[Crm-sig] Modelling an Event's General Outcome Ideas? Properties?

George Bruseker george.bruseker at gmail.com
Fri Jan 7 10:38:00 EET 2022


Hi Martin,

Quoting self, "in the idiom of CRM, I am proposing that this be restricted
to the concept of one event resulting in another event of a type.

E7 pxxx had outcome of type E55 (of an E5/7????).

So I am looking for a CRM property that would be able to denote a similar
concept to the one that the English language term 'outcome' denotes when it
is uttered.""

Best,

George


On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 8:42 PM Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr> wrote:

> Sorry,
>
> I mean (Oxford Dictionary):
>
> "outcome
> noun [ C usually singular ]
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/help/codes.html>
> uk
> /ˈaʊt.kʌm/ us
> /ˈaʊt.kʌm/
> C1
> a result <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/result>
> or effect <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/effect>
> of an action
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/action>,
> situation
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/situation>,
> etc.:
> It's too early to predict
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/predict> the
> outcome of the meeting
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/meeting>.
> Thesaurus: synonyms, antonyms, and examples
> the result of something
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/articles/the-result-of-something>
>
>    - result <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/result>His
>    firing was a direct result of his refusal to follow the employment policies.
>    - effect <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/effect>The
>    radiation leak has had a disastrous effect on the environment.
>    - consequence
>    <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/consequence>Failure to
>    do proper safety checks may have serious consequences.
>    - outcome <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/outcome>It's
>    too early to predict the outcome of the meeting.
>    - upshot <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/upshot>The
>    upshot of the discussions is that there will be no further redundancies.
>    - end result <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/thesaurus/end-result>The
>    end result of these changes should be a more efficient system for dealing
>    with complaints.
>
> What do you mean of all that? The fact that equivalent words exist in some
> other languages has nothing to do with definition.
>
> I hope this is comprehensible.
>
> Best,
>
> Martin
>
> On 1/6/2022 8:21 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>
>
> I agree with Francesco -- anywhere we don't have complete knowledge of the
> activities there will be utility to such a shortcut, when there is an
> intended outcome, but one which is not certain.
>
> An archeological expedition -- resulted in outcome of type "came home
> empty handed" / "found something"
> Commission of an artwork -- resulted in outcome of type "artist ran off
> with the money" / "artist produced something else" / "artist produced what
> was wanted" / ...
> Exhibition planning -- resulted in outcome of type "exhibition" / "no
> exhibition" / "revised exhibition" / ...
> Conservation of object -- resulted in outcome of type "destroyed object by
> mistake" / "no change" / "repaired damage" / ...
> etc.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 12:56 PM George Bruseker <george.bruseker at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Rob / Martin,
>>
>> Yes, Rob provides a nice instance example.
>>
>> Again, I just want to explore whether such a property has applications
>> beyond this scope. Perhaps it isn't needed but if we look at more examples
>> maybe a generalization will arise.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> George
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 7:53 PM Robert Sanderson <azaroth42 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Let me try and explain my understanding
>>>
>>> There are events, such as the auction of a specific lot, in which the
>>> objects in the lot are offered for sale.
>>>
>>> That event might result in the transfer of ownership of the objects in
>>> the lot from their current owner to the new owner, but they might not --
>>> there might be no bidders, the reserve price might not be met, etc. At
>>> which point there is no transfer of ownership at all, and hence we should
>>> not create an E8 Acquisition because there was no change in ownership.
>>>
>>> So ... we have established that the auction of the lot is not the same
>>> entity as the E8 acquisition, which might be triggered by the auction of
>>> lot. Let's just call it an E7 Activity.
>>>
>>> Now, lets assume that we do not know anything at all about that
>>> Acquisition. So, much like the other *_of_type properties, we don't want to
>>> instantiate an E8 which was triggered by the E7 but with no properties, but
>>> instead to just say that the E7 resulted in an activity of_type Sale, or
>>> of_type Return, or of_type Unknown, or of_type Bought In.
>>>
>>> Thus:
>>>
>>> <auction_of_lot1> a E7_Activity ;
>>>   carried_out_by <auction house> ;
>>>   triggered_activity_of_type <bought-in> .
>>>
>>> <bought-in> a E55_Type .
>>>
>>> Something like that?
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 12:28 PM Martin Doerr via Crm-sig <
>>> crm-sig at ics.forth.gr> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi George,
>>>>
>>>> Please explain in more detail:
>>>>
>>>> On 1/6/2022 1:54 PM, George Bruseker wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>
>>>> So the context for this is that there are provenance events being
>>>> described and there is categorical knowledge derivable from the source
>>>> material which a researcher might want to attribute to the event on what
>>>> generally happened, the event ended in a sale, didn't end in a sale etc.
>>>>
>>>> What sort of event would "end in a sale", and why this event is not a
>>>> sale itself, or why the sale itself is not an event in its own right. Can
>>>> you cite an instance? Since I have happened to make full analysis of
>>>> auction house actions and internet sales offers, I would need more details.
>>>>
>>>> I used a model which simply separates the sales offer from the legal
>>>> transaction. The sale itself is not an outcome in this model, but motivated
>>>> by the offer. Note that sales may be done without offer. Requests for sales
>>>> are also different communications.
>>>>
>>>> I did not see a need to describe "outcome" in general terms.
>>>>
>>>> Further, could you better explain what you mean by "outcome" other than
>>>> common language? Could you give a semantic definition, that would separate
>>>> expextations from necessities, prerequisites and deterministic behaviour
>>>> etc. ?
>>>>
>>>> I seriuosly do not understand  that "outcome" has an ontological
>>>> nature. For the time being I recognize it as a word of a language.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The cheap and cheerful solution would just be to put this as a p2 has
>>>> type... the typical solution.
>>>>
>>>> I principally disagree that cheap is cheerful. This is not a CRM
>>>> Principle. P2 has type has never been a cheap solution. It is very precisly
>>>> described as specialization without adding properties. I honestly do not
>>>> understand what the type would pertain to, once it may not characterize the
>>>> event, but an event to follow?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It would nice to be more accurate though since the categorization isn't
>>>> of the event itself but of its typical outcome.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly, if I would understand he sense of "outcome", I could follow
>>>> you better. Note, that words and senses are different, and CRM is not
>>>> modelling English language.
>>>>
>>>> So the case that comes up here is that provenance researchers want to
>>>> classify the outcomes of an event by type regardless of their knowledge of
>>>> the specifics of what went on in that event (because the source material
>>>> may simply not allow them to know).
>>>>
>>>> Please provide instances.
>>>>
>>>> In this context, as type the outcome value will be used for
>>>> categorization, how many events resulted in 'sale' how many in 'not sale'.
>>>>
>>>> In a real query scenario it would be asking questions like how many
>>>> events of such and such a type had what kinds of outcome. Or maybe how many
>>>> events with such and such a general purpose had such and such a general
>>>> outcome. And then filter by time, space, people etc.
>>>>
>>>> It would be very interesting to seek other examples of general outcome
>>>> recording for events in other contexts and see if this is a generally
>>>> useful property to define.
>>>>
>>>> Still, you use the term "outcome", without explaining it, isn't it? I
>>>> honestly do not regard it as self-evident, and I had already written that
>>>> in previous messages.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> George
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 7:28 PM Martin Doerr via Crm-sig <
>>>> crm-sig at ics.forth.gr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In continuation:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Sold", "completed", "incomplete" are very specific things. Objects
>>>>> are offered for sale, which does not imply anything more than a sort of
>>>>> publication. Actual purchase is a reaction on the offer.  Purchase may
>>>>> happen without offer. Actual change of ownership is modeled in the CRM. The
>>>>> type of the event itself implies per default completion, such as
>>>>> production, modification etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> The interesting case are processes which are known to be abandoned,
>>>>> but what that means needs further investigation: How much of action has
>>>>> been done and left historical traces?
>>>>>
>>>>> Processes which have not been finished during recording time are
>>>>> another case. This is notoriously difficult, and resembles the "current"
>>>>> discussions. We may need an "still ongoing", which should be harmonized
>>>>> with the time-spans.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unknown parameters of an event, such as purchase from unknown to
>>>>> unknown, do not need a n "outcome" property, but are just a specific event
>>>>> an object has experienced.
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Other kinds of "outcomes" can be modifications, obligations, receiving
>>>>> knowledge of, transfer of properties between "input-output" etc. May be it
>>>>> is time to study if we can create a relatively comprehensive list. Some
>>>>> events may only leave memory as only persistent thing, e.g. performances.
>>>>>
>>>>> To be discussed!😁
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/31/2021 8:29 PM, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>> The missing property of outcome is so far deliberate in the CRM,
>>>>> because we could not identify a general case. In contrast, there are models
>>>>> with input-output semantics, but this is a very small subset.
>>>>>
>>>>> As in all such cases, we first need a collection of examples, and
>>>>> study if there exist common semantics, or if it splits in a set of more
>>>>> specific cases. I'd expect about 5 kinds of outcomes. If you give me the
>>>>> time, I can present in the next meeting some.
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/20/2021 6:45 PM, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Thanasi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The proposal creates a consistent way of doing the 'type of' version
>>>>> of a property that relates one particular to another particular.
>>>>>
>>>>> So  each individual property:
>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1
>>>>> has its typed version like:
>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1
>>>>>
>>>>> Right?
>>>>>
>>>>> But I contend there IS NO particular property in regular CRM that
>>>>> expresses the semantics I indicate above (therefore the proposal cannot
>>>>> generate its typed version). P21 DOES NOT express the semantics I need
>>>>> (hence also not P23).
>>>>>
>>>>> O13 triggers more or less does. in particular. But I need the
>>>>> generalization. Triggered an outcome of type.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyhow, not sure if anyone else needs this, but very common in my data.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> G
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 4:35 PM Athanasios Velios <
>>>>> thanasis at softicon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Following Athina's response and in relation to the question about the
>>>>>> extant properties, I guess the "type of type" can be replicated with
>>>>>> thesaurus related properties (e.g. P127 has broader term). I would
>>>>>> consider the instances of E55 Type slightly differently to normal
>>>>>> instances and not extent the idea to them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> T.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14/12/2021 19:42, George Bruseker wrote:
>>>>>> > Hi Thanasi,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Yes that's true. Good reminder. That might be a solution but then
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> > would need the particular property for expressing that two events
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> > causally connected. I avoided to put it in the last email so as not
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> > stir up to many semantic teapots. But obviously to have the general
>>>>>> > property we should have the particular property. So we have for
>>>>>> example
>>>>>> > we have the particular properties:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1
>>>>>> > <
>>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > and
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1
>>>>>> > <
>>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > so the analogy to this in my situation is probably
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > O13 triggers (is triggered by)
>>>>>> > https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf
>>>>>> > <
>>>>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf>
>>>>>> > and we need the analogy of p21 to make the model complete....
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On another note out of curiosity, in the extension where every
>>>>>> property
>>>>>> > has a 'type of' property what happens with the extant 'type of'
>>>>>> > properties? I assume there isn't any has general purpose of type
>>>>>> > property... or is there?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Cheers
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > G
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 9:20 PM Athanasios Velios via Crm-sig
>>>>>> > <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     Hi George, all,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     As part of Linked Conservation Data (and with the help of
>>>>>> Carlo, Martin
>>>>>> >     and Steve) we proposed the idea of Typed Properties which
>>>>>> derive from
>>>>>> >     current CRM properties and always have E55 Type as range.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     E.g. "bears feature" → "bears feature of type" so that one can
>>>>>> describe
>>>>>> >     the type of something without specifying the individual. It is
>>>>>> very
>>>>>> >     economical in conservation where we want to avoid describing
>>>>>> >     hundreds of
>>>>>> >     individuals of similar types.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     We are still baking the exact impact of such a reduction from
>>>>>> >     individuals to Types. One issue in RDFS is the multitude of new
>>>>>> >     properties. There seems to be a simple implementation in OWL
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> >     property paths. Not an immediate solution but a flag for more
>>>>>> to come.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     All the best,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     Thanasis
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >     On 14/12/2021 15:49, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote:
>>>>>> >      > Hi all,
>>>>>> >      >
>>>>>> >      > I have situations in which I have events where the data
>>>>>> curators
>>>>>> >      > describe events for which they have generic knowledge of the
>>>>>> >     outcome:
>>>>>> >      > sold, completed, incomplete, this sort of thing. So there is
>>>>>> >     knowledge
>>>>>> >      > but it is not knowledge of the particular next event but of a
>>>>>> >     general
>>>>>> >      > kind of outcome.
>>>>>> >      >
>>>>>> >      > We have properties like: P21 had general purpose (was
>>>>>> purpose of)
>>>>>> >     which
>>>>>> >      > is very useful for when the data curator only has generic
>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>> >      > knowledge and not particular knowledge regarding purpose.
>>>>>> This
>>>>>> >     seems a
>>>>>> >      > parallel to this case.
>>>>>> >      >
>>>>>> >      > Anybody else have this case and have an interest in a
>>>>>> property
>>>>>> >     like 'had
>>>>>> >      > general outcome' or 'had outcome of type' that goes from
>>>>>> Event to a
>>>>>> >      > Type? Or, better yet if possible, a solution that doesn't
>>>>>> involve
>>>>>> >     a new
>>>>>> >      > property but that does meet this semantic need without too
>>>>>> many
>>>>>> >     contortions?
>>>>>> >      >
>>>>>> >      > Best,
>>>>>> >      >
>>>>>> >      > George
>>>>>> >      >
>>>>>> >      > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> >      > 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
>>>>>> >     <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
>>>>>> >     <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Crm-sig mailing listCrm-sig at ics.forth.grhttp://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>>  Dr. Martin Doerr
>>>>>
>>>>>  Honorary Head of the
>>>>>  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
>>>>>
>>>>>  Vox:+30(2810)391625
>>>>>  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
>>>>>  Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Crm-sig mailing listCrm-sig at ics.forth.grhttp://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>>  Dr. Martin Doerr
>>>>>
>>>>>  Honorary Head of the
>>>>>  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
>>>>>
>>>>>  Vox:+30(2810)391625
>>>>>  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
>>>>>  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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>  Dr. Martin Doerr
>>>>
>>>>  Honorary Head of the
>>>>  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
>>>>
>>>>  Vox:+30(2810)391625
>>>>  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
>>>>  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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rob Sanderson
>>> Director for Cultural Heritage Metadata
>>> Yale University
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Rob Sanderson
> Director for Cultural Heritage Metadata
> Yale University
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------
>  Dr. Martin Doerr
>
>  Honorary Head of the
>  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
>
>  Vox:+30(2810)391625
>  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
>  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/20220107/4215e8ec/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list