Conceptual Biology Research Supporting Platform: Current Design and Future Directions

  • Ying Xie
  • Jayasimha Katukuri
  • Vijay V. Raghavan
  • Tony Presti
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 122)


Conceptual biology utilizes a vast amount of published biomedical data to enhance and speed up biomedical research. Current computational study on conceptual biology focuses on hypothesis generation from biomedical literature. Most of the algorithms for hypothesis generation are dedicated to produce one type of hypothesis called pairwise relation by interacting with certain search engines such as PubMed. In order to fully realize the potential of conceptual biology, we designed and implemented a conceptual biology research support platform that consists of a set of interrelated information extraction, mining, reasoning, and visualizing technologies to automatically generate several types of biomedical hypotheses and to facilitate researchers in validating generated hypotheses. In this chapter, we provide detailed descriptions of the platform architecture, the algorithms for generating novel hypotheses, and the technologies for visualizing generated hypotheses. Furthermore, we propose a set of computational procedures and measures for evaluating generated hypotheses. The experimental analysis of the proposed hypothesis generation algorithms is also presented.


Association Rule Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Semantic Type Support Level Test Collection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cohen AM, Hersh WR (2005) A survey of current work in biomedical text mining. Brie_ngs in Bioinformatics. 6:57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Don RS (1986) Raynaud's syndrome, and undiscovered public knowledge. Perspective in Biology and Medicine 30(1):7–18.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Don RS (1990) Medical literature as a potential source of new knowledge. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 78(1):29–37MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Don RS (1990) Somatomedin C and arginine: implicit connection between mutually-isolated literatures. Perspective in Biology and Medicine 33(2):157–186.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gambineri A, Patton L, Vaccina A, Cacciari M, Morselli-Labate AM, Cavazza C, Pagotto U, Pasquali R (2006) Treatment with utamide, metformin, and their combination added to a hypocaloric diet in overweight-obese women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a randomized, 12-month, placebo-controlled study. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 91(10):3970–3980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drugbank. of October, 2007.
  7. 7.
    ExPAsy Proteomics Server (ExPAsy). of October, 2007.
  8. 8.
    Hongkun Z, Weiyi M, Zonghuan W, Vijay VR, Clement TY (2005) Fully automatic wrapper generation for search engines. Proceedings of the 14th International World Wide Web Conference (Chiba, Japan) 66–75.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hu X, Zhang X, Li G, Yoo I, Zhou X, Wu D (to be published) Mining Hidden Connections among Biomedical Concepts from Disjoint Biomedical Literature Sets through Semantic-based Association Rule. International Journal of Intelligent Systems.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johannes S, Guenter G (2003) Hypothesis generation guided by co-word clustering. Scientometrics 56(1):111–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Michael DG, Robert KL (1996) Toward Discovery Support Systems: A Replication, Re-Examination, and Extension of Swanson's Work on Literature-Based Discovery. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 47(2):116–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mikhail VB, Arthur BP (2002) Unearthing the gems. Nature 416:373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ohtomo S, Izuhara Y, Takizawa S, Yamada N, Kakuta T, van Ypersele de Strihou C, Miyata T (2007) Thiazolidinediones provide better renoprotection than insulin in an obese, hypertensive type II diabetic rat model. Kidney international.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Padmini S (2004) Text mining: generating hypotheses from MedLine. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology 55(5):396–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    The RCSB Protein Data Bank (PDB). of October, 2007
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Selego. http://www.selego.comas of Octorber, 2007.
  18. 18.
    Tanja B(2006) Conceptual biology, hypothesis discovery, and text mining: Swanson's legacy. Biomedical Digital Library 3(2).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Uni_ed Medical Language System (UMLS): of October, 2007.
  20. 20.
    Wanda P, Meliha Y(2003) LitLinker: capturing connections across the biomedical literature. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Knowledge capture (New York, USA) 105–112.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weeber M, Klein H, Aronson AR, Mork JG, JongVan Den Berg L, Vos R(2000) Text-based discovery in biomedicine: the architecture of the DAD-system. Proceedings of the AMIA Annual FALL Symposium(Philadelphia, USA) 903–907.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yiyu Y, A Framework for Web-based Research Support Systems. Proceedings of 27th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (Dallas, USA) 601–606.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    1999 The Diabetes Prevention Program. Design and methods for a clinical trial in the prevention of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 22(4):623–634.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ying Xie
    • 1
  • Jayasimha Katukuri
    • 2
  • Vijay V. Raghavan
    • 2
  • Tony Presti
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Information SystemsKennesaw State UniversityKennesawUSA
  2. 2.Center for Advanced Computer StudiesUniversity of Louisiana at LafayetteLafayetteUSA
  3. 3.Araicom Research, LLC.USA

Personalised recommendations