Re: PROV-ISSUE-26 (uses and generates questions): How can one figure out the provenance of a given entity?

Hi Paulo,

Using the notation we have introduced in the provenance model, this is 
writen


uses(pe, a, r_a)
uses(pe, b, r_b)
isGeneratedBy(c,pe,r_c)
isDerivedFrom(c,a)

where a,b,c are entities, pe a process execution and r_a, r_b, r_c roles.

To try and answer your questions:
- if something is wrong about c, you may want to inspect pe, and hopefully
    there are assertions about pe (not in this excerpt) which may be useful

- you may want to replay the execution, and so having a and b, and 
knowing which
    process definition underping pe, may help you verify the result.

- I assume you mean can we infer that c was derived by the process 
execution

    Yes, this is explained in the document, and further refine in the 
soon-to-be-released new version.
     Only one pe can generate c (in one account).
     And from a derivation from c to a, one can infer the existence of a 
pe which generated c and  used a.

I hope it helps,
Cheers,
Luc

On 07/07/11 15:50, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> PROV-ISSUE-26 (uses and generates questions): How can one figure out the provenance of a given entity?
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/26
>
> Raised by: Paulo Pinheiro da Silva
> On product:
>
> Context:
> 1. P uses A
> 2. P uses B
> 3. P generates C
> 4. C derived from A
>
> If the provenance of C is the concern of a user of C (as opposed to the provenance of a process that generates C), one may have the following questions:
>
> 1) What the “uses” and “generates” relationships are adding to one’s understanding of C if something is wrong with C?
> 2) Can we infer that A was derived by the execution of process P? How?
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 23:17:19 UTC