W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-prov-wg@w3.org > October 2012

RE: PROV-ISSUE-516: Data Model Section 5.2.1 [prov-dm]

From: Freimuth, Robert, Ph.D. <Freimuth.Robert@mayo.edu>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 18:02:53 +0000
To: Khalid Belhajjame <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk>, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
CC: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <76A706C559A90249BA321EE35470B85701E1C5@MSGPEXCEI12A.mfad.mfroot.org>
Hi,

Khalid correctly interpreted my comment.

"A derivation" uses "derivation" as a noun, whereas "derivation" alone will likely be interpreted as a verb.

The definition in the DM doc is "A derivation is a transformation", which is a little confusing (the first two words indicate noun, but the context added by the next few words indicate verb).  The text goes on to state that "there must be some underpinning activities" involved, which seem to support interpretation as a verb.  To those new to PROV, "derivation" can sound very much like an activity.

It would help readers to explicitly state that "derivation" (as defined by PROV) describes the relationship between two entities, one of which was derived from the other through an activity.  More specifically, "derivation" is not a type of activity.

A portion of the attached diagram might help to illustrate this, and avoid any potential confusion that might arise due to verb vs. noun ambiguity.

Thanks,
Bob
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: kbelhajj@googlemail.com 
> [mailto:kbelhajj@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of Khalid Belhajjame
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 8:45 AM
> To: Paul Groth
> Cc: Luc Moreau; public-prov-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: PROV-ISSUE-516: Data Model Section 5.2.1 [prov-dm]
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> On 3 October 2012 13:59, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote:
> > Hi Khalid,
> >
> > I don't understand your suggestion. A derivation is a transformation
> > that is performed by an activity.
> 
> What I meant is that the definition "Derivation is a transformation",
> implies that derivation is "action", and that the reader may wrongly
> infer that it is a sort of action. Hence, the suggestion is to
> slightly reword the definition of derivation to avoid that
> 
> khalid
> 
> We just don't always say what
> > activity did the transformation.
> >
> > regards
> > Paul
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Khalid Belhajjame
> > <Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I think that the confusion that the reviewer had stems 
> from the fact
> >> that derivation is defined as "transformation", which one 
> may argue is
> >> an activity.
> >>
> >> So, I guess we may need to slightly change the definition of
> >> Derivation. Rather than stating "Derivation is a tranformation",
> >> replacing with something in the lines of "Derivation is 
> used to that
> >> an entity was constructed by updating or ? another entity", would
> >> address the reviewer concerns and avoid confusion.
> >>
> >> Thanks, khalid
> >>
> >> On 25 September 2012 12:10, Luc Moreau 
> <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>> I have drafted a response to ISSUE-516 on the wiki at:
> >>> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISS
> UE-516_.28DerivationAsBundle.29
> >>> It is copied below for your convenience.
> >>>
> >>> Feedback appreciated.
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Luc
> >>>
> >>> ISSUE-516 (DerivationAsBundle)
> >>>
> >>> Original email:
> >>> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Sep/0106.html
> >>> Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/516
> >>> Group Response:
> >>>
> >>> A derivation is not an activity, a derivation is a 
> transformation of an
> >>> entity to another. A derivation may be realized by one or 
> more activities.
> >>> If a derivation (between e2 and e1) is realized by one 
> known activity, then
> >>> that activity generated e2 and used e1.
> >>> All this is formalized in the constraints document (see 
> references).
> >>> The reason why derivation can refer to a usage and a 
> generation is that we
> >>> wanted to be able to express the derivation path in full. 
> This is particular
> >>> important in a number of use cases, including result 
> reproducibility.
> >>> So, derivation is a construct that refers to two 
> entities, an activity
> >>> (similarly to other relations in the model) and in 
> addition to a usage and a
> >>> generation, by means of their identifiers. (Reminder: 
> these identifiers
> >>> identify entity/activity/usage/generation and not statements).
> >>> A bundle is a set of provenance statements. (Reminder: 
> statements do not
> >>> have identifiers.)
> >>> Hence, a derivation is not a bundle, it does not contain 
> statements.
> >>>
> >>> References:
> >>>
> >>> derivation expandable parameters:
> >>> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/#expand
able-parameters-fig
> >>> derivation constraint:
> >>> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/#deriva
tion-generation-use-inference_text
> >>>
> >>> Original author's acknowledgement:
> >>>
> >>> [edit]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 10/09/2012 09:45, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> >>>
> >>> PROV-ISSUE-516: Data Model Section 5.2.1   [prov-dm]
> >>>
> >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/516
> >>>
> >>> Raised by: Luc Moreau
> >>> On product: prov-dm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/LC_Feedback#Data_Model_Section_5.2.1
> >>>
> >>> ISSUE-463
> >>>
> >>> See comments for 2.1.2, as well as the text that 
> indicates that a derivation
> >>> is an activity ("underpinning activities performing the 
> necessary actions
> >>> resulting in such a derivation"). However, it seems the 
> intended concept of
> >>> a derivation is a summary of information that describes 
> how the creation of
> >>> one entity was informed by another. If this is correct, 
> is a derivation a
> >>> type of bundle? Or would a bundle contain statement(s) regarding a
> >>> derivation? Please clarify the relationship between these 
> concepts.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Professor Luc Moreau
> >>> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
> >>> University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
> >>> Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
> >>> United Kingdom                     
> http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
> > http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
> > Assistant Professor
> > - Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
> >   Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
> > - The Network Institute
> > VU University Amsterdam
> 
> 


Derivation Interaction.png
(image/png attachment: Derivation_Interaction.png)

Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 18:05:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:58:19 UTC