the w3c prov standard:data model for the provenance of information, and enabler for trustworthy...
DESCRIPTION
Invited talk at the National Institute of Informatics (NII), Tokyo, July 2014TRANSCRIPT
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
The W3C PROV standard:data model for the provenance of information,
and enabler for trustworthy publicationand exchange of open data
Paolo Missier, PhD
School of Computing Science
Newcastle University
Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
NII, Tokyo, July, 2014
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Motivation: generating and publishing genomics data
• Next Generation Sequencing at the forefront of genomics• the number of DNA base pairs that can be sequenced per $ doubles every five
months (2010)
• In the UK, the cost of sequencing a single patient sample is currently just under $1.5K and decreasing
• Genetic testing: from research method to clinical diagnostic tool
• Key technology: Whole-exome / Whole-genome processing pipelines (WEP/WGP)
• Key problem: assessing the reliability of the results
Goal of data processing and interpretation:
to rapidly identify genetic mutations across the entire genome, which:• Have known associations to genetic diseases• Are unknown but potentially deleterious
Specifically important in the study of rare diseases
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Data publication and reuse in science/biology/genomics
Public, genome-wide gene expression data is potentially highly reusable
Rung, Johan, and Alvis Brazma. “Reuse of Public Genome-Wide Gene Expression Data.” Nature Reviews. Genetics 14, no. 2 (March 2013): 89–99. doi:10.1038/nrg3394.
But:
• Published data must be provably correct, trustworthy
Approximately half of the studies that use public gene expression data rely solely on existing data without adding newly generated data, and half of them use the public data in combination with new data.
Problem:
• A large WEP/ WES space, many experimental configurations, many possible results
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Workflow for programming pipelines
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Multiple Workflow systems for implementing pipelines…
[1] Torri, Federica, Ivo D Dinov, Alen Zamanyan, Sam Hobel, Alex Genco, Petros Petrosyan, Andrew P Clark, et al. “Next Generation Sequence Analysis and Computational Genomics Using Graphical Pipeline Workflows.” Genes 3, no. 3 (August 30, 2012): 545–575. doi:10.3390/genes3030545.
[2] Goecks, Jeremy, Anton Nekrutenko, and James Taylor. “Galaxy: A Comprehensive Approach for Supporting Accessible, Reproducible, and Transparent Computational Research in the Life Sciences.” Genome Biology 11, no. 8 (January 2010): R86. doi:10.1186/gb-2010-11-8-r86.
[3] Reid, Jeffrey, Andreq Carroll, Narayanan Veeraraghavan, and Mahmoud Dahdouli. “Launching Genomics into the Cloud: Deployment of Mercury, a next Generation Sequence Analysis Pipeline.” BMC Bioinformatics (2014).
Loni pipeline (UCLA, USA) [1]Newcastle, UK [4]
Mercury [3]Baylor College of Medicine,Houston. Tx., USA)
[2]
[4] Watson, Paul, Hugo Hiden, and Simon Woodman. “E-Science Central for CARMEN: Science as a Service.” Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 22, no. 17 (2010): 2369–2380. doi:10.1002/cpe.1611.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Multiple Pipeline configurations
Many tools to choose from, multiple ways to configure each tool
From: Pabinger, Stephan, Andreas Dander, Maria Fischer, Rene Snajder, Michael Sperk, Mirjana Efremova, Birgit Krabichler, Michael R Speicher, Johannes Zschocke, and Zlatko Trajanoski. “A Survey of Tools for Variant Analysis of next-Generation Genome Sequencing Data.” Briefings in Bioinformatics (January 21, 2013): bbs086–. doi:10.1093/bib/bbs086.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
… and different configurations yield very different results
Outcomes are very sensitive to pipeline configuration
False positives, false negatives
The set of genetic mutations identified in one individual may vary
greatly depending on the tools used
Also: tools evolve over time longitudinal variations over results
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
The Cloud-e-Genome project
Goal 1:
provide mechanisms to rapidly and flexibly create new WEP pipelines, and to deploy them in a scalable way;
Goal 2:provide clinicians with a tool for analysis and interpretation of human variants
• 2 year pilot project• Funded by UK’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
through the Biomedical Research Council (BRC)
Challenge:
to deliver the benefits of WES/WGS technology to clinical practice
NGS data processing
Human variant interpretation for clinical diagnosis
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Implementing the pipeline using workflow technology
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Pipeline evolution
Pipeline:
set C = { c1 … cn } of components -- tool wrappers
Each ci has a configuration conf(ci) and a version v(ci)
…and why
• Technology / algorithm evolution• Traditional GATK variant caller
GATK haplotype caller• Does the interface change?• Do the operational assumptions
change?
Eg. GATK Variant Recalibrator requires large input data. Not suitable for targeted sequencing
What can change
1 – Tool version:v(ci) v’(ci)
2 - Tool replacement / add / remove:ci c’I
3 – Configuration parametersconf(ci) conf’(ci)
(*) S. Pabinger, A. Dander, M. Fischer, R. Snajder, M. Sperk, M. Efremova, B. Krabichler, M. R. Speicher, J. Zschocke, and Z. Trajanoski, “A survey of tools for variant analysis of next-generation genome sequencing data.” Briefings in bioinformatics, pp. bbs086–, Jan. 2013
Just for sequence alignment Pabinger et al. in their survey (*) list 17 aligners while for variant annotation they refer to over 70 tools
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
How do you know published results are sound?
Mechanisms for data dissemination exist
Data journals
Data repositories
Data structures: Research Objects(from ResearchObject.org)
Bechhofer, Sean, Iain Buchan, David De Roure, Paolo Missier, J. Ainsworth, J. Bhagat, P. Couch, et al. “Why Linked Data Is Not Enough for Scientists.” Future Generation Computer Systems (2011). doi:doi:10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004.
… but they are not enough to meet two key requirements:
• Attribution of published data to its producers
• Verifiability and reproducibility of scientific results
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Role of provenance
Provenance refers to the sources of information, including entities and processes, involving in producing or delivering an artifact (*)
Provenance is a description of how things came to be, and how they came to be in the state they are in today (*)
• Provenance is evidence in support of clinical diagnosis1. Why do these variants appear in the output list?
2. Why have you concluded they are disease-causing?
• Requires ability to trace variants through workflow execution
• Workflow managers provide this
“Why are these variants included in the results?”
“Why do these two results differ?”
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Why does provenance matter?
• To establish quality, relevance, trust
• To track information attribution through complex transformations
• To describe one’s experiment to others, for understanding / reuse
• To provide evidence in support of scientific claims
• To enable process analysis for debugging, improvement,
evolution
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
The W3C Working Group on Provenance: timeline
14
W3CIncubator groupon provenance
Chair: Yolanda Gil, ISI, USC
W3Cworking groupapproved
Chairs: Luc Moreau,Paul Groth
2009-2010
Main output:“Provenance XG Final Report”http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov/- provides an overview of the various existing approaches, vocabularies- proposes the creation of a dedicated W3C Working
Group
April, 2011 April, 2013
ProposedRecommendationsfinalised
prov-dm: Data Modelprov-o: OWL ontology, RDF encodingprov-n: prov notationprov-constraints
...plus a number of non-prescriptive Notes
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
PROV: scope and structure
15
source: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/
Recommendationtrack
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
PROV Core Elements (graph depiction)
16
An entity is a physical, digital, conceptual, or other kind of thing with some fixed aspects; entities may be real or imaginary.
An activity is something that occurs over a period of time and acts upon or with entities; it may include consuming, processing, transforming, ..., using, or generating entities.
An agent is something that bears some form of responsibility for an activity taking place, for the existence of an entity, or for another agent's activity.
Jump to alternate
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Generation, Usage
17
Generation is the completion of production of a new entity by an activity. This entity did not exist before generation and becomes available for usage after this generation.
Usage is the beginning of utilizing an entity by an activity. Before usage, the activity had not begun to utilize this entity
PROV is based on a notion of instantaneous events, that mark transitions in the world
- generation, usage (and others)
Ordering constraints amongst events:
“generation of e must precede each of usages”
“a can only use / generate e after it has started and before it has ended”
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Concepts and relations
18
Generation of “draft v1” expressed as relation:
wasGeneratedBy(“draft v1”, ...)
Usage of “draft v1” by “commenting” expressed as relation:
used(“commenting, “draft v1”,...)
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
PROV notation
19
document
prefix prov <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#>prefix ex <http://www.example.com/>
entity(ex:draftComments)entity(ex:draftV1, [ ex:distr='internal', ex:status = "draft"])entity(ex:paper1)entity(ex:paper2)
activity(ex:commenting)activity(ex:drafting)wasGeneratedBy(ex:draftComments, ex:commenting, 2013-03-18T11:10:00)used(ex:commenting, ex:draftV1, -)wasGeneratedBy(ex:draftV1, ex:drafting, -)used(ex:drafting, ex:paper1, -)used(ex:drafting, ex:paper2, -)
endDocument
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sierSame example — PROV-O notation (RDF/N3)
20
:draftComments a prov:Entity ; :distr "internal"^^xsd:string ; prov:wasGeneratedBy :commenting .
:commenting a prov:Activity ; prov:used :draftV1 .
:draftV1 a prov:Entity ; :distr "internal"^^xsd:string ; :status "draft"^^xsd:string ; :version "0.1"^^xsd:string ; prov:wasGeneratedBy :drafting .
:drafting a prov:Activity ; prov:used :paper1, :paper2 .
:paper1 a prov:Entity, "reference"^^xsd:string .
:paper2 a prov:Entity, "reference"^^xsd:string .
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Association, Attribution, Delegation: who did what?
21
An activity association is an assignment of responsibility to an agent for an activity, indicating that the agent had a role in the activity.
Attribution is the ascribing of an entity to an agent.
entity(ex:draftComments, [ ex:distr='internal' ])activity(ex:commenting)agent(ex:Bob, [prov:type = "mainEditor"] )agent(ex:Alice, [prov:type = "srEditor"])
wasAssociatedWith(ex:commenting, Bob, -, [prov:role = "editor"])actedOnBehalfOf(Bob, Alice)wasAttributedTo(ex:draftComments, ex:Bob)
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sierSame example — PROV-O notation (RDF/N3)
22
:Alice a prov:Agent, "ex:chiefEditor"; :firstName "Alice"; :lastName "Cooper".
:Bob a prov:Agent, "ex:seniorEditor"; :firstName "Robert"; :lastName "Thompson"^; prov:actedOnBehalfOf :Alice .
:draftComments prov:wasAttributedTo :Bob .:drafting a prov:Activity ; prov:wasAssociatedWith :Bob .
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Association and Attribution
23
Q.: what is the relationship between attribution and association?
This is defined as an inference rule in the PROV-CONSTR document
entity(e)agent(Ag)activity(a)
wasAttributedTo(e, Ag)wasGeneratedBy(e, a) wasAssociatedWith(a, Ag)
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Communication amongst activities
24
Communication is the exchange of some unspecified entity by two activities, one activity using some entity generated by the other.
activity(ex:commenting)activity(ex:drafting)
wasInformedBy(ex:commenting, ex:drafting)
:drafting a prov:Activity .
:commenting a prov:Activity ; prov:wasInformedBy :drafting .
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Communication, generation, usage
25
activity(ex:commenting)activity(ex:drafting)entity(e)wasInformedBy(ex:commenting, ex:drafting)wasGeneratedBy(e,ex:drafting)used(ex:commenting, e)
Q.: what is the relationship between communication, generation, and usage?
This are inference rules 5 and 6 in the PROV-CONSTR document
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Summary of the PROV Core model
26
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Derivation amongst entities
27
A derivation is a transformation of an entity into another, an update of an entity resulting in a new one, or the construction of a new entity based on a pre-existing entity.
entity(ex:draftV1)entity(ex:draftComments)wasDerivedFrom(ex:draftComments, ex:draftV1)
Q.: what is the relationship between derivation, generation, and usage?
:draftComments a prov:Entity ; prov:wasDerivedFrom :draftV1 .
:draftV1 a prov:Entity .
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Relations may be given identifiers
28
entity(ex:draftComments)entity(ex:draftV1)activity(ex:commenting)wasGeneratedBy(gen1; ex:draftComments, ex:commenting, -)used(use1; ex:commenting, ex:draftV1, -)
gen1 denotes a generation event
use1 denotes a usage event
wasDerivedFrom(id; e2, e1, a, g2, u1, attrs)
General derivation relation:
Relation IDs make it possible to refer to relations in other relations
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Rendering N-ary relations in PROV-O
29
RDF is for binary relations —- N-ary relations require reification
entity(ex:draftComments)entity(ex:draftV1)activity(ex:commenting)wasGeneratedBy(gen1; ex:draftComments, ex:commenting, 2013-03-18T10:00:01)used(use1; ex:commenting, ex:draftV1, -)
:draftComments a prov:Entity ; prov:qualifiedGeneration :gen1 .
:gen1 a prov:Generation ; prov:activity :commenting; prov:atTime “2013-03-18T10:00:01+09:00".
:commenting a prov:Activity ; prov:qualifiedUsage :use1 .
:use1 a prov:Usage ; :note "found comments useful"; prov:atTime "2013-03-21T10:00:01+09:00"; prov:entity :draftV1.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
“Qualified relation” RDF pattern
30
:draftComments a prov:Entity ; prov:qualifiedGeneration :gen1 .
:gen1 a prov:Generation ; prov:activity :commenting; prov:atTime “2013-03-18T10:00:01+09:00".
:commenting a prov:Activity ; prov:qualifiedUsage :use1 .
:use1 a prov:Usage ; :note "found comments useful"; prov:atTime "2013-03-21T10:00:01+09:00"; prov:entity :draftV1.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Plans — why was something done?
31
Most relation types have two arguments which are { Entity, Activity, Agent}
Derivation is one exception:
wasDerivedFrom(id; e2, e1, a, g2, u1, attrs)
Two other notable exceptions: - Associations with a plan- Delegation with an activity scope
wasAssociatedWith(id; a, ag, pl, attrs)
A plan is an entity that represents a set of actions or steps intended by one or more agents to achieve some goal
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Association with a plan
32
A plan plays a role in an association
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Plans are typed entities
33
activity(ex:_aProgramExecution, [ex:execTime="22.5sec"])agent(ex:_aJVM, [prov:type = “JVM-6.0”])entity(ex:myCleverProgram, [prov:type='prov:Plan', ex:label="Program 1"])
wasAssociatedWith(ex:_aProgramExecution, ex:_aJVM, ex:myCleverProgram, [prov:role="defaultRuntime", ex:accessPath="webapp" ])
A plan is an entity having prov:type = “prov:plan”
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Plan pattern as PROV-O
34
:_aProgramExecution a prov:Activity ; :execTime "22.5sec; prov:qualifiedAssociation [ a prov:Association ; :accessPath "webapp"; prov:agent :_aJVM ; prov:hadPlan :myCleverProgram ; prov:hadRole "defaultRuntime"] .
:_aJVM a prov:Agent, “Java-6.0".
:myCleverProgram a prov:Entity, prov:Plan.
activity(ex:_aProgramExecution, [ex:execTime="22.5sec"])agent(ex:_aJVM, [prov:type = “JVM-6.0”])entity(ex:myCleverProgram, [prov:type='prov:Plan', ex:label="Program 1"])
wasAssociatedWith(ex:_aProgramExecution, ex:_aJVM, ex:myCleverProgram, [prov:role="defaultRuntime", ex:accessPath="webapp" ])
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Plan pattern as PROV-O
35
:_aProgramExecution a prov:Activity ; :execTime "22.5sec; prov:qualifiedAssociation [ a prov:Association ; :accessPath "webapp"; prov:agent :_aJVM ; prov:hadPlan :myCleverProgram ; prov:hadRole "defaultRuntime"] .
:_aJVM a prov:Agent, “Java-6.0".
:myCleverProgram a prov:Entity, prov:Plan.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Delegation within an activity scope
36
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Real-world artifacts vs provenance entities
37
ref: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/PROV-FAQ#Examples_of_Provenance
“What do I know about the car I see in this Cambridge street today?”
•It was bought by Joe in 2011
•Joe drove it to Boston on March 16th, 2013. The car has now got 10,000 miles on it
•Joe drove it to Cambridge on March 18th, 2013.
“Same” car, but different provenance at each stage of its evolution
To Core Elements
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Alternate-specialization pattern
38
Two alternate entities present aspects of the same thing. These aspects may be the same or different, and the alternate entities may or may not overlap in time.
An entity that is a specialization of another shares all aspects of the latter, and additionally presents more specific aspects of the same thing as the latter.
...But, this is still that car!
Semantic notes:1. Specialization implies alternate: IF specializationOf(e1,e2) THEN alternateOf(e1,e2).2. Alternate is symmetric: IF alternateOf(e1,e2) THEN alternateOf(e2,e1)
3. Specialization is transitive: IF specializationOf(e1,e2) and specializationOf(e2,e3) THEN specializationOf(e1,e3).
To Core Elements
differing in their location
same owner, added location
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Reserved attributes and types
39
A small set of reserved attributes, with some usage restrictions
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Bundles, provenance of provenance
40
A bundle is a named set of provenance descriptions, and is itself an entity, so allowing provenance of provenance to be expressed.
bundle pm:bundle1
entity(ex:draftComments)entity(ex:draftV1)
activity(ex:commenting)wasGeneratedBy(ex:draftComments, ex:commenting,-) used(ex:commenting, ex:draftV1, -)endBundle...entity(pm:bundle1, [ prov:type='prov:Bundle' ])wasGeneratedBy(pm:bundle1, -, 2013-03-20T10:30:00)wasAttributedTo(pm:bundle1, ex:Bob)
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Bundles in PROV-O
41
Bundle definition (an RDF named graph):
ex:bundle1 { :draftComments a prov:Entity ; :status “blah"; prov:wasGeneratedBy :commenting .
:commenting a prov:Activity ; prov:used :draftV1 .
:draftV1 a prov:Entity .}
Bundle usage:
ex:bundle1 a prov:Entity, "prov:Bundle"; prov:qualifiedGeneration [ a prov:Generation ; prov:atTime “2013-03-20T10:30:00+09:00" ]; prov:wasAttributedTo :Bob .
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Time, Events
42
wasStartedBy(id; a2, e, a1, t, attrs)
wasEndedBy(id; a2, e, a1, t, attrs)
Instead, the PROV data model is implicitly based on a notion of instantaneous events, that mark transitions in the world (*)
(*) PROV-CONSTR http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-constraints/#events (non-normative)
Events:
- activity start, activity end,
- entity generation , entity usage, entity invalidation
- Provenance statements are combined by different systems
- An application may not be able to align the times involved to a single global timeline
Therefore, PROV minimizes assumptions about time
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
From “scruffy” provenance to “valid” provenance
43
- Are all possible temporal partial ordering of events equally acceptable?- How can we specify the set of all valid orderings?
More generally, how do we formally define what it means for a set of provenance statements to be valid?
PROV defines a set of temporal constraints that ensure consistency of a provenance graph
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Exploiting provenance: why do my results differ from yours?
Run pipeline version V1
V1 V2:Replace BWA versionModify Annovar configuration parameters
Variant list VL1
Variant list VL2Run pipeline version V2
??
Variant list VL1
Variant list VL2
DDIFF(data differencing)
PDIFF(provenance differencing)
Missier, Paolo, Simon Woodman, Hugo Hiden, and Paul Watson. “Provenance and Data Differencing for Workflow Reproducibility Analysis.” Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience (2013): doi:10.1002/cpe.3035.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
PDIFF - overview
WA
WB
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
The corresponding provenance traces
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Delta graph computed by PDIFF
PDIFF helps determine the impact of variations in the pipeline
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Provenance of Linked Open Data resources
Goal: to establish a LD-compliant association between an LD resource and a description of its provenance
• Where does the provenance of a LD resource live?
• How can it be accessed?
Why?
1. to enable LD search and discovery• By indexing data by its provenance
• Ex. “Find all resources for which Alice is an author which contain data derived from dataset D”
2. To enable reasoning about quality/reliability of the LD resource• Predicates and rules over provenance
• Ex. “if D has been derived from either {A,B,C} and Alice is one of the authors, then score X”
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Provenance of Linked Open Data resources: how
How: Three mechanisms:
1. Provenance Access and Query (PROV-AQ) – part of the W3C PROV recommendation suite
2. Embedding provenance statements within the resource itself• Eg the “Nanopublication” model
3. Packaging data + provenance as a Research Object
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
1. Provenance pingback and query service
Image reproduced from:De Nies, Tom, Robert Meusel, Kai Eckert, Dominique Ritze, and Anastasia Dimou. “A Lightweight Provenance Pingback and Query Service for Web Publications.” In Procs. IPAW 2014. Cologne, Germany: Springer, 2014.
Objective: to decouple publishing of content and of its provenance (as LOD)
Scenario:• Publishers publish content resources, are not responsible for provenance
• Eg. Mendeley, ResearchGate, etc.• Authors publish provenance, are not responsible for publishing content
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
2. Provenance Embedding
The nanopublication model is an example of provenance embedding within a published RDF document
From nanopub.org:
A nanopublication is the smallest unit of publishable information: an assertion about anything that can be uniquely identified and attributed to its author.Individual nanopublications can be cited by others and tracked for their impact on the community.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Nanopublication: example
Assertion: an “association” between a gene and a genetic disorder. The strength of this association is given by a statistical p-value. See nanopub.org for details
{ : a nanopub:Nanopublication ; nanopub:hasAssertion :NanoPub_1_Assertion ; nanopub:hasProvenance :NanoPub_1_Provenance . :NanoPub_1_Provenance nanopub:hasAttribution :NanoPub_1_Attribution ; nanopub:hasSupporting :NanoPub_1_Supporting . :NanoPub_1_Assertion a nanopub:Assertion . :NanoPub_1_Provenance a nanopub:Provenance . :NanoPub_1_Attribution a nanopub:Attribution . :NanoPub_1_Supporting a nanopub:Supporting .}:NanoPub_1_Assertion { :Association_1 a sio:statistical-association ; sio:has-measurement-value :Association_1_p_value ; sio:refers-to ...}:NanoPub_1_Attribution { :pav:authoredBy res_a, reS_b. :NanoPub_1_Assertion pav:createdBy ...;}:NanoPub_1_Supporting { :Association_1 opm:wasDerivedFrom gene_disease_concept_profiles_1980_2010...; opm:wasGeneratedBy gene_disease_concept_profiles_matching_1980_2010; .}
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
3. Research Objects for data and provenance packaging
Research Objects (ROs) are semantically rich aggregations of resources that bring together data, methods and people in scientific investigations.
A Research Object is a combination of:• Aggregation (reusing Object Reuse and Exchange [ORE])• Annotation (reusing the Annotation Ontology [AO])• RO ontologies
From the Wf4Ever EU project
See also: Belhajjame K, Corcho O, Garijo D, Zhao J, Missier P, Newman DR, Palma R, Bechhofer S et al.: Workflow-Centric Research Objects: A First Class Citizen in the Scholarly Discourse. In proceedings of the ESWC2012 Workshop on the Future of Scholarly Communication in the Semantic Web (SePublica2012), Heraklion, Greece, May 2012
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier
Links to resources cited in the talk
• The PROV Data Model (PROV-DM): www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/• A primer on PROV with a simple running example:http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-primer/
• LD and PROV:• Nanopublications: nanopub.org• Research Objects: researchobject.org• The Wf4Ever project: www.wf4ever-project.org• PROV Access and Query conventions (PROV-AQ): http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-aq/
• Visualising provenance using PROV-O-Viz: http://provoviz.org/• PROV-O-Viz video:• PROV-O-Viz IPAW’14 paper preprint: http://dare.ubvu.vu.nl/handle/1871/51388• Reference:
Hoekstra, Rinke, and Paul Groth. “PROV-O-Viz - Understanding the Role of Activities in Provenance.” In Procs. IPAW 2014. Springer, 2014.
NII,
Tok
yo, J
uly
2014
– P
aolo
Mis
sier