The results of this two-page exercise were discussed together to obtain a common understanding about the meaning units and depth of concepts until consensus was achieved.
A focus group methodology was chosen for concept elicitation, as breadth rather than depth of concepts was desired, and an open-ended, semistructured interview guide was used to generate discussion among focus group members.
Hence, the differences between the modal depths of concepts are usually small.
In fact, the modal depth of a concept is usually restricted by a very small value, while the length of a concept is usually large.
Sotheby's cataloger underlines the depth of the concept: "We began by questioning what differentiates Lichtenstein from a cartoon and end wondering what defines an artist".
The number of possibilities depends on the depth of the concept hierarchy in the knowledge base.
The modal depth of a concept C, denoted by ({ mdepth }(C)), is defined to be: 0 if C is of the form (top ), (bot ), A or (exists r.mathsf {Self}); (mathsf {mdepth}(D)) if C is of the form (lnot D); (max (mathsf {mdepth}(D),mathsf {mdepth}(D'))) if C is of the form (D sqcap D') or (D sqcup D'); (mathsf {mdepth}(D) + 1) if C is of the form (forall R.D), (exists R.D), ({ge }h,R.C) or (h,R.C).
Since its first formalisation in the theory of communication devised by Shannon Shannon and Weaverr 1949), the depth of the concept has been progressively increased in the case of sequences of symbols, typical of what we find in genomes (Cover and Thomas 1991; Yockey 1992; Danchin 1996, 2003).
Furthermore, we suggest that the molecular life science community, in addition to identifying the concepts, needs to specify both the level of detail and depth of the concepts and processes that we intend our students to understand.
With the proposed ontology weight computing (Sect. 4.2), it is possible to query depth of the concepts using the SPARQL query [19].
