Standard Model Ontology
A few years back me and my friend Robert Stevens discussed the how ‘cool’ it would be to create an ontology for elementary particles and the standard model. We didn’t really proceed too far with this, however one recent rainy weekend I decided to give it some more thought. This [1] was the result – it is still far from complete and very much a work in progress. Interestingly the ontology does use a lot of the features of OWL2.
It appears meanwhile that Robert has also been building his own version.
Hopefully our efforts will see the start of some linked open data from CERN – I can dream 
I’ll write up this work when the ontology is complete. Meanwhile comments welcome (comments aside from “you need to get out more” that is).
[1] – best viewed in Protege 4.1
Leave a Reply
Twitter Feed
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Have you tried classifying that thing using a reasoner? Took about 1168225ms (~= 19 min.) with Pellet on my machine.
Yes it does take a long time (and as I say it’s still not finished). Hermit seems to be quicker, but there is something in the ontology it doesn’t like and it crashes towards the end.
I’m taking an ontology class right now and we are using the protege editor, as a project I began to try and create a standard model ontology. I am running into trouble in the very beginning. Does it start with protons or does it start with leptons (or perhaps even elements)? The real trouble that I am having is where do fields sit? This one is a real brain turner.
Ahh good questions Dave. I opted to start at proton, neutrons and go down to quarks. I have forces and leptons also. My ontology is still far from finished. Plenty of open questions…anti particles? How many exotic particles should it include? Supersymmetric particles? Higgs? Fields? Let me know how you get on.