Vocab AND Ontology?

[Frederic V. Hessman]

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
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
-------------------------


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20071009/deeea3aa/attachment-0001.html>