See current related work at: http://taxonbytes.org/prior-work-on-concept-taxonomy-2013/ We will demonstrate the features of Euler/X, a toolkit in development for logic-based multi-taxonomy integration. The Euler project (see http://euler.cs.ucdavis.edu/; software code available at https://bitbucket.org/eulerx/euler-project) utilizes the taxonomic concept approach to represent perceived taxonomic entities in two or more related yet distinct classifications. Euler/X will read in these taxonomies together with an initial set of expert-made concept relationship assessments, or articulations. The latter are based on Region Connection Calculus (RCC-5) relations; specifically congruence (=), proper inclusion (>), inverse proper inclusion (<),><),>, representing different ways to merge the input taxonomies, are visualized. Upon viewing the possible worlds the expert user has follow-up opportunities to revisit articulations that are responsible for ambiguities in the merge, thereby reducing the number of possible world solutions. We demonstrate the Euler/X workflow and related considerations and challenges using the example of a Perelleschus concept history published by Franz & Cardona-Duque, 2013 [1]. This weevil genus was revised in 2001 and again in 2013, resulting in two distinct taxonomic and phylogenetic perspectives that can be aligned and merged with the toolkit. Euler/X implements innovative concepts and logic representation technologies that advance the task of tracking classification and phylogeny provenance in systematics, with implications for biodiversity data annotation and integration.

1. A Toolkit for Reconciling
Multiple Taxonomic Perspectives:
Euler/X and the Perelleschus Use Case
Nico Franz1, Mingmin Chen2, Shizhuo Yu2, Shawn Bowers3 & Bertram Ludäscher2
1
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University
2 Department of Computer Science, UC Davis
3 Department of Computer Science, Gonzaga University
TDWD 2013 Annual Conference, Florence, Italy
Semantics for Biodiversity – Formal Models and Ontologies
November 01, 2013
Slides @ http://taxonbytes.org/tdwg-2013-a-toolkit-for-reconciling-multiple-taxonomic-perspectives

2. Introduction – the Euler project & Euler/X toolkit
• The project builds on a ~ 25 year history of using taxonomic concepts in the
TDWG community; primarily in Australia, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan.
• Prior extensive uses of concept articulations include Koperski et al. (2000); and
concatenation of articulations by Berendsohn, Geoffroy & Güntsch (2003).
Homepage:
https://sites.google.com/site/eulerdi/home
Open source:
https://bitbucket.org/eulerx/euler-project
Overview paper:
http://taxonbytes.org/pdf/ChenEtAl2013-EulerToolkit.pdf

3. Introduction – the Euler project & Euler/X toolkit
• The project builds on a ~ 25 year history of using taxonomic concepts in the
TDWG community; primarily in Australia, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan.
• Prior extensive uses of concept articulations include Koperski et al. (2000); and
concatenation of articulations by Berendsohn, Geoffroy & Güntsch (2003).
• David Thau's (2006-2010) work on CleanTax prototyped the use of RCC-5
relations in combination for First-Order Logic reasoning over taxonomies.
• The Euler project (2011-) succeeds CleanTax, with performance optimizations,
many added functions, and an increasing focus on Answer Set Programming.
Homepage:
https://sites.google.com/site/eulerdi/home
Open source:
https://bitbucket.org/eulerx/euler-project
Overview paper:
http://taxonbytes.org/pdf/ChenEtAl2013-EulerToolkit.pdf

4. Review: RCC-5 articulations between two concepts C1, C2
congruence
inverse proper
inclusion
exclusion
proper inclusion
overlap
Use of "OR" to express uncertainty.
Example: C1 == OR > C2
Source: Franz & Peet. 2009. Towards a language for mapping relationships among taxonomic concepts. Systematics and Biodiversity 7: 5–20.

5. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.

6. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.
• Solution: Euler/X reads in 2 concept taxonomies (TCs + T1 + T2) plus a set of
initial, expert-made articulations (A). The toolkit then allows for:

7. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.
• Solution: Euler/X reads in 2 concept taxonomies (TCs + T1 + T2) plus a set of
initial, expert-made articulations (A). The toolkit then allows for:
• Checking for, and identification of, alignment inconsistencies.

8. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.
• Solution: Euler/X reads in 2 concept taxonomies (TCs + T1 + T2) plus a set of
initial, expert-made articulations (A). The toolkit then allows for:
• Checking for, and identification of, alignment inconsistencies.
• Interactive inconsistency repair.

9. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.
• Solution: Euler/X reads in 2 concept taxonomies (TCs + T1 + T2) plus a set of
initial, expert-made articulations (A). The toolkit then allows for:
• Checking for, and identification of, alignment inconsistencies.
• Interactive inconsistency repair.
• Generation of the set of mir – maximally informative relations (necessary
and sufficient to yield a complete alignment).

10. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.
• Solution: Euler/X reads in 2 concept taxonomies (TCs + T1 + T2) plus a set of
initial, expert-made articulations (A). The toolkit then allows for:
• Checking for, and identification of, alignment inconsistencies.
• Interactive inconsistency repair.
• Generation of the set of mir – maximally informative relations (necessary
and sufficient to yield a complete alignment).
• Interactive uncertainty reduction.

11. Interactive taxonomy alignment: Euler/X toolkit workflow
• Challenge: asserting articulations across 2 taxonomies may lead to ambiguities,
inconsistencies, and omissions, resulting in an imperfect alignment.
• Solution: Euler/X reads in 2 concept taxonomies (TCs + T1 + T2) plus a set of
initial, expert-made articulations (A). The toolkit then allows for:
• Checking for, and identification of, alignment inconsistencies.
• Interactive inconsistency repair.
• Generation of the set of mir – maximally informative relations (necessary
and sufficient to yield a complete alignment).
• Interactive uncertainty reduction.
• Visualization of one or more "Possible World" merge taxonomies.

12. Euler/X is ready1 for real-life
use cases – Perelleschus
1
After many iterations of testing/optimization with abstract cases, PW visualizations, and reasoner benchmarking.

13. Perelleschus use case – overview of 6 classifications/phylogenies
1936
1954


1986
 = "carludovicae" (name),
cumulative history
2001

2006
2013




14. Key properties of the Perelleschus concept history use case
• 6 classifications (3 taxonomic, 3 phylogenetic), 54 concepts, from 1936 to 2013
• Complete concept history from 1st concept E. carludovicae sec. Günther (1936)
to current phylogenetic arrangement (2013) with 10 species-level concepts.
• All instances of taxonomic incongruence occur above the species level.
DOI:10.1080/14772000.2013.806371 (link)

15. Key properties of the Perelleschus concept history use case
• 6 classifications (3 taxonomic, 3 phylogenetic), 54 concepts, from 1936 to 2013
• Complete concept history from 1st concept E. carludovicae sec. Günther (1936)
to current phylogenetic arrangement (2013) with 10 species-level concepts.
• All instances of taxonomic incongruence occur above the species level.
• Franz & Cardona-D. (2013) provide 54 concepts + Trees 1-6 + 76 articulations.
• Only 5 of 54 higher-level concept articulations are unambiguously congruent.
• Articulations take into account membership & diagnostic features.
DOI:10.1080/14772000.2013.806371 (link)

16. Concept evolution – Günther (1936) to Voss (1954)
Reconciliation appears easy enough; except E. carludovicae sec. Günther (1936; [2]) – a
Costa Rican taxon/concept – was placed in Elleschus sec. Günther (1936; [1]) – a
European taxon/concept with several other children which the author omitted in his
1936 treatment (issue: incomplete listing of children).

17. Concept evolution – Günther (1936) to Voss (1954)
Reconciliation appears easy enough; except E. carludovicae sec. Günther (1936; [2]) – a
Costa Rican taxon/concept – was placed in Elleschus sec. Günther (1936; [1]) – a
European taxon/concept with several other children which the author omitted in his
1936 treatment (issue: incomplete listing of children).
Thus "overlap" (><) is an intuitive articulation among [1] and [3]; however Euler/X
would not infer this unless we either:
1. Relax the "coverage assumption" for [1] (coverage means that a parent's
extension is fully defined by its children); or
2. Add a child "1 Imp" (implied) to obtain the proper mir and merge.

18. Concept evolution – Günther (1936) to Voss (1954)
Once "1 Imp" is added, Euler/X yields a consistent merge that is intuitive at all levels.
Euler/X mir
Euler/X merge
1.1 Imp
Color legend
1936 concepts
1954 concepts
Congruent species
concepts '36/'54
Overlap (><)

19. Concept evolution – Wibmer & O'Brien (1986) to Franz & O'Brien (2001)
Euler/X merge
Color legend
1986
2001
Congr.
'86/'01
><
Euler/X infers a consistent and
plausible merge of the 1986 threespecies taxonomy and the eightspecies 2001 phylogeny.

20. Concept evolution – Wibmer & O'Brien (1986) to Franz & O'Brien (2001)
Euler/X merge
Color legend
1986
2001
Congr.
'86/'01
><
The overlap (><) articulations
among 2001 higher-level concepts
[14,16,20,…] and Perelleschus sec.
W. & O. 1986 [7] are rooted in the
inclusion/exclusion of "subcinctus"
[10/13] in "Perelleschus" [7/14].

21. Concept evolution – Wibmer & O'Brien (1986) to Franz & O'Brien (2001)
Euler/X merge
Color legend
1986
2001
Congr.
'86/'01
><
The 2001 authors transferred
"subcinctus" into Phyllotrox [12].

22. Concept evolution – Franz & O'Brien (2001) to Franz & Cardona-D. (2013)
At the surface and beyond, the two phylogenies share many congruent terminals and
seemingly also higher-level entities.
However, the 2013 treatment includes two new species/concepts [53,54] and one new
clade [52] nested well within the genus-level topology.

23. Concept evolution – Franz & O'Brien (2001) to Franz & Cardona-D. (2013)
Once the results: were due in part as congruent and "sealed off" (through
Initial mergeoutroups "noisy" "stipulated"because of divergent outgroup assumptions.
application of coverage) Outgroups ingroups, "noise"
from the too much the merge got solidified and simplified.
2013: Phyllotrogina
Unwanted overlap???
2001: Derelomini
out of position
38 = 2013: Perelleschus
Main 2013 higher-level trunk
14 = 2001: Perelleschus

24. Concept evolution – Franz & O'Brien (2001) to Franz & Cardona-D. (2013)
2013 higher-level concepts
2001 higher-level concepts
2013/2001 congruence
Zoom in on
overlap
"Clean" merge with overlapping,
parallel 2001/2013 mid-level trunks
that reflect the addition of a new,
nested 2013 clade.
New 2013 clade

25. In progress – zooming in on overlap, "combined concept" resolution
1. Merge view – overlap
A20
A20'
[3 new labels]
><
"AB2047"
B47
B47'
2. Zoom view – 2 levels
Level 1:
Level 2:
A20'
A21B45
A22B46
"AB2047"
B47'
A23
B52

26. Conclusions & outlook
1. The Euler/X toolkit is moving towards logically sound, interactive, scalable,
and visually effective solutions to the challenge of reasoning over concept
and classification / phylogeny provenance in real-life use cases.
2. Many agencies and projects aim towards integration of taxonomic names and
concepts, including the Global Names Architecture initiative.
3. The Euler concept approach represents a robust and powerful way to achieve
this through interactive, semi-automated reasoning and visualization of merge
taxonomies.

27. Acknowledgments
• TDWG 2013 Symposium organizers – John Deck, Mark Schildhauer, Ramona Walls
• Juliana Cardona-Duque – Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia
• NSF Award IIS-1118088.
"III: Small: A Logic-Based, Provenance-Aware System for Merging Scientific Data
under Context and Classification Constraints."
https://sites.google.com/site/eulerdi/home
https://sols.asu.edu
http://taxonbytes.org