The new release of the Modern Science Ontology (ModSci)

Dear All,

We are happy to announce the new release of the Modern Science Ontology (ModSci), an ontology for modeling relationships between modern science branches and related entities, such as scientific discoveries, phenomena, renowned scientists, instruments, etc. ModSci is a poly-hierarchical ontology that can be utilized in Semantic Web applications. It is an upper ontology that provides a unifying framework for the various domain ontologies that make up the Science Knowledge Graph Ontology (SKGO) Suite [1].

ModSci can be browsed online, through web-based repository front-end for browsing and visualizing published ontologies, at BioPortal, Linked Open Vocabularies, and AberOWL, thus increasing the findability and reusability of the ontology.

Indeed, the classification of research topics through ontological taxonomies supports a diversity of research areas, such as information exploration (e.g., in digital libraries), scholarly data analytics and integration, and modeling research dynamics.

The ModSci classification tree of modern sciences branches is freely available for research purposes in HTML format (viewable as an interactive graph).

ModSci powers two projects for semantically representing scholarly information: Open Research Knowledge Graph and OpenResearch.org.

3 Likes

Nice work! :+1:

I noticed, however, that the introduction still contains placeholder text:

Introduction

This is a place holder text for the introduction. The introduction should briefly describe the ontology, its motivation, state of the art and goals.

The references list is also empty:

References

Add your references here. It is recommended to have them as a list.

Finally, how should we interpret instances of those classes? I mean, if I say

<#example> a modsci:Astronomy

what should be our interpretation of the instance #example? The document should make some considerations about that.

Maybe it would make more sense to model this ontology with the fields of modern science being instances of skos:Concept instead of classes? In fact, in my view, this ontology seems to be a typical use case for using SKOS. Just a thought.