Abstract
We compare two distinct approaches for querying data in the context of the life sciences. The first approach utilizes conventional databases to store the data and provides intuitive form-based interfaces to facilitate querying of the data, commonly used by the life science researchers that we study. The second approach utilizes a large OWL ontology and the same datasets associated as RDF instances of the ontology. Both approaches are being used in parallel by a team of cell biologists in their daily research activities, with the objective of gradually replacing the conventional approach with the knowledgedriven one. We describe several benefits of the knowledge-driven approach in comparison to the traditional one, and highlight a few limitations. We believe that our analysis not only explicitly highlights the benefits and limitations of semantic Web technologies in the context of life sciences but also contributes toward effective ways of translating a question in a researcher’s mind into precise queries with the intent of obtaining effective answers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Paige tools, http://paige.ctegd.uga.edu
Parikh, P., Minning, T., Nguyen, V., Lalithsena, S., Asiaee, A., Sahoo, S., Doshi, P., Tarleton, R., Sheth, A.: A Semantic Problem Solving Environment for Integrative Parasite Research: Identification of Intervention Targets for Trypanosoma cruzi. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 6(1), e1458 (2012)
Cuebee (Original Version), http://Cuebee.sourceforge.net
Mendes, P., McKnight, B., Sheth, A., Kissinger, J.: Tcruzikb: Enabling complex queries for genomic data exploration. In: IEEE-ICSC, pp. 432–439 (2008)
Sirin, E., Parsia, B.: SPARQL-DL: SPARQL Query for OWL-DL. In : Third OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED) (2007)
Kiefer, C., Bernstein, A., Lee, H.J., Klein, M., Stocker, M.: Semantic Process Retrieval with iSPARQL. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 609–623. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Russell, A., Smart, P., Braines, D., Shadbolt, N.: NITELIGHT: A Graphical Tool for Semantic Query Construction. In: SWUI Hosted by CHI, Florence (2008)
Bernstein, A., Kaufmann, E., Kaiser, C., Kiefer, C.: Ginseng: A Guided Input Natural Language Search Engine for Querying Ontologies. In: Jena User Conference, UK (2006)
Dietze, H., Schroeder, M.: GoWeb: a semantic search engine for the life science web. BMC Bioinformatics 10(suppl. 10), S:7 (2009)
Cheung, K., Frost, H., Marshall, M., Prud’hommeaux, E., Samwald, M., Zhao, J., Paschke, A.: A journey to Semantic Web query federation in the life sciences. BMC Bioinformatics 10(suppl. 10), S:10 (2009)
Brooke, J.: SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp.189–194 (1996)
Cuebee (Enhanced Version), http://jade.cs.uga.edu:8080/Cuebee
TriTrypDB, http://tritrypdb.org
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Asiaee, A.H. et al. (2013). From Questions to Effective Answers: On the Utility of Knowledge-Driven Querying Systems for Life Sciences Data. In: Baker, C.J.O., Butler, G., Jurisica, I. (eds) Data Integration in the Life Sciences. DILS 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7970. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39437-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39437-9_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39436-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39437-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)