- From: Helena Deus <helenadeus@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 12:19:35 +0100
- To: Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>
- Cc: Satya Sahoo <sahoo.2@wright.edu>, Joanne Luciano <jluciano@gmail.com>, public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPkJ_9mUU87JoysqB0xc_dqxSi=5v131GTMYWCvOY4YgrHi9gw@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Michel, Latest work of the provenance wg is here - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html Where both the model of provenance and how provenance assertions can be created are graphically illustrated. My role in the prov wg is to make sure that there is a smooth transition from the model to its applicability in realistic scenarios, many of which come from life sciences domains. Kind regards, Helena On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Michel Dumontier < michel.dumontier@gmail.com> wrote: > As a testament to the growing recognition of provenance for (e-)science, > i'm glad to see that the incubator group worked hard to think about the > issues and record them. > > a good starting point: > > "provenance is often represented as metadata, but not all metadata is > necessarily provenance" > > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov-20101214/#Provenance_and_Metadata > > but > "Descriptive metadata of a resource only becomes part of its provenance > when one also specifies its relationship to deriving the resource." > > does not provide adequate description for identifying the conditions. > > and > "Provenance of a resource is a record that describes entities and > processes involved in producing and delivering or otherwise influencing that > resource" > > contains elements that are undefined (record), uncertain (are processes not > also entities?), narrow (producing/delivering) and broad (influencing). > > Of course, I appreciate the difficulty in crafting a good definition, and I > understand that this is a definition from which useful work can be > achieved. I will take the opportunity to express my thoughts on the matter. > > i think there are two key aspects to provenance (not unlike what is > suggested here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/edf0k68ccw3a22hu/) > 1. how did the resource come about? (relates to creation and justification) > -> important for reproducibility (which is an element of science) > -> includes attribution (who created the resource), creation (process that > generated the resource), reproduction (process in which a copy was > made), derivation (process in which the resource was generated from some > resource or portion of a resource), versioning (process of keeping count of > sequential derivations) > > 2. what is the history of the resource (from the point of creation) > -> important for authenticity > -> includes origin, possession and the acts of transfer > > Both have implications for trust, and can be used for accountability, among > other things. > > I find this part on recommendations of a provenance framework quite nice: > > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov-20101214/#A_Roadmap_for_Provenance_on_the_Web > > but get less excited when i see the collection of "provenance concepts" > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov-20101214/#Recommendations (section > 4) > > particularly because we need to simply the discourse such that we consider > > an event (for 1 above) > - participants (and their roles; e.g. agents, targets, products) > - locations > - time instants (e.g. action timestamps) and durations (processual > attributes) > > and a sequence of events (for both 1 and 2 above) > > this would certainly help to generate a specification with a minimal set of > classes and relations to express this kind of information. > > now, i'm writing this late at night, and I appreciate that I may not have > considered all the issues that the provenance group has (along with others > that have written about the subject), but perhaps there is still some good > discussions to be had wrt provenance and how we formally represent it, as it > is of strategic importance to the HCLSIG in our current and future efforts. > > Best, > > m. > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Satya Sahoo <sahoo.2@wright.edu> wrote: > >> Hi Joanne and Scott, >> In the Provenance incubator we agreed on the following definition: >> Provenance of a resource is a record that describes entities and processes >> involved in producing and delivering or otherwise influencing that resource. >> Provenance provides a critical foundation for assessing authenticity, >> enabling trust, and allowing reproducibility. Provenance assertions are a >> form of contextual metadata and can themselves become important records with >> their own provenance. >> >> >> >> A couple of key points in the above definition that will hopefully help to >> "draw the line in the definition" - metadata, record past events (the use >> of temporal dimension is critical to definition of provenance and has >> consensus in the current provenance WG also [1]), foundation for trust >> and reproducibility (these are often confused to be synonymous with >> provenance but are actually derived from or are use of provenance), and >> contextual or in other words each domain/application defines its own set >> of provenance terms. >> >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> >> Best, >> Satya Sahoo >> http://cci.case.edu/cci/index.php/Satya_Sahoo >> >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Main_Page >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Joanne Luciano <jluciano@gmail.com> >> Date: Thursday, September 22, 2011 12:34 pm >> Subject: The Provenance Spectrum.... >> To: public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org> >> >> >> > Thank you Scott for suggestion that we move the discussion to the >> mailing list... and to include the provenance working group. >> > >> >> > What is provenance? Where do we draw the line in the definition? >> > >> >> > Our HCLSIG TMO discussion today was reminiscent of the 'what is an >> ontology discussion?'. And this is good discussion (that we just had on the >> HCLSIG call). I would like to settle the argument of what is provenance and >> what isn't by suggesting (and claiming, if no one else has already claimed, >> and if so, then agreeing) that there is a Provenance Spectrum and >> inviting my esteemed colleagues to fill in the provenance spectrum ... and >> let's create a nice graphic to go with it that we can all use. >> > >> >> > Let's add UTILITY, if we can, so as we move across the spectrum, we get >> more out of including more into the provenance definition. I noticed that >> many of us have spent a lot of time creating metadata terms and standards to >> address the problems with legacy data for the purpose of integration, for >> example, but that if these metadata are included as "provenance" then many >> questions become easier to answer. I learned this when I went to the IPAW >> conference last June (2010) at RPI. I suggest people check the papers >> there. I was impressed. >> > >> >> > And to Invite the Provenance working group to the discussion (or join >> their discussion). >> > >> >> > Cheers, >> > Joanne >> > >> >> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> > Joanne S. Luciano, PhD Rensselaer >> Polytechnic Institute >> > Research Associate Professor 110 8th Street, Winslow >> 2143 >> > Tetherless World Constellation Troy, NY 12180, USA >> > Deputy Director, WebScience Email: jluciano@cs.rpi.edu >> > Office Tel. +1.518.276.4939 Global Tel. >> +1.617.440.4364 (skypeIn) >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> > >> >> > > > -- > Michel Dumontier > Associate Professor of Bioinformatics > Carleton University > http://dumontierlab.com > -- Helena F. Deus Post-Doctoral Researcher at DERI/NUIG http://lenadeus.info/
Received on Saturday, 1 October 2011 11:20:23 UTC