RE: FAQ entry on influence/inform (ISSUE-592)

Hi Khalid,

> This is not always possible in the sense that en entity e2 can be
> influenced by an entity e1, yet e2 may not be derived from e1.

OK, so my question from before was: can you give an example of such an e2 and e1?

thanks,
Simon

Dr Simon Miles
Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
+44 (0)20 7848 1166

Evolutionary Testing of Autonomous Software Agents:
http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1370/

________________________________________
From: kbelhajj@googlemail.com [kbelhajj@googlemail.com] on behalf of Khalid Belhajjame [Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk]
Sent: 01 April 2013 11:38
To: Miles, Simon
Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: FAQ entry on influence/inform (ISSUE-592)

Hi again :-)


So in the last sentence of your entry, you say:

"If you find yourself using wasInfluencedBy in your provenance model,
it is preferable to check what kinds of element (entities, activities,
or agents) you are trying to relate and considering using the more
specific relation. For example, if you wish to express the influence
of one entity on another, this can be done with a wasDerivedFrom
relation."

If you look at the last sentence in the above paragraph, from my
understanding, it suggets the following:

If one wants to express influence between 2 elements and those
elements happen to be entities, then use derivation instead of
influence.

This is not always possible in the sense that en entity e2 can be
influenced by an entity e1, yet e2 may not be derived from e1.

Was this helpful?

khalid



On 1 April 2013 11:20, Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi Khalid,
>
> Sorry, but I'm still not understanding what you mean.
>
>> may suggest for the reader that derivation is used to express influence between entities.
>
> Yes, that is what I want to suggest. As the DM says "A... derivation... is also an influence."
>
>> While derivation entails
>> influence, it is also used to express entity transformations that are
>> captured by influence.
>
> But transformation is only one form of derivation by its definition in the DM. Saying that X wasDerivedFrom Y does not entail that X was transformed from Y, as it may merely be "based on" Y (by the definition).
>
> I think I'm still not understanding your point. Can you say what sentence you could give as replacement for the one you dislike? I understand you may be asking just to remove my sentence, but that would not help clarify the reasons to me.
>
> thanks,
> Simon
>
> Dr Simon Miles
> Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>
> Evolutionary Testing of Autonomous Software Agents:
> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1370/
>
> ________________________________________
> From: kbelhajj@googlemail.com [kbelhajj@googlemail.com] on behalf of Khalid Belhajjame [Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk]
> Sent: 01 April 2013 11:09
> To: Miles, Simon
> Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: FAQ entry on influence/inform (ISSUE-592)
>
> Hi Simon,
>
>
> On 1 April 2013 11:00, Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Hi Khalid,
>>
>> OK. That is not how I have understood things from the DM.
>>
>> The DM says "A Usage, start, end, generation, invalidation, communication, derivation, attribution, association, and delegation is also an influence. It is recommended to adopt these more specific relations when writing provenance descriptions. It is anticipated that the Influence relation may be useful to express queries over provenance information."  If you are correct that influence could be used to express provenance relationships between entities that derivation could not capture, then why would we be recommending not to use it?
>>
>> Can you give me an example of a relationship between entities that is an >influence but not a derivation?
>
> That was not what I said. What I said (or at least meant) is that the
> wording of the last sentence in your entry may suggest for the reader
> that derivation is used
> to express influence between entities. While derivation entails
> influence, it is also used to express entity transformations that are
> captured by influence.
>
> Best,
> khalid
>
>
>>
>> thanks,
>> Simon
>>
>> Dr Simon Miles
>> Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
>> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
>> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>>
>> Evolutionary Testing of Autonomous Software Agents:
>> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1370/
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: kbelhajj@googlemail.com [kbelhajj@googlemail.com] on behalf of Khalid Belhajjame [Khalid.Belhajjame@cs.man.ac.uk]
>> Sent: 29 March 2013 18:25
>> To: Miles, Simon
>> Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: FAQ entry on influence/inform (ISSUE-592)
>>
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> Thanks for the new entry, which I think will be useful.
>> Regarding the last sentence, I think it may lead to some
>> mis-understanding [1], as the reader may think that derivation is used
>> to express influence between entities, whereas it is used to express a
>> relation that is stronger than influence.
>>
>> [1] "For example, if you wish to express the influence of one entity
>> on another, this can be done with a wasDerivedFrom relation."
>>
>> Best,
>> khalid
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 19:32, Miles, Simon <simon.miles@kcl.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've made a stab at a FAQ entry for whether to use wasInluencedBy,
>>> wasInformedBy or another relation, relating to an old open issue.
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/PROV-FAQ#Should_I_use_wasInfluencedBy.2C_wasInformedBy.2C_or_another_relation.3F
>>>
>>> Any feedback is welcome.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> Dr Simon Miles
>>> Senior Lecturer, Department of Informatics
>>> Kings College London, WC2R 2LS, UK
>>> +44 (0)20 7848 1166
>>>
>>> Evolutionary Testing of Autonomous Software Agents:
>>> http://eprints.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/1370/
>>
>>
>
>

Received on Monday, 1 April 2013 10:53:15 UTC