You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For @ukemi :
The high level goal is to check a biological process node in a GO-CAM model with a manually assigned type to see if the manual assignment agrees with the term's logical definition in GO.
If the definition is complete and the model is complete, then it ought to be possible to simply take out the manually assigned type and see if the reasoner could recapitulate it or not. If not, then we either have an insufficient definition (very likely and common) or a problem with the Reactome data (model or content).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm not sure the reasoner could completely recapitulate the BP from the root nodes. Most BPs are logically defined with respect to a generic class. But, we should be able to use this kind of check to ensure model consistency. The model should not violate the logical axioms of the BP term This is a really good idea.
For @ukemi :
The high level goal is to check a biological process node in a GO-CAM model with a manually assigned type to see if the manual assignment agrees with the term's logical definition in GO.
If the definition is complete and the model is complete, then it ought to be possible to simply take out the manually assigned type and see if the reasoner could recapitulate it or not. If not, then we either have an insufficient definition (very likely and common) or a problem with the Reactome data (model or content).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: