Abstract
A principled and logical representation of the structure of the human body has led to conflicts with traditional representations of the same knowledge by anatomy textbooks. The examples which illustrate resolution of these conflicts suggest that stricter requirements must be met for semantic consistency, expressivity and specificity by knowledge sources intended to support inference than by textbooks and term lists. These next-generation resources should influence traditional concept representation, rather than be constrained by convention.
Full text
PDF
Images in this article
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Mejino J. L., Jr, Rosse C. The potential of the digital anatomist foundational model for assuring consistency in UMLS sources. Proc AMIA Symp. 1998:825–829. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rosse C., Ben Said M., Eno K. R., Brinkley J. F. Enhancements of anatomical information in UMLS knowledge sources. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care. 1995:873–877. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rosse C., Mejino J. L., Modayur B. R., Jakobovits R., Hinshaw K. P., Brinkley J. F. Motivation and organizational principles for anatomical knowledge representation: the digital anatomist symbolic knowledge base. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1998 Jan-Feb;5(1):17–40. doi: 10.1136/jamia.1998.0050017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rosse C., Shapiro L. G., Brinkley J. F. The digital anatomist foundational model: principles for defining and structuring its concept domain. Proc AMIA Symp. 1998:820–824. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]