Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

adding GCI to infer part-of edges for morphogenesis. Addresses #12658 #24280

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cmungall
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@cmungall cmungall requested a review from balhoff October 27, 2022 02:03
@cmungall
Copy link
Member Author

@balhoff do we have a way of testing the generative capacities?

for now I am just running by hand:

dosdp-tools generate --obo-prefixes true --ontology go-edit.obo --catalog catalog-v001.xml --template ../design_patterns/x_morphogenesis.yaml --infile ../design_patterns/x_morphogenesis.tsv --outfile foo.owl

This is producing two flavors of GCI as expected - next step is to hook up materialize

@cmungall cmungall changed the title adding GCI to recapitulate part-of. Addresses #12658 adding GCI to infer part-of edges for morphogenesis. Addresses #12658 Oct 27, 2022
@balhoff
Copy link
Member

balhoff commented Oct 28, 2022

I think we'll want to create separate YAMLs just to generate the GCIs, right? Otherwise we're going to create extra labels, etc. I'm doing something like this for Biochebi: https://github.com/geneontology/go-ontology/blob/master/src/biochebi/biochebi_gcis.yaml

@balhoff
Copy link
Member

balhoff commented Oct 28, 2022

We are already materializing 'part of', so if we import the GCIs it should just work.

Copy link
Member

@balhoff balhoff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I did a check and find that including the GCIs in the DP causes the DP match query to find no results (since the GCI doesn't exist in the ontology). I think we should keep the GCIs in a separate generative file, since we use these files for matching.

@balhoff
Copy link
Member

balhoff commented Oct 28, 2022

@cmungall I made several additions to the PR, to separate out the GCI pattern, and add generation steps to the makefile. What is a test case part_of we should be looking for?

@cmungall
Copy link
Member Author

OK, let's leave the GCIs in a seperate file for now, but these are already quite repetitious, involving repetition of information from other patterns. It might be an idea to have an option on match to selectively match on equivalence axioms, since that is the main use case

@cmungall
Copy link
Member Author

Shall we make a separate issue with the proposal to merge cell morphogenesis involved in differentiation? We can include the explanation there (we don't need to discuss the regulation since it trivially follows)

@balhoff
Copy link
Member

balhoff commented Oct 28, 2022

Shall we make a separate issue with the proposal to merge cell morphogenesis involved in differentiation? We can include the explanation there (we don't need to discuss the regulation since it trivially follows)

#24299

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants