ArticleFrontiers in bioinformatics2026
SHACLens: a visualization workflow for SHACL violation exploration in knowledge graphs.
Article in Frontiers in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Validating large knowledge graphs with the Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL) often yields violation reports too large to interpret and trace to root causes, especially in industry-scale datasets such as pharmaceutical omics pipelines. Methods: We present SHACLens, an interactive visualization workflow-developed with a major pharmaceutical partner-that links ontology, instance data, and violation reports across multiple coordinated views. We contribute a practitioner-informed workflow co-designed with pharmaceutical data-analysis experts. A Node-Link View combines ontology and groups of equivalent violations, a projection view reveals clusters of nodes with similar errors, a LineUp table combines instance data with violation information, a Class Tree offers a class-hierarchy overview, and an integrated LLM assistant provides contextual explanations and can operate the system via natural-language commands. Results: Within this workflow, selections and filters propagate across views, exposing co-occurring errors and their likely upstream causes. Analysts iteratively identify violation clusters, inspect correlations, and trace the detailed cause of errors. Evaluation and implications: We evaluated SHACLens through an iterative expert-in-the-loop design process with the partner team and a qualitative study on a transcriptomics dataset containing 5,203 violating nodes with the same experts. In this study, SHACLens efficiently surfaced repeated sets of errors due to missing objects and schema inconsistencies, supporting goal-oriented analysis and serendipitous findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.