Metadata properties listed in the following are picked from MOD1.4.
This ontology repository implements MOD1.4 but does not necessarily encode metadata with the same properties (see the used properties).
F1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier.
30.0 (73%)
11.0 (27.0%)
F1Q1 : Does the ontology have a "local" identifier, i.e., a globally unique and potentially permanent identifier assigned by the developer (or developing organization)?
9 / 9
  • Ontology URI is absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology URI is present but invalid.
    3.0
  • Ontology URI is present and valid.
    9.0
owl:ontologyIRI http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/chebi_lite.owl
F1Q2 : Does the ontology provide an additional "external" identifier, i.e., a guarantee globally unique and persistent identifier assigned by an accredited body? If yes, is the external identifier a DOI?
0 / 11
  • External identifier is absent.
    0.0
  • External identifier is present but invalid.
    3.0
  • External identifier is present and valid.
    6.0
  • External identifier is an invalid DOI.
    9.0
  • External identifier is a valid DOI.
    11.0
dct:identifier null
F1Q3 : Are the ontology metadata clearly identified either by the same identifier than the ontology (if included in the ontology file) or with its own globally unique and persistent identifier?
12 / 12
Ontology metadata clearly identified: the repository explicitly identifies its metadata.
  • Ontology metadata clearly identified: the repository explicitly identifies its metadata.
    12.0
F1Q4 : Does the ontology provide a version-specific URI, and is this URI resolvable?
9 / 9
  • Version URI is absent.
    0.0
  • Version URI is present but invalid.
    2.0
  • Version URI is present, valid but not resolvable.
    4.0
  • Version URI is present, valid and resolvable.
    9.0
owl:versionIRI http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/chebi/253/chebi_lite.owl
F2: Ontologies are described with rich ontology metadata.
21.0 (77%)
6.0 (23.0%)
F2Q1 : Is the ontology described with additional 'MIRO must' metadata properties?
10 / 16
  • The ontology is described with 0 'MIRO must' property.
    0.0
  • The ontology is described with 1 'MIRO must' property.
    2.0
  • The ontology is described with 2 'MIRO must' properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology is described with 3 'MIRO must' properties.
    6.0
  • The ontology is described with 4 'MIRO must' properties.
    8.0
  • The ontology is described with 5 'MIRO must' properties.
    10.0
  • The ontology is described with 6 'MIRO must' properties.
    12.0
  • The ontology is described with 7 'MIRO must' properties.
    14.0
  • The ontology is described with 8 or more 'MIRO must' properties.
    16.0
omv:knownUsage null
foaf:homepage https://www.ebi.ac.uk/chebi
void:uriRegexPattern null
omv:acronym CHEBI
vann:preferredNamespaceUri null
dct:subject null
dct:coverage null
dct:audience null
foaf:page null
doap:bugDatabase null
skos:hiddenLabel null
idot:exampleIdentifier null
door:comesFromTheSameDomain null
owl:backwardCompatibleWith null
vann:example null
mod:hasEvaluation null
dct:alternative null
doap:mailing-list null
dct:description Chemical Entities of Biological Interest is a freely available ontology and dictionary of molecular entities focused on small chemical compounds, with traceable chemical classifications and relationships., Chemical Entities of Biological Interest, also known as ChEBI, is a chemical database and ontology of molecular entities focused on 'small' chemical compounds, that is part of the Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) effort at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI).
omv:resourceLocator https://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/chebi/ontology/chebi_lite.owl
omv:keywords null
dct:title Chemical Entities of Biological Interest
dct:publisher null
doap:repository null
F2Q2 : Is the ontology described with additional 'MIRO should' or 'optional' metadata properties?
4 / 4
  • The ontology is described with 0 'should or optional' property.
    0.0
  • The ontology is described with 1 'should or optional' property.
    1.0
  • The ontology is described with 2 'should or optional' properties.
    2.0
  • The ontology is described with 3 'should or optional' properties.
    3.0
  • The ontology is described with 4 'should or optional' properties.
    3.0
  • The ontology is described with 5 'should or optional' properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology is described with 6 or more 'should or optional' properties.
    4.0
omv:numberOfClasses 237672
omv:numberOfProperties 9
vann:preferredNamespacePrefix chebi_ontology
mod:metrics https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/metrics
omv:numberOfAxioms null
omv:numberOfIndividuals 0
F2Q3 : Is the ontology described with another metadata property with no explicit corresponding MIRO requirement?
7 / 7
  • The ontology is described with 0 additionnal property.
    0.0
  • The ontology is described with 1 additionnal property.
    1.0
  • The ontology is described with 2 additionnal properties.
    2.0
  • The ontology is described with 3 additionnal properties.
    3.0
  • The ontology is described with 4 additionnal properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology is described with 5 additionnal properties.
    5.0
  • The ontology is described with 6 additionnal properties.
    6.0
  • The ontology is described with 7 or more additionnal properties.
    7.0
dct:hasPart null
omv:isOfType null
omv:keyClasses null
dct:dateSubmitted 2026-07-15T23:40:45.000+00:00
dct:abstract null
mod:classesWithMoreThan25Children 1328
dct:created 2026-07-15T23:40:11.000+00:00
dct:bibliographicCitation null
pav:curatedOn null
foaf:depiction null
void:openSearchDescription https://data.dev.matportal.org/search?ontologies=CHEBI&q=
schema:comment ["ChEBI subsumes and replaces the Chemical Ontology first. This ontology was developed by Michael Ashburner and Pankaj Jaiswal. Data was cuarated by The ChEBI Curation Team. For any queries contact chebi-help@ebi.ac.uk"]
void:propertyPartition https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/properties
dct:valid null
void:classPartition https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/classes
mod:classesWithOneChild 3906
dct:modified null
void:dataDump https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/download
foaf:logo null
void:uriLookupEndpoint https://data.dev.matportal.org/search?ontologies=CHEBI&require_exact_match=true&q=
door:hasDisparateModelling null
mod:classesWithNoDefinition 182270
schema:associatedMedia null
schema:workTranslation null
voaf:usedBy null
dct:language null
mod:analytics https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/analytics
owl:incompatibleWith null
void:rootResource https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/classes/roots
mod:browsingUI http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/CHEBI
voaf:hasDisjunctionsWith null
schema:award null
voaf:toDoList null
mod:maxChildCount 13998
F3: Ontology metadata clearly and explicitly include the identifier of the ontologies they describe.
21.0 (100%)
F3Q1 : Are the ontology metadata included and maintained in the ontology file?
0 / 21
This question
  • 21.0
F3Q2 : If not, are the ontology metadata described in an external file?
11 / 11
The ontology repository provides ontology metadata in an external file.
  • The ontology repository provides ontology metadata in an external file.
    11.0
F3Q3 : Does that external file explicitly link to the ontology and vice-versa?
10 / 10
Bidirectional links between the ontology and its metadata.
  • No explicit link between the ontology and its metadata and vice-versa.
    0.0
  • One explicit link between the ontology and its metadata (but no reciprocal).
    5.0
  • Bidirectional links between the ontology and its metadata.
    10.0
F4: Ontologies and ontology metadata are registered or indexed in a searchable resource typically an ontology repository.
16.0 (67%)
8.0 (33.0%)
F4Q1 : Is the ontology registered in multiple ontology 'libraries'?
0 / 6
  • The ontology is registered in 0 ontology library.
    0.0
  • The ontology is registered in 1 ontology library.
    2.0
  • The ontology is registered in 2 ontology libraries.
    4.0
  • The ontology is registered in 3 or more ontology libraries.
    6.0
schema:includedInDataCatalog null
F4Q2 : Is the ontology registered in multiple open ontology 'repositories'?
0 / 10
  • The ontology is registered in 0 ontology repository.
    0.0
  • The ontology is registered in 1 ontology repository.
    2.0
  • The ontology is registered in 2 ontology repositories.
    4.0
  • The ontology is registered in 3 ontology repositories.
    6.0
  • The ontology is registered in 4 ontology repositories.
    8.0
  • The ontology is registered in 5 or more ontology repositories.
    10.0
schema:includedInDataCatalog null
F4Q3 : Are the ontology libraries or repositories properly indexed by Web search engines?
0 / 8
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 8.0
A1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized communication protocol.
37.0 (86%)
6.0 (14.0%)
A1Q1 : Does the ontology URI and other identifiers, if exist, resolve to the ontology?
6 / 6
  • The ontology provides 0 resolvable identifier.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 resolvable identifier.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides 2 resolvable identifiers.
    6.0
owl:ontologyIRI http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/chebi_lite.owl
dct:identifier null
A1Q2 : Does the ontology URI (if metadata is included in the ontology file) or the external metadata URI resolve to the metadata record?
7 / 7
The repository provides an external metadata URI which resolves to the metadata record.
  • The repository provides an external metadata URI which resolves to the metadata record.
    7.0
A1Q3 : Do the ontology URI and the external metadata URI (if the metadata are not included in the ontology file), support content negotiation?
18 / 24
  • Ontology and its metadata do not support content negotiation.
    0.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 1 negotiation format.
    3.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 2 negotiation formats.
    6.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 3 negotiation formats.
    9.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 4 negotiation formats.
    12.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 5 negotiation formats.
    15.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 6 negotiation formats.
    18.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 7 negotiation formats.
    21.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 8 or more negotiation formats.
    24.0
owl:ontologyIRI http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/chebi_lite.owl
A1Q4 : Are the ontology and its metadata accessible through another standard protocol such as SPARQL?
6 / 6
  • The ontology is not accessible through a SPARQL endpoint.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares being accessible through a SPARQL endpoint.
    6.0
sd:endpoint ["http://sparql.bioontology.org"]
A1.1: The protocol to retrieve ontologies and ontology metadata is open, free and universally implementable.
28.0 (100%)
A1.1Q1 : Is the ontology relying on HTTP/URIs for its identification and access mechanisms?
20 / 20
The repository uses HTTP/URIs for identification and access mechanisms.
  • The repository uses HTTP/URIs for identification and access mechanisms.
    20.0
A1.1Q2 : Is the ontology access protocol open, free, and universally implementable?
4 / 4
The repository access protocols (HTTP/URIs) are open, free and universally implementable.
  • The repository access protocols (HTTP/URIs) are open, free and universally implementable.
    4.0
A1.1Q3 : If the ontology and metadata are accessible through another protocol, is that protocol open, free, and universally implementable?
4 / 4
The repository uses another protocol (SPARQL) that is open, free and universally implementable.
  • The repository uses another protocol (SPARQL) that is open, free and universally implementable.
    4.0
A1.2: The protocol to retrieve ontologies and ontology metadata supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
22.0 (100%)
A1.2Q1 : Is the ontology accessible through a protocol that supports authentication and authorization?
11 / 11
The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
  • The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
    11.0
A1.2Q2 : Are the ontology metadata accessible through a protocol that supports authentification and authorization?
11 / 11
The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
  • The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
    11.0
A2: Ontology metadata should be accessible even when the ontology is no longer available.
20.0 (100%)
A2Q1 : Is the ontology accessible in a repository that supports versioning?
7 / 7
The repository supports versioning.
  • The repository supports versioning.
    7.0
A2Q2 : Are the ontology metadata of each version available?
5 / 5
The repository provides metadata for each version of the ontology.
  • The repository provides metadata for each version of the ontology.
    5.0
A2Q3 : Are the ontology metadata accessible even if no more versions of the ontology are available?
4 / 4
The repository provides metadata even if no more versions of the ontology are available.
  • The repository provides metadata even if no more versions of the ontology are available.
    4.0
A2Q4 : Is the status of the ontology clearly informed?
4 / 4
  • Ontology status absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology status partially specified.
    2.0
  • Ontology status fully specified.
    4.0
owl:deprecated false
omv:status production
I1: Ontologies and ontology metadata use a formal, accessible, shared and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation.
28.0 (63%)
16.0 (37.0%)
I1Q1 : What is the representation language used for ontology and ontology metadata?
18 / 18
  • Ontology knowledge representation language absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in PDF.
    5.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in TXT.
    7.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in CSV.
    9.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in XML.
    10.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in OBO.
    11.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in RDFS.
    12.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in SKOS.
    15.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in OWL.
    18.0
omv:hasOntologyLanguage OWL
I1Q2 : Is the representation language used a W3C Recommendation?
10 / 10
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are not represented using a W3C Recommendation.
    0.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented using a W3C Recommendatione.
    10.0
omv:hasOntologyLanguage OWL
I1Q3 : Is the syntax of the ontology informed?
0 / 5
  • Ontology syntax is absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology syntax is present.
    5.0
omv:hasOntologySyntax null
I1Q4 : Is the formality level of the ontology informed?
0 / 5
  • Ontology formality level absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology formality level present.
    5.0
omv:hasFormalityLevel null
I1Q5 : Is the availability of other syntaxes/formats informed?
0 / 4
  • No information is provided about the availability of the ontology in other formats.
    0.0
  • The availability of other ontology formats is informed.
    4.0
dct:hasFormat null
dct:isFormatOf null
I2: Ontologies and ontology metadata use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles.
22.0 (69%)
10.0 (31.0%)
I2Q1 : Does the ontology import other FAIR vocabularies?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not import other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology imports other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    5.0
owl:imports null
I2Q2 : Does the ontology reuse terms from other FAIR vocabularies (URIs)?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not declare reusing other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares reusing terms from other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    5.0
dct:relation null
I2Q3 : If yes, does it include the minimum information for those terms?
0 / 3
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 3.0
I2Q4 : Is the ontology aligned to other FAIR vocabularies?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not declare being aligned to other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares being aligned to other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    5.0
voaf:hasEquivalencesWith null
I2Q5 : If yes, are those alignments well represented and to unambiguous entities? If yes, are those alignements curated?
0 / 7
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 7.0
I2Q6 : Does the ontology provide metadata information about relation to or influence of other FAIR vocabularies?
0 / 2
  • The ontology does not declare influential relations to other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares influential relations to other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    2.0
schema:translationOfWork null
voaf:generalizes null
voaf:specializes null
voaf:similar null
dct:isPartOf null
I2Q7 : Does the ontology reuse standard and FAIR metadata vocabularies to describe its metadata?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not declare reusing standards metadata vocabularies to describe its metadata.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares reusing standards metadata vocabularies (more or less 'FAIR') to describe its metadata.
    5.0
voaf:metadataVoc null
I3: Ontologies or ontology metadata include qualified references to other (meta)data.
7.0 (21%)
26.0 (79.0%)
I3Q1 : Does an ontology provide qualified cross-references to external resources/databases?
0 / 20
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 20.0
I3Q2 : If yes, are those cross-references well represented and to unambiguous entities?
0 / 6
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 6.0
I3Q3 : Does the ontology use valid URIs to encode some metadata values?
7 / 7
  • The ontology does not use URIs to encode metadata values.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides at least 1 metadata value encoded as URI.
    1.0
  • The ontology provides at least 2 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides at least 3 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides at least 4 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides at least 5 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    5.0
  • The ontology provides at least 6 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    6.0
  • The ontology provides at least 7 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    7.0
dct:hasPart null
owl:imports null
mod:obsoleteProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#deprecated
mod:synonymProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#altLabel
omv:hasOntologySyntax null
dct:isPartOf null
door:comesFromTheSameDomain null
mod:prefLabelProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel
dct:relation null
dct:hasVersion https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/submissions
voaf:specializes null
schema:translationOfWork null
voaf:generalizes null
door:hasDisparateModelling null
mod:hierarchyProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#subClassOf
owl:priorVersion null
dct:subject null
dct:isFormatOf null
schema:workTranslation null
voaf:usedBy null
omv:hasFormalityLevel null
dct:license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
owl:backwardCompatibleWith null
mod:definitionProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#definition
voaf:hasEquivalencesWith null
owl:incompatibleWith null
mod:authorProperty http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator
dct:hasFormat null
voaf:hasDisjunctionsWith null
voaf:similar null
R1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes.
7.0 (21%)
27.0 (79.0%)
R1Q1 : Does the ontology provide information about how classes or concepts are defined?
5 / 5
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    1.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides 4 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 5 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    5.0
mod:definitionProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#definition
mod:prefLabelProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel
mod:authorProperty http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator
mod:obsoleteProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#deprecated
mod:synonymProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#altLabel
R1Q2 : Does the ontology provide information about its hierarchy?
2 / 3
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about its hierarchy.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about its hierarchy.
    1.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about its hierarchy.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform about its hierarchy.
    3.0
mod:obsoleteParent null
mod:hierarchyProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#subClassOf
mod:maxDepth 23
R1Q3 : How much of the ontology objects are described with labels?
0 / 7
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 7.0
R1Q4 : How much of the ontology objects are defined using a text description?
0 / 6
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 6.0
R1Q5 : How much ontology objects are defined using a property restriction or an equivalent class?
0 / 6
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 6.0
R1Q6 : How much of the ontology objects provide provenance information with annotation properties?
0 / 5
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 5.0
R1.1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are released with a clear and accessible usage license.
26.0 (70%)
11.0 (30.0%)
R1.1Q1 : Is the ontology license clearly specified, with an URI that is resolvable and supports content negotiation?
15 / 15
  • Ontology license absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology license present but not a valid URI.
    4.0
  • Ontology license present and valid but not resolvable.
    8.0
  • Ontology license present, valid, resolvable but with no content negotiation.
    12.0
  • Ontology license is clearly specified with a valid and resolvable URI that supports content negotiation.
    15.0
dct:license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
R1.1Q2 : Are the ontology access rights specified and permissions documented?
4 / 7
  • Ontology access rights and permissions absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology access rights are clearly specified.
    4.0
  • Ontology access rights are clearly specified and permissions are documented.
    7.0
dct:accessRights public
cc:morePermissions null
R1.1Q3 : Are the ontology usage guidelines and copyright holder documented?
7 / 15
  • Ontology usage guidelines and copyright holder are absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology usage guidelines or copyright holder is absent.
    7.0
  • Ontology usage guidelines and copyright holder are present.
    15.0
cc:useGuidelines null
dct:rightsHolder ChEBI Team
R1.2: Ontologies and ontology metadata are associated with detailed provenance.
4.0 (10%)
32.0 (84%)
2.0 (6.0%)
R1.2Q1 : Does the ontology provide information about the actors involved in its development?
0 / 8
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    5.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    7.0
  • The ontology provides 4 properties to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    8.0
schema:translator null
dct:creator null
dct:contributor null
pav:curatedBy null
R1.2Q2 : Does an ontology provide information on its general provenance?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides O property to inform on its general provenance.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform on its general provenance.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform on its general provenance.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform on its general provenance.
    6.0
prov:wasGeneratedBy null
prov:wasInvalidatedBy null
dct:source null
R1.2Q3 : Are the accrual methods and policy of the ontology documented?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides 0 accrual property.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 accrual property.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 accrual properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 3 accrual properties.
    6.0
dct:accrualPolicy null
dct:accrualMethod null
dct:accrualPeriodicity null
R1.2Q4 : Is the ontology clearly versioned with version information and links to previous versions?
4 / 4
  • The ontology provides O property to inform about versioning.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about versioning.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 or more properties to inform about versioning.
    4.0
dct:hasVersion https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CHEBI/submissions
owl:priorVersion null
owl:versionInfo 253
R1.2Q5 : Are the ontology latest changes documented?
0 / 2
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 2.0
R1.2Q6 : Are the methodology and tools used to build the ontology documented?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about methodology and tools used.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about methodology and tools used.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about methodology and tools used.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform about methodology and tools used.
    6.0
omv:conformsToKnowledgeRepresentationParadigm null
omv:usedOntologyEngineeringTool null
omv:usedOntologyEngineeringMethodology null
R1.2Q7 : Is the ontology rationale documented?
0 / 4
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about rationale documentation.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about rationale documentation.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about rationale documentation.
    4.0
omv:designedForOntologyTask null
mod:competencyQuestion null
R1.2Q8 : Does an ontology inform about its funding organization?
0 / 2
  • The ontology does not inform about its funding organization.
    0.0
  • The ontology informs about its funding organization.
    2.0
foaf:fundedBy null
R1.3: Ontologies and ontology metadata meet domain-relevant community standards.
6.0 (16%)
30.0 (84.0%)
R1.3Q1 : Does an ontology provide information about projects using or organizations endorsing?
0 / 10
  • The ontology does not provide information about projects or endorsing organizations.
    0.0
  • The ontology provide information about projects or endorsing organizations.
    5.0
  • The ontology provide information about projects and endorsing organizations.
    10.0
mod:ontologyInUse null
omv:endorsedBy null
R1.3Q2 : Is the ontology included in a specific community set or group?
0 / 20
  • The ontology does not provide information about its community set or group.
    0.0
  • The ontology is included in one of this groups: "WHEAT", "CROP", "INRAE".
    10.0
  • The ontology is included in the OBO library.
    15.0
  • The ontology is included in the OBO library and is part of the OBO Foundry.
    20.0
mod:group https://data.dev.matportal.org/groups/chemistry
R1.3Q3 : Is the ontology openly and freely available?
6 / 6
  • The ontology is not openly and freely available.
    0.0
  • The ontology is openly and freely available.
    6.0
dct:accessRights public