1
|
Lamprecht AL, Palmblad M, Ison J, Schwämmle V, Al Manir MS, Altintas I, Baker CJO, Ben Hadj Amor A, Capella-Gutierrez S, Charonyktakis P, Crusoe MR, Gil Y, Goble C, Griffin TJ, Groth P, Ienasescu H, Jagtap P, Kalaš M, Kasalica V, Khanteymoori A, Kuhn T, Mei H, Ménager H, Möller S, Richardson RA, Robert V, Soiland-Reyes S, Stevens R, Szaniszlo S, Verberne S, Verhoeven A, Wolstencroft K. Perspectives on automated composition of workflows in the life sciences. F1000Res 2021; 10:897. [PMID: 34804501 PMCID: PMC8573700 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.54159.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Scientific data analyses often combine several computational tools in automated pipelines, or workflows. Thousands of such workflows have been used in the life sciences, though their composition has remained a cumbersome manual process due to a lack of standards for annotation, assembly, and implementation. Recent technological advances have returned the long-standing vision of automated workflow composition into focus. This article summarizes a recent Lorentz Center workshop dedicated to automated composition of workflows in the life sciences. We survey previous initiatives to automate the composition process, and discuss the current state of the art and future perspectives. We start by drawing the "big picture" of the scientific workflow development life cycle, before surveying and discussing current methods, technologies and practices for semantic domain modelling, automation in workflow development, and workflow assessment. Finally, we derive a roadmap of individual and community-based actions to work toward the vision of automated workflow development in the forthcoming years. A central outcome of the workshop is a general description of the workflow life cycle in six stages: 1) scientific question or hypothesis, 2) conceptual workflow, 3) abstract workflow, 4) concrete workflow, 5) production workflow, and 6) scientific results. The transitions between stages are facilitated by diverse tools and methods, usually incorporating domain knowledge in some form. Formal semantic domain modelling is hard and often a bottleneck for the application of semantic technologies. However, life science communities have made considerable progress here in recent years and are continuously improving, renewing interest in the application of semantic technologies for workflow exploration, composition and instantiation. Combined with systematic benchmarking with reference data and large-scale deployment of production-stage workflows, such technologies enable a more systematic process of workflow development than we know today. We believe that this can lead to more robust, reusable, and sustainable workflows in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Magnus Palmblad
- Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Jon Ison
- French Institute of Bioinformatics, 91057 Évry, France
| | | | | | - Ilkay Altintas
- University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Christopher J. O. Baker
- University of New Brunswick, Saint John, E2L 4L5, Canada
- IPSNP Computing Inc., Saint John, E2L 4S6, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | - Yolanda Gil
- University of Southern California, Marina Del Rey, CA, 90292, USA
| | - Carole Goble
- Department of Computer Science, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Timothy J. Griffin
- Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Biophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA
| | - Paul Groth
- University of Amsterdam, 1090 GH Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hans Ienasescu
- Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
| | - Pratik Jagtap
- Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Biophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA
| | | | | | | | - Tobias Kuhn
- VU Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hailiang Mei
- Sequencing Analysis Support Core, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Steffen Möller
- IBIMA, Rostock University Medical Center, 18057 Rostock, Germany
| | | | | | - Stian Soiland-Reyes
- Department of Computer Science, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
- Informatics Institute, University of Amsterdam, 1090 GH Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert Stevens
- Department of Computer Science, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | | | - Suzan Verberne
- Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Aswin Verhoeven
- Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Katherine Wolstencroft
- Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, 2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|