  The use of semantic technologies is gaining significant traction in science
communication with a wide array of applications in disciplines including the
Life Sciences, Computer Science, and the Social Sciences. Languages like RDF,
OWL, and other formalisms based on formal logic are applied to make scientific
knowledge accessible not only to human readers but also to automated systems.
These approaches have mostly focused on the structure of scientific
publications themselves, on the used scientific methods and equipment, or on
the structure of the used datasets. The core claims or hypotheses of scientific
work have only been covered in a shallow manner, such as by linking mentioned
entities to established identifiers. In this research, we therefore want to
find out whether we can use existing semantic formalisms to fully express the
content of high-level scientific claims using formal semantics in a systematic
way. Analyzing the main claims from a sample of scientific articles from all
disciplines, we find that their semantics are more complex than what a
straight-forward application of formalisms like RDF or OWL account for, but we
managed to elicit a clear semantic pattern which we call the 'super-pattern'.
We show here how the instantiation of the five slots of this super-pattern
leads to a strictly defined statement in higher-order logic. We successfully
applied this super-pattern to an enlarged sample of scientific claims. We show
that knowledge representation experts, when instructed to independently
instantiate the super-pattern with given scientific claims, show a high degree
of consistency and convergence given the complexity of the task and the
subject. These results therefore open the door for expressing high-level
scientific findings in a manner they can be automatically interpreted, which on
the longer run can allow us to do automated consistency checking, and much
more.
