[Crm-sig] *** ISSUE *** Revision of scope note for E73 Information Object to specifically include named graphs

Richard Light richard at light.demon.co.uk
Mon Jul 28 16:18:34 EEST 2014


Martin,

Thanks you for this: I now have a much better idea of what you are 
trying to express.  I can also now see how the AAT is relevant to the 
discussion: it is precisely a set of propositions with an identity, or 
(to use SKOS terminology) a Concept Scheme.   (However, I can't see the 
AAT being cited as justification for an assertion or set of 
assertions.)  Is your idea of a "Named Graph" close to that of a Concept 
Scheme?

Richard

On 28/07/2014 11:34, martin wrote:
> Dear Richard,
>
> On 28/7/2014 11:41 ??, Richard Light wrote:
>> Martin,
>>
>> I thought that a major merit of the CRM was that it was an abstract 
>> model, which could be instantiated using whatever technology was felt 
>> to be appropriate.  That being the case, I would be concerned if 
>> RDF-specific techniques were presented to the world as the only way 
>> in which a particular challenge ("implementing argumentation systems 
>> ...") could be tackled using the CRM.  Or are you talking 
>> specifically about RDF implementations of the CRM?
> I share your concerns :-) !
>>
>> Why can't "premises and conclusions" be modelled using reification, 
>> so they can then be given a unique URI? This is the sort of approach 
>> which the BM has successfully deployed, as I understand it.  I would 
>> be grateful if someone could provide a really simple concrete example 
>> which shows the need for the named graph approach.
> Your are right!
>
> Actually I see the "Named Graph" not as a particular RDF feature, but 
> at the level of abstraction that Simon pointed
> out: A set of propositions with a "historical" identity which is not 
> reduced to the identity of the set itself.
>
> The CRM uses an abstract data model of classes, superclasses, 
> properties, superproperties etc., which is more or
> less the stable core of all data structures and KR models used so far 
> in industrial systems. We have however adopted
> the term "property" from RDF, just to reduce the semantic gap for 
> people now. Originally, we used TELOS terms, but KIF, OIL was equally 
> compatible.
>
> The requirement to introduce argumentation structures into consistent 
> graphs of propositions is relatively new.
> Reification is an atomic mechanism, which does not allow for 
> describing that a set of propositions is believed
> together. Therefore it looses an important part of the semantics of 
> argumentation. A Named Graph is in my mind
> an abstarction which subsumes reification. Reification is a workaround 
> using a syntax which has not foreseen the problem before. Named Graph 
> is a NEW logical construct not found in any other industrial KR model, 
> and born out of a necessity that first showed up when integrating 
> different sources. (Before, one could say AI just slept in a one-truth 
> cyberworld with a god-like user or math on top of reality).
>
> I believe we need the Named Graph construct as a logical form, not as 
> an RDF syntax, if we want to integrate
> provenance of knowledge with the CRM. So far, we have evidence of two 
> real-life data structures, one is
> archaeological excavation records, and another description of medieval 
> book-bindings, which systematically
> register source of evidence and concluded facts. E.g., geometric 
> topology of stratigarphic units and microsopic
> stratigraphic interface properties are used to justify chronological 
> sequence. In a simple model, this is atomic,
> in a more general, it is probabilistic Bayesian. So, we would need a 
> "Typed Named Graph", which restricts the
> propositions in the Graph to a certain schema (topology, chronology), 
> and then a relationship "is evidence for"
> between the typed named graphs. The assertion itself forms part of the 
> belief implicit in the archaeological
> record.
>
> If there is any logician on this mailing list, a proper formulation of 
> such a construct and an abstract syntax for the CRM would be great to 
> have!!!
>
> We will try to suggest a graphic primitive, which is a bubble around 
> the propositions with a "hot spot" on the
> perimeter.
>
> Suggestions most welcome!
>>
>> To pick up on the suggestion of using the AAT as an example: in what 
>> way is the AAT a named graph?  Surely it's a SKOS Concept Scheme 
>> (plus)?  I think it would be impossible to give an example of a 
>> "well-known" named graph, for the reasons Simon has been explaining.
> Named Graphs are new, so none is really "well known", but I would 
> regard a skosified AAT as a Named Graph,
> as well as all the RDF junks for LoD, once RDF regards any RDF file as 
> a Named Graph. The only condition is, that
> two RDF Files with the same content and different URI are not regarded 
> as being identical (owl:same_as).
>
> Best,
>
> Martin
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 25/07/2014 20:25, martin wrote:
>>> Dear Richard,
>>>
>>> At least in the implementations we use one triple can be in any 
>>> number of graphs, even nested ones
>>> (SESAME, Virtuoso, OWLIM).
>>>
>>> The point Steve is making here that Named Graphs are the only way in 
>>> which facts in a database can be
>>> described as explicit content of multiple(!) information objects 
>>> which are described (creation etc.) in the
>>> same system. There is no other choice for implementing argumentation 
>>> systems which explicitly describe
>>> premises and conclusions as propositions in the database.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24/7/2014 11:03 ??, Richard Light wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I must say that I'm not so sure that named graphs are going to be 
>>>> particularly useful for implementations of the CRM. As I understand 
>>>> it (and I don't claim to be an RDF expert), the idea of quads was 
>>>> invented so that "naked" RDF assertions could be given a 
>>>> "context".  The problem I have always had with that idea is that 
>>>> you only get one shot at it (i.e. you can only assign one context 
>>>> to any given triple).
>>>>
>>>> Surely (a) we need to be able to express multiple contexts for 
>>>> statements made within the CRM, (b) we have already developed a 
>>>> rich enough use of RDF to allow us to do so.
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>>
>>>> On 24/07/2014 05:57, Simon Spero wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The AAT might work.
>>>>> I'm not entirely sure that named graphs are propositional objects 
>>>>> as defined in the CRM, but I think the definition is loose enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> Named graphs are not graphs that are named; they are a tuple of an 
>>>>> IRI (which is a name), and graph (which is the set of 
>>>>> propositions). If the name is a proposition, it is not one in the 
>>>>> graph it is associated with.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Propositional objects can include parts which are not 
>>>>> propositions then there is no problem- though it would seem more 
>>>>> natural to have information objects only part of which are 
>>>>> propositional.
>>>>> That would be a bit too  big a change this far down the road ; if 
>>>>> named graphs can't fit directly, graphs themselves would; these 
>>>>> could be part of named graphs.
>>>>>
>>> I am not sure if "The encoding structure known as a "named graph" 
>>> also falls
>>> under this class, so that each "named graph" is an instance of an E73
>>> Information Object." is the right way to say it.
>>>
>>> May be better "information encoded as named
>>> graphs may represent instances of E73 Information object including 
>>> an explicit representation of contents".
>>> Since it is an encoding construct, it may represent other things as 
>>> well. In a sense,
>>> it is trivial that any RDF File is an information object, but it is 
>>> not trivial if a part of the content
>>> of an RDF File represents (,not "is",) an information object in its 
>>> own right.
>>> I would rather put that at the end of the scope note as an 
>>> implementation note.
>>>>> On Jul 24, 2014 12:15 AM, "Stephen Stead" <steads at paveprime.com 
>>>>> <mailto:steads at paveprime.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>     Can you think of a named graph that would be sufficiently
>>>>>     iconic to make a
>>>>>     good example?
>>>>>     Rgds
>>>>>     SdS
>>>>>
>>>>>     Stephen Stead
>>>>>     Tel +44 20 8668 3075 <tel:%2B44%2020%208668%203075>
>>>>>     Mob +44 7802 755 013 <tel:%2B44%207802%20755%20013>
>>>>>     E-mail steads at paveprime.com <mailto:steads at paveprime.com>
>>>>>     LinkedIn Profile http://uk.linkedin.com/in/steads
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     -----Original Message-----
>>>>>     From: Crm-sig [mailto:crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr
>>>>>     <mailto:crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr>] On Behalf Of Øyvind Eide
>>>>>     Sent: 23 July 2014 15:12
>>>>>     To: crm-sig
>>>>>     Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] *** ISSUE *** Revision of scope note
>>>>>     for E73
>>>>>     Information Object to specifically include named graphs
>>>>>
>>>>>     Dear Steve,
>>>>>
>>>>>     This sounds good to me. Do you think an example of a named
>>>>>     graph should be
>>>>>     added as well?
>>>>>
>>>>>     Best,
>>>>>
>>>>>     Øyvind
>>>>>
>>>>>     On 18. juli 2014, at 08:44, Stephen Stead wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>     > Dear CRM-SIG
>>>>>     > I would like to suggest the following revision to the scope
>>>>>     note for E73
>>>>>     Information Object. Its intention is to specifically mention
>>>>>     "named graphs"
>>>>>     as being instances of E73 Information Object. As we look at
>>>>>     implementation
>>>>>     of the CRM it is becoming increasingly obvious that "named
>>>>>     graphs" are going
>>>>>     to be a particularly useful tool, it would therefore seem
>>>>>     handy if we
>>>>>     explicitly mentioned that they live in E73!
>>>>>     > Best regards
>>>>>     > SdS
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > Current Scope Note
>>>>>     > E73 Information Object
>>>>>     > Subclass of:        E89 Propositional Object
>>>>>     > E90 Symbolic Object
>>>>>     > Superclass of:    E29 Design or Procedure
>>>>>     > E31 Document
>>>>>     > E33 Linguistic Object
>>>>>     > E36 Visual Item
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > Scope note:        This class comprises identifiable
>>>>>     immaterial items,
>>>>>     such as a poems, jokes, data sets, images, texts, multimedia
>>>>>     objects,
>>>>>     procedural prescriptions, computer program code, algorithm or
>>>>>     mathematical
>>>>>     formulae, that have an objectively recognizable structure and
>>>>>     are documented
>>>>>     as single units.
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > An E73 Information Object does not depend on a specific
>>>>>     physical carrier,
>>>>>     which can include human memory, and it can exist on one or
>>>>>     more carriers
>>>>>     simultaneously.
>>>>>     > Instances of E73 Information Object of a linguistic nature
>>>>>     should be
>>>>>     declared as instances of the E33 Linguistic Object subclass.
>>>>>     Instances of
>>>>>     E73 Information Object of a documentary nature should be
>>>>>     declared as
>>>>>     instances of the E31 Document subclass. Conceptual items such
>>>>>     as types and
>>>>>     classes are not instances of E73 Information Object, nor are
>>>>>     ideas without a
>>>>>     reproducible expression.
>>>>>     > Examples:
>>>>>     > §  image BM000038850.JPG from the Clayton Herbarium in
>>>>>     London §  E. A.
>>>>>     > Poe's "The Raven"
>>>>>     > §  the movie "The Seven Samurai" by Akira Kurosawa §  the
>>>>>     Maxwell
>>>>>     > Equations
>>>>>     > Properties:
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > Revised Scope Note
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > E73 Information Object
>>>>>     > Subclass of:        E89 Propositional Object
>>>>>     > E90 Symbolic Object
>>>>>     > Superclass of:    E29 Design or Procedure
>>>>>     > E31 Document
>>>>>     > E33 Linguistic Object
>>>>>     > E36 Visual Item
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > Scope note:        This class comprises identifiable
>>>>>     immaterial items,
>>>>>     such as a poems, jokes, data sets, images, texts, multimedia
>>>>>     objects,
>>>>>     procedural prescriptions, computer program code, algorithm or
>>>>>     mathematical
>>>>>     formulae, that have an objectively recognizable structure and
>>>>>     are documented
>>>>>     as single units. The encoding structure known as a "named
>>>>>     graph" also falls
>>>>>     under this class, so that each "named graph" is an instance of
>>>>>     an E73
>>>>>     Information Object.
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > An E73 Information Object does not depend on a specific
>>>>>     physical carrier,
>>>>>     which can include human memory, and it can exist on one or
>>>>>     more carriers
>>>>>     simultaneously.
>>>>>     > Instances of E73 Information Object of a linguistic nature
>>>>>     should be
>>>>>     declared as instances of the E33 Linguistic Object subclass.
>>>>>     Instances of
>>>>>     E73 Information Object of a documentary nature should be
>>>>>     declared as
>>>>>     instances of the E31 Document subclass. Conceptual items such
>>>>>     as types and
>>>>>     classes are not instances of E73 Information Object, nor are
>>>>>     ideas without a
>>>>>     reproducible expression.
>>>>>     > Examples:
>>>>>     > §  image BM000038850.JPG from the Clayton Herbarium in
>>>>>     London §  E. A.
>>>>>     > Poe's "The Raven"
>>>>>     > §  the movie "The Seven Samurai" by Akira Kurosawa §  the
>>>>>     Maxwell
>>>>>     > Equations
>>>>>     > Properties:
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > Stephen Stead
>>>>>     > Director
>>>>>     > Paveprime Ltd
>>>>>     > 35 Downs Court Rd
>>>>>     > Purley, Surrey
>>>>>     > UK, CR8 1BF
>>>>>     > Tel +44 20 8668 3075
>>>>>     > Fax +44 20 8763 1739
>>>>>     > Mob +44 7802 755 013
>>>>>     > E-mail steads at paveprime.com <mailto:steads at paveprime.com>
>>>>>     > LinkedIn Profile http://uk.linkedin.com/in/steads
>>>>>     >
>>>>>     > _______________________________________________
>>>>>     > Crm-sig mailing list
>>>>>     > Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>>>>>     > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>>     Crm-sig mailing list
>>>>>     Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>>>>>     http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>>     Crm-sig mailing list
>>>>>     Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>>>>>     http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Crm-sig mailing list
>>>>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>>>>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> *Richard Light*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Crm-sig mailing list
>>>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>>>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>   Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
>>>   Research Director             |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
>>>                                 |  Email:martin at ics.forth.gr  |
>>>                                                               |
>>>                 Center for Cultural Informatics               |
>>>                 Information Systems Laboratory                |
>>>                  Institute of Computer Science                |
>>>     Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)   |
>>>                                                               |
>>>                 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,             |
>>>                  GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece               |
>>>                                                               |
>>>               Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl            |
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Crm-sig mailing list
>>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>
>> -- 
>> *Richard Light*
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Crm-sig mailing list
>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>
>
> -- 
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>   Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
>   Research Director             |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
>                                 |  Email:martin at ics.forth.gr  |
>                                                               |
>                 Center for Cultural Informatics               |
>                 Information Systems Laboratory                |
>                  Institute of Computer Science                |
>     Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)   |
>                                                               |
>                 N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,             |
>                  GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece               |
>                                                               |
>               Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl            |
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

-- 
*Richard Light*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20140728/36c878a5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list