "atomic_processes" "interactions"
> galaxy disk flare

Well,..... how about

        "disk_flaring" RT "disks" "morphology"

> coronal mass ejection

        "coronal_mass_ejections" (exists)
> L dwarf

        ALT for "L_stars" (unlike "M_stars", which don't have to be dwarfs)
> T dwarf

        ALT for "T_stars" (Ibid.)

Actually, there is a need is for

	"L_subdwarfs" BT "L_stars"
	"T_subdwarfs" BT "T_stars"


> magnetar
"magnetars" BT "magnetic_stars" "neutron_stars"
> soft gamma ray repeater
"soft_gamma-ray_repeaters" BT "magnetars" "gamma-ray_sources"
"irregular_variable_stars"
> cosmochronology

        "cosmochronology" ALT "nucleocosmochronology" RT "age" "cosmology" "nuclear_fission"
> dark energy

        "Dark_Energy" (exists)
> red clump

        "red_giant_clump" BT "giant_branch" RT "metal-rich_stars"
> red giant bump

        "red_giant_bump" BT "giant_branch"
> blue loop

        "blue_loop" BT "giant_branch"
> extreme horizontal branch star

        "extreme_horizontal_branch_stars" BT "horizontal_branch_stars"
> PG1159 (subclass of extremely hot helium rich WD)

	"DO_stars" BT "white_dwarf_stars"
	"GW_Virginis_stars" BT "DO_stars" "multi-periodic_variable_stars"  
ALT "PG1159 stars" "PG1159-35 stars"
> low mass x-ray binary

Ooops - as an old CV person, I should have thought of

        "low-mass_X-ray_binary_stars" BT "X-ray_binary_stars" ALT "LMXB" RT "low-mass_stars" "neutron_stars" "accretion_disks"
> high mass x-ray binary

        "high-mass_X-ray_binary_stars" BT "X-ray_binary_stars" ALT "HMXB" RT "high-mass_stars" "neutron_stars" "black_holes"
> primary companion star
> secondary companion star
> tertiary companion star

I agree with Rob that this could be done ontologically differently if we knew how to combine tokens, but these are very common phrases in the binary business, so

	"primary_stars" BT "companion_stars"
	"secondary_stars" BT "companion_stars"
	"tertiary_stars" BT "companion_stars"


> tip of red giant branch distance
"RGB_tip_distances" BT "distance_measurements" RT "red_giant_tip"
> Cepheid distance
"Cepheid_distances" BT "distance_measurements" RT "Cepheids"
> surface brightness fluctuation distance
"SBF_distances" BT "distance_measurements" ALT "SBF" RT
"elliptical_galaxies"
> Faber-Jackson distance

Ooops - did we really forget Faber-Jackson? Then we also forgot the "fundamental_plane"! Good thing we still have a few days... :-)

        "fundamental_plane" BT "radius-luminosity_relations" "luminosity- dispersion_relations" NT "Faber-Jackson_relation" RT "elliptical_galaxies"

        "luminosity-dispersion_relation" BT "correlation" RT "luminosity" "velocity_dispersion"

        "Faber-Jackson_relation" BT "luminosity-dispersion_relation" "fundamental_plane" RT "elliptical_galaxies"

        "Faber-Jackson_distance" BT "distance_measurement" RT "Faber- Jackson_relation"
> log

        This belongs in the math vocabulary (wherever that is - help!).

> log g (a particularly important log quantity)

        "log_g" BT "g_values" N "logarithm reference needed!"
> overabundance

        "overabundance" BT "abundance"
> underabundance

        "underabundance" BT "abundance"
> enrichment

        "enrichment" BT "chemical_evolution" RT "abundance"

> Geometric Quantities: (separate namespace?)
> projections (ie mercator etc)

Oh yes, all the stuff STC and FITS WCS supports.....

> region
> area
> circle
> greate circle
> boundary
> conic section
> spheroid
> sphere
> oblate spheroid
> prolate spheroid
> parabola
> hyperbola
> square
> radius
> diameter

Separate vocabulary is probably a good idea - aren't there any math ones out there? This is a good example of where we might be able to be conformal to an external semantic-web namespace if it exists.

> General Unit Dimensions: (separate namespace?)
> height
> width
> length
> area
> volume
> mass density

Ibid.

> all of the elements, isotopes, ionization states, transitions(in a
> different namespace?)

Chemistry vocabularies/ontologies, anyone?

> all of the photmetric systems (ie, Johnson filters (UBVRI) and
> other systems ubvgri, etc) (in a different namespace?)

Ugh. Might be more elegant, but since they're already in the IAU thesaurus and VERY astronomical, we should leave them in.

Rick



Dr. Frederic V. Hessman     Hessman-at-Astro.physik.Uni-Goettingen.DE
Institut für Astrophysik          Tel.  +49-551-39-5052
Friedrich-Hund-Platz 1         Fax +49-551-39-5043
37077 Goettingen                 Room F04-133
http://www.Astro.physik.Uni-Goettingen.de/~hessman


MONET: a MOnitoring NEtwork of Telescopes
http://monet.Uni-Goettingen.de
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
-------------------------
Received on 2007-10-09Z15:31:16