Request for review | GCMD --> SWEET concept match candidates

[brandonnodnarb]

request

The SWEET community are seeking reviews of candidate matches between SWEET and GCMD concepts. This review is ultimately dual purpose as it will facilitate adding existing GCMD definitions to SWEET concepts (per #211) as well as initiate the process of mapping between SWEET and GCMD.

background

The SequenceMatcher class from the Python package difflib was used to generate a similarity score between a pairwise evaluation of each SWEET concept label (rdfs:label) against every GCMD concept label (skos:prefLabel). Only results with an arbitrarily determined similarity score of 0.90 or better were returned and included in the spreadsheets.

The results are split up by GCMD concept scheme primarily for convenience. An initial cursory scan for false positive matches (e.g. adsorption != absorption) has been completed. These predominantly false positive results are in a second tab in each spreadsheet titled 'CONCEPT SCHEME'_removed.

reviewing

For those willing to review concepts, please use the comments field to capture anything specific to a record. If you have reviewed a concept pairing and:

1. determined they indeed are a match
2. determined they indeed are NOT a match
3. provided a comment which needs to be addressed before assessing whether or not the concepts are or are NOT a match

please then add your name (or ORCID) to one of the reviewer cells for that concept. If the concept is determined to be a match you are done. If the concept is determined to be NOT a match, please cut and paste the entire row to the spreadsheet's '_removed' tab.

When two reviewers have completed their assessment and agreed it a match (or NOT), that concept row can be highlighted and considered completed. If a potential match has conflicting reviews, or needs discussion for any reason, please use this thread or the sweetontology ESIP slack channel for discussion. Any concept needing further deliberation will be added as an agenda item for the STC monthly meeting.

There are currently two reviewer columns. Please do add more reviewer columns if needed.

results for review

The following table lists the GCMD concept scheme, total number of candidate SWEET matches for that concept scheme and initial observations (comments). Concept schemes are linked to their respective google spreadsheet which will be used to facilitate the review.

GCMD concept scheme	total 'matches'	comments
chronounits	163	straightforward; fairly tight domain alignment
DataFormat	17	straightforward; possibly two false+ results worth discussing
instruments	64	several GCMD instruments have acronyms which are also labels for domain concepts -- e.g. SOLSTICE -- which make the results quite noisy
locations	46	Need to be mindful of context (e.g. realm, state, etc.) for SWEET reference concepts; NO GCMD CONCEPTS HAVE A DEFINITION (e.g. mapping only)
MeasurementName	148	Need to be mindful of context (e.g. realm, state, etc.) for SWEET reference concepts; many GCMD concepts lack definition
platforms	48	many GCMD platforms are acronyms which are also labels for domain concepts -- which make the results quite noisy
projects	91	SWEET doesn't have platforms so these matches are nearly all false+
providers	26	SWEET doesn't have providers in this sense so matches are nearly all false+
rucontenttype	5	Not entirely sure to what rucontenttype means; as such, unclear of any of these are actual matches
sciencekeywords	1327	mostly straightforward; good chunk of false+ so far (104) but they are fairly obvious; nearly all of these concepts have a GCMD definition
temporalresolutionrange	4	straightforward