  Classification standards such as the Mammal Species of the World (MSW) aim to
unify name usages at the global scale, but may nevertheless experience
significant levels of taxonomic change from one edition to the next. This
circumstance challenges the biodiversity and phylogenetic data communities to
develop more granular identifiers to track taxonomic congruence and
incongruence in ways that both humans and machines can process, i.e., to
logically represent taxonomic provenance across multiple classification
hierarchies. Here we show that reasoning over taxonomic provenance is feasible
for two classifications of primates corresponding to the second and third MSW
editions. Our approach entails three main components: (1) individuation of name
usages as taxonomic concepts, (2) articulation of concepts via human-asserted
Region Connection Calculus (RCC-5) relationships, and (3) the use of an Answer
Set Programming toolkit to infer and visualize logically consistent alignments
of these taxonomic input constraints. Our use case entails the Primates sec.
Groves (1993; MSW2 - 317 taxonomic concepts; 233 at the species level) and
Primates sec. Groves (2005; MSW3 - 483 taxonomic concepts; 376 at the species
level). Using 402 concept-to-concept input articulations, the reasoning process
yields a single, consistent alignment, and infers 153,111 Maximally Informative
Relations that constitute a comprehensive provenance resolution map for every
concept pair in the Primates sec. MSW2/MSW3. The entire alignment and various
partitions facilitate quantitative analyses of name/meaning dissociation,
revealing that approximately one in three paired name usages across treatments
is not reliable - in the sense of the same name identifying congruent taxonomic
meanings. We conclude with an optimistic outlook for logic-based provenance
tools in next-generation biodiversity and phylogeny data platforms.
