[Crm-sig] ISSUE: E13 Attribute Assignment

Maximilian Schich maximilian at schich.info
Sat Mar 24 12:10:53 EET 2018


Dear Florian and all,

Based on quantitative evidence, I'd object to the following to part of your suggestion:

"This fact must not individually be registered for all instances of properties provided by the maintaining team, because it*/would result in an endless recursion/*  of whose opinion was the description of an opinion."

=> This would only be correct if the maintaining team would add additional E13 Attribute Assignments to their own E13 statements. Otherwise,*/in practice, the data would (a) more or less double, plus (b) a 
non-exploding truncated tail of additional E13 correction statements/**/, where the maintaining team corrects itself./*

=> Example for (a): In large data sets such as the "Census of Antique Works of Art and Architecture" the "record history" approximately doubles the data set as a whole. Note: The Census "record history" is the place where the maintaining team records their own E13-like/attribute //assertions /(aka/assertions of database record authorship/). It is important to point out that the record history, where an internal database curator implicitly claims authorship for say an artist attribution in the Census, is conceptually in no way different from an external author providing a differing opinion (both usually have PhDs in art history). Ergo there are two default cases: (1) The internal database curator claims authorship for a*/direct assertion/*  via a single E13 Attribute assignment in the record history; (2) The internal database curator claims authorship for a*/cited assertion/*  via an E13 attribute assignment in the record history on top of the*/original assertion/*  that connects the stated opinion to its external source via another E13 attribute assignment.

=> Example for (b): In large data sets where the multiplicity of opinion is recorded, the number of competing assertions including both record history and external opinions, is usually characterized by a tailed frequency distribution*. This usually means in practice that the data set stays in the same order of magnitude relative to the case where the maintaining team decides to follow one of the alternative assertions.**
* The frequency distributions would look similar to Schich 2010 "Revealing Matrices" Fig. 14-8. Indeed, my pre-publication version of this figure had a column for the record history, not included in the article, as the networks were too large for the preceding figure.
** Yes, we should expect some "assertion cascades" to be exceedingly large, but we can also expect the median cascade length being very short, between 1 and 2 in cultural heritage databases based on personal experience, and still short in very large scale cases, such as spreading rumors on the Web (cf. Friggeri et al. 2014 "Rumour cascades" Fig. 5).

=> The recommendation, in my opinion, should be:*/By default, the maintaining team should establish authorship by adding 
an E13 Attribute Assignment to each assertion in the data set. Yet, the 
maintaining team should _only_ add an E13 Attribute Assignment to their 
own E13 Attribute Assignments in the case of discernible modifications, 
updates, or corrections. To avoid comment cascades, such alternative E13 
statements should be done in /**/*/parallel(!) not recursively.***/* This recommended procedure 
establishes a record history and granular ability to cite data set 
contributions by author, yet also avoids a recursive explosion of E13 
statements./*
*** Parallel, means E13 statements in the internal record history should never be about statements in the record history itself. This can easily be maintained with users being logged in or recorded via IP and timestamp. Working example: The Wikipedia edit history.


Hope this makes sense.

Best, Max


On 2018-03-24 08:47, Øyvind Eide wrote:
>> Am 23.03.2018 um 20:26 schrieb Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr>:
>>
>> Dear Florian,
>>
>> This is what I meant by "in general".
>>
>> I propose to reformulate:
>>
>> Therefore the use of E13 Attribute Assignment marks the fact, that the maintaining team is either neutral to the validity of the respective assertion or has another opinion about it, but registers another ones opinion and how it came about.
> Therefore the use of E13 Attribute Assignment makes the point that the maintaining team is either neutral to the validity of the respective assertion or has another opinion about it. What they register is somebody else's opinion and how it came about.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Øyvind
>
>> Best,
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On 3/20/2018 11:04 AM, Florian Kräutli wrote:
>>> Dear Martin,
>>>
>>> many thanks for this! I would change, or remove, this part
>>>
>>> 	"[...] marks the fact, that the maintaining team is in general neutral to the validity of the respective assertion [...]"
>>>
>>> We see a good use-case for E13 in recording information that is wrong, or information that once used to be thought correct. For example, an artefact that was once thought to have been produced by Person A, but later it emerged that it was made by Person B. In such cases, we want to record the first piece of information using E13, along with its source, to indicate that we are aware of it and to allow people to find it even when they search based on outdated knowledge. We as the maintaining team are therefore not neutral to the validity of the assertion.
>>>
>>> All best,
>>>
>>> Florian
>>>
>>>> From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr>
>>>> Date: Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:05 PM
>>>> To: crm-sig <Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] ISSUE: E13 Attribute Assignment
>>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> Here the old scope note:
>>>> E13 Attribute Assignment
>>>> Subclass of:         E7 Activity
>>>> Superclass of:      E14 Condition Assessment
>>>> E15 Identifier Assignment
>>>> E16 Measurement
>>>> E17 Type Assignment
>>>>
>>>> Scope note:         This class comprises the actions of making assertions about properties of an object or any relation between two items or concepts.
>>>>
>>>> This class allows the documentation of how the respective assignment came about, and whose opinion it was. All the attributes or properties assigned in such an action can also be seen as directly attached to the respective item or concept, possibly as a collection of contradictory values. All cases of properties in this model that are also described indirectly through an action are characterised as "short cuts" of this action. This redundant modelling of two alternative views is preferred because many implementations may have good reasons to model either the action or the short cut, and the relation between both alternatives can be captured by simple rules.
>>>>
>>>> In particular, the class describes the actions of people making propositions and statements during certain museum procedures, e.g. the person and date when a condition statement was made, an identifier was assigned, the museum object was measured, etc. Which kinds of such assignments and statements need to be documented explicitly in structures of a schema rather than free text, depends on if this information should be accessible by structured queries.
>>>> =====================================================================
>>>> Here my new proposed scope note:
>>>>
>>>> E13 Attribute Assignment
>>>> Subclass of:         E7 Activity
>>>> Superclass of:      E14 Condition Assessment
>>>> E15 Identifier Assignment
>>>> E16 Measurement
>>>> E17 Type Assignment
>>>>
>>>> Scope note:         This class comprises the actions of making assertions about properties of an object or any relation between two items or concepts. The type of the property asserted to hold between two items or concepts can be described by the property P2 has type.
>>>>
>>>> This class allows for the documentation of how the respective assignment came about, and whose opinion it was. Note that all instances of properties described in a knowledge base are the opinion of someone. Per default, they are the opinion of the team maintaining the knowledge base. This fact must not individually be registered for all  instances of properties provided by the maintaining team, because it would result in an endless recursion of whose opinion was the description of an opinion. Therefore the use of E13 Attribute Assignment marks the fact, that the maintaining team is in general neutral to the validity of the respective assertion, but registers another ones opinion and how it came about.
>>>>
>>>> All properties assigned in such an action can also be seen as directly relating the respective pair of items or concepts. Multiple use of E13 Attribute Assignment may possibly lead to a collection of contradictory values. All cases of properties in this model that are also described indirectly through a subclass of E13 Attribute Assignment  are characterised as "short cuts" of a path via this subclass. This redundant modelling of two alternative views is preferred because many implementations may have good reasons to model either the action of assertion or the short cut, and the relation between both alternative can be captured by simple rules.
>>>>
>>>> In particular, the class describes the actions of people making propositions and statements during certain museum procedures, e.g. the person and date when a condition statement was made, an identifier was assigned, the museum object was measured, etc. Which kinds of such assignments and statements need to be documented explicitly in structures of a schema rather than free text, depends on if this information should be accessible by structured queries.
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/13/2018 12:48 PM, Martin Doerr wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> The scope note of E13 must be updated:
>>>>
>>>> A) the property type it refers to should be described by P2 has type of the E13 instance. Then it is
>>>>
>>>> isomorphic with an RDF reification statement.
>>>>
>>>> B) The epistemology should be described more precisely: It describes that the maintainers of the knowledge base are not directly responsible for the validity of the statement.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
>>>>
>>>> Research Director             |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
>>>>
>>>>                                |  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr<mailto: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           |
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Martin Doerr              |  Vox:+30(2810)391625        |
>>>>
>>>> Research Director             |  Fax:+30(2810)391638        |
>>>>
>>>>                                |  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr<mailto: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           |
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>> URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20180319/9f5ad147/attachment.html>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Crm-sig mailing list
>>>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>>>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> End of Crm-sig Digest, Vol 134, Issue 26
>>>> ****************************************
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

-- 
*Dr. Maximilian Schich*
Associate Professor, Arts & Technology
Founding member, The Edith O'Donnell Institute of Art History

*/The University of Texas at Dallas/*
800 West Campbell Road, AT10
Richardson, Texas 75080 – USA
US phone: +1-214-673-3051
EU phone: +49-179-667-8041

www.utdallas.edu/atec/schich/ <http://www.utdallas.edu/atec/schich/>
www.schich.info <http://www.schich.info/>
www.cultsci.net <http://www.cultsci.net/>

Current location: Dallas, Texas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20180324/5ccce66d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list