Classificatory Theory in Data-intensive Science: The Case of Open Biomedical Ontologies

Knowledge-making practices in biology are being strongly affected by the availability of data on an unprecedented scale, the insistence on systemic approaches and growing reliance on bioinformatics and digital infrastructures. What role does theory play within data-intensive science, and what does that tell us about scientific theories in general? To answer these questions, I focus on Open Biomedical Ontologies, digital classification tools that have become crucial to sharing results across research contexts in the biological and biomedical sciences, and argue that they constitute an example of classificatory theory. This form of theorizing emerges from classification practices in conjunction with experimental know-how and expresses the knowledge underpinning the analysis and interpretation of data disseminated online.

[1]  James A. Evans,et al.  Machine Science , 2010, Science.

[2]  Sean Bechhofer,et al.  Understanding and using the meaning of statements in a bio-ontology: recasting the Gene Ontology in OWL , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[3]  Judith A. Blake,et al.  Beyond the data deluge: Data integration and bio-ontologies , 2006, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[4]  Winston A Hide,et al.  Big data: The future of biocuration , 2008, Nature.

[5]  Kenneth Baclawski,et al.  Ontologies for Bioinformatics , 2005 .

[6]  K. Buetow.  Cyberinfrastructure: Empowering a "Third Way" in Biomedical Research , 2005, Science.

[7]  Daniel P. Miranker,et al.  Mapping between the OBO and OWL ontology languages , 2011, J. Biomed. Semant..

[8]  Allen H. Renear,et al.  Strategic Reading, Ontologies, and the Future of Scientific Publishing , 2009, Science.

[9]  Staffan Müller-Wille,et al.  Natural history and information overload: The case of Linnaeus , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[10]  John Quackenbush,et al.  Data standards: a call to action. , 2006, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[11]  Luisa Calè,et al.  The Disorder of Things , 2011 .

[12]  Peter A. Chow-White,et al.  Bidirectional Shaping and Spaces of Convergence , 2012 .

[13]  Margaret Morrison.  Unifying Scientific Theories: Index , 2000 .

[14]  S. Leonelli,et al.  Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives , 2009 .

[15]  J. Pickstone.  Ways of Knowing: A New History of Science, Technology, and Medicine , 2000 .

[16]  Maureen A. O’Malley,et al.  Philosophies of Funding , 2009, Cell.

[17]  Werner Callebaut,et al.  Scientific perspectivism: A philosopher of science's response to the challenge of big data biology. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[18]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[19]  J. Griesemer.  Theoretical Integration, Cooperation, and Theories as Tracking Devices , 2006 .

[20]  M. Hesse.  The Structure of Scientific Inference , 2023 .

[21]  B. Strasser.  The Experimenter's Museum: GenBank, Natural History, and the Moral Economies of Biomedicine , 2011, Isis.

[22]  D. Kell,et al.  Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post-genomic era. , 2004, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[23]  Gary H. Merrill,et al.  Ontological realism: Methodology or misdirection? , 2010, Appl. Ontology.

[24]  Natural Kind Theory as a Tool for Philosophers of Science , 2009 .

[25]  J. Dupré.  In Defence of Classification , 2001 .

[26]  H. Kyburg,et al.  How the laws of physics lie , 1984 .

[27]  J. Bard,et al.  Ontologies in biology: design, applications and future challenges , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  Ingo Brigandt,et al.  Natural Kinds in Evolution and Systematics: Metaphysical and Epistemological Considerations , 2009, Acta biotheoretica.

[29]  Tony Hey,et al.  The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery , 2009 .

[30]  Vernon Ahmadjian,et al.  Symbiosis: An Introduction to Biological Associations , 1988 .

[31]  C. Bult.  From information to understanding: the role of model organism databases in comparative and functional genomics. , 2006, Animal genetics.

[32]  Ewan Birney,et al.  Genomic information infrastructure after the deluge , 2010, Genome Biology.

[33]  A. Brazma,et al.  Standards for systems biology , 2006, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[34]  Ambuj K. Singh,et al.  Predicting genetic interactions with random walks on biological networks , 2009, BMC Bioinformatics.

[35]  A. Rector,et al.  Relations in biomedical ontologies , 2005, Genome Biology.

[36]  Ronald N. Giere,et al.  Science without laws , 1999 .

[37]  C. Maria Keet.  Dependencies between ontology design parameters , 2010, Int. J. Metadata Semant. Ontologies.

[38]  M. Norton Wise,et al.  Science without laws : model systems, cases, exemplary narratives , 2007 .

[39]  R. S. Woolhouse,et al.  Revolutions and Reconstructions in the Philosophy of Science. , 1981 .

[40]  M. Ashburner,et al.  The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[41]  Maureen A. O’Malley,et al.  Metagenomics and biological ontology. , 2007, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[42]  S. Leonelli,et al.  Introduction: Making sense of data-driven research in the biological and biomedical sciences. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[43]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  Documenting the emergence of bio-ontologies: or, why researching bioinformatics requires HPSSB. , 2010, History and philosophy of the life sciences.

[44]  Staffan Müller-Wille,et al.  Collection and collation: theory and practice of Linnaean botany. , 2007, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[45]  C. Hamlin,et al.  Ways of Knowing: A New History of Science, Technology and Medicine , 2001 .

[46]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  How the gene ontology evolves , 2011, BMC Bioinformatics.

[47]  Margaret Morrison,et al.  Unifying Scientific Theories by Margaret Morrison , 2000 .

[48]  Sabina Leonelli,et al.  On the Locality of Data and Claims about Phenomena , 2009, Philosophy of Science.

[49]  J F Allen,et al.  Bioinformatics and discovery: induction beckons again , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[50]  Werner Ceusters,et al.  Ontological realism: A methodology for coordinated evolution of scientific ontologies , 2010, Appl. Ontology.

[51]  M. Ashburner,et al.  Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology , 2000, Nature Genetics.

[52]  Michel Dumontier,et al.  Relations as patterns: bridging the gap between OBO and OWL , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[53]  S. Burger.  An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine , 1950, The Pharos of Alpha Omega Alpha-Honor Medical Society. Alpha Omega Alpha.

[54]  J. Woodward,et al.  Saving the phenomena , 1988 .

[55]  C. Bernard.  Medical Classic. (Book Reviews: An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine) , 1957 .

[56]  Seung Yon Rhee,et al.  Biological Databases for Plant Research , 2005, Plant Physiology.

[57]  Margaret Morrison,et al.  Models as Mediators , 1999 .

[58]  L. Darden.  Theory Construction in Genetics , 1980 .

[59]  Suzanna E Lewis,et al.  Gene Ontology: looking backwards and forwards , 2004, Genome Biology.

[60]  Kathryn Denning.  Thinking from Things: Essays in the Philosophy of Archaeology , 2003, European Journal of Archaeology.

[61]  R. Ankeny,et al.  Re-thinking organisms: The impact of databases on model organism biology. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[62]  Judith A. Blake,et al.  Gene Ontology annotations: what they mean and where they come from , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[63]  J. McAllister.  Phenomena and Patterns in Data Sets , 1997 .