A Survey on Knowledge Organization Systems of Research Fields: Resources and Challenges

Angelo Salatino,Tanay Aggarwal,Andrea Mannocci,Francesco Osborne,Enrico Motta
2024-09-07
Abstract:Knowledge Organization Systems (KOSs), such as term lists, thesauri, taxonomies, and ontologies, play a fundamental role in categorising, managing, and retrieving information. In the academic domain, KOSs are often adopted for representing research areas and their relationships, primarily aiming to classify research articles, academic courses, patents, books, scientific venues, domain experts, grants, software, experiment materials, and several other relevant products and agents. These structured representations of research areas, widely embraced by many academic fields, have proven effective in empowering AI-based systems to i) enhance retrievability of relevant documents, ii) enable advanced analytic solutions to quantify the impact of academic research, and iii) analyse and forecast research dynamics. This paper aims to present a comprehensive survey of the current KOS for academic disciplines. We analysed and compared 45 KOSs according to five main dimensions: scope, structure, curation, usage, and links to other KOSs. Our results reveal a very heterogeneous scenario in terms of scope, scale, quality, and usage, highlighting the need for more integrated solutions for representing research knowledge across academic fields. We conclude by discussing the main challenges and the most promising future directions.
Digital Libraries,Artificial Intelligence,Information Retrieval
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper attempts to address the current state and challenges of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) in the academic field. Specifically: 1. **Comprehensive Survey**: The paper aims to provide a thorough review of the current KOS in the academic field. By analyzing and comparing 45 KOS, it evaluates the characteristics of these systems from five main dimensions (scope, structure, maintenance, usage, and links to other KOS). 2. **Heterogeneity Issue**: The study finds significant heterogeneity in the scope, scale, quality, and usage of existing KOS. For example, certain fields (such as biomedicine) have multiple KOS, while other fields (such as mathematics) rely on a single widely accepted KOS. Some fields even lack their own specialized KOS. 3. **Integration and Interconnection**: The paper discusses how to integrate and interconnect existing solutions to generate a more comprehensive and detailed representation of research areas. This helps improve the efficiency of literature retrieval, quantify research impact, and understand and predict research dynamics. 4. **Future Directions**: Finally, the paper explores the main challenges and the most promising future directions in this field, proposing how to improve the knowledge organization methods of the entire academic community by integrating existing systems. Through this work, the authors hope to provide a more systematic KOS analysis framework for the academic community and promote the development of more efficient and practical knowledge organization tools in the future.