- From: Paul Groth <pgroth@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:18:20 +0100
- To: Paulo Pinheiro da Silva <paulo@utep.edu>
- Cc: "<public-xg-prov@w3.org>" <public-xg-prov@w3.org>
For the grouping I was just thinking putting everything with the same concept together. E.g provenier:haspart and dc:haspart Paul Sent from my iPhone On Nov 24, 2010, at 0:05, Paulo Pinheiro da Silva <paulo@utep.edu> wrote: > Hi All, > > I see that Jim added some PML concepts to the list of suggested concepts along with some comments -- thank you a lot Jim. > > Considering Paul's suggestion of grouping the suggested concepts for the charter, I would like to know the group opinion about implementing a minimal grouping of the concepts into "provenance data" and "provenance metadata." Please note that the group has already discussed the relevance of these two categories during one of our meetings. > > Many thanks, > Paulo. > >> Most of the concepts seem reasonable to me. I think some overlap more or >> less with dublin core and opm. Hopefully we can pull these together in >> groupings. > > >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Nov 23, 2010, at 8:34 PM, Satya Sahoo <sahoo.2@wright.edu >> <mailto:sahoo.2@wright.edu>> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> >>> The following is a list of suggested terms from the Provenir ontology >>> for submission with WG charter. I have also added the concepts to the >>> wiki. >>> >>> >>> Any feedback is welcome. >>> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> Satya >>> >>> >>> 1. provenir:part_of >>> Definition: This property is used to represent parthood relation >>> between entities (both class and instance-level). >>> Example: A mass analyzer is part of a mass spectrometer >>> >>> >>> 2. provenir:contained_in >>> Definition: This property is used to represent containment relation >>> between entities. >>> Example: A temperature sensor is contained in an ocean buoy. >>> >>> >>> 3. provenir:adjacent_to >>> Definition: Spatial proximity is represented by this property. It is >>> defined only for agent class, where the adjacent spatial location of >>> individuals of agent class may have an effect on data values. >>> Example: Quality of observations made by a sensor may be affected if >>> it is adjacent to a sensor generating a magnetic field. >>> >>> >>> 4. provenir:transformation_of >>> Definition: This property is similar to the ro:transformation_of >>> property that is asserted between two entities that preserve their >>> identity between the two transformation stages. >>> Example: An cancer cell is a transformation of a normal cell >>> >>> >>> 5. provenir:preceded_by >>> Definition: This property is used define a temporal ordering of >>> processes, which may or may not be modeled be linked by a common artifact. >>> Example: Example from RO, aging preceded by development. >>> >>> >>> 6. provenir:located_in >>> Definition: An instance of data or agent is associated with exactly >>> one spatial region that is its exact location at given instance of time. >>> Example: A sensor is located in a specific geospatial region at time >>> instance t >>> >>> >>> 7. provenir:has_temporal_value >>> Definition: This property is used to explicitly associate temporal >>> value with individuals of Provenir classes. >>> Example: duration of a liquid chromatography process has temporal >>> value 20 minutes. >>> >>> >>> 8. provenir: preceded_by* >>> Definition: Defines a temporal (and causal or non-causal) property for >>> distinct instances of provenir:process. >>> Example: A researcher starts a process to send email about the status >>> of an (long-running) experiment process. The notification process is >>> preceded by the experiment process. >>> >>> >>> 9. provenir:has_participant @ >>> Definition: Property linking data to process, where the individual of >>> data class participates in a process. >>> Example: Trypsin enzyme (used to digest protein sample) participates >>> in a proteome analysis experiment >>> >>> >>> 10. provenir:derives_from $ >>> Definition: Property represents the derivation history of data >>> entities as a chain or pathway. >>> Example: The average rainfall (specific to geospatial-temporal >>> instance) is derived from sensor readings. >>> >>> >>> 11. provenir:temporal_parameter & >>> Definition: This class captures the temporal details associated with >>> individuals of provenir:data_collection, provenir:process, and >>> provenir:agent. >>> Example: The timestamp associated with a sensor reading >>> Example: The duration of a protein analysis process >>> Example: The time period during which a sensor was working correctly >>> >>> >>> 12. provenir:spatial_parameter >>> Definition: The spatial metadata associated with instances of >>> provenir:process or provenir:agent or provenir:data_collection classes >>> is represented by this class. >>> Example: The geographical location of an ocean buoy is an example of >>> spatial parameter. >>> >>> >>> *Notes*: >>> * Unlike opm:wasTriggeredBy, provenir:preceded_by property links >>> processes that may or may not be causally dependent. >>> @ Unlike opm:used, provenir:has_participant may or may not represent >>> an existential relationship between the provenir:data and >>> provenir:process, in other words the provenir:process may or may not >>> require the existence of the provenir:data to initiate/terminate. >>> $ Unlike opm:wasDerivedFrom, provenir:derives_from may or may not >>> represent an existential relationship between entities. >>> & Extensions of the Provenir ontology, such as the Janus ontology for >>> Taverna, and Parasite Experiment ontology for biomedicine, use the >>> OWL:Time ontology terms to represent temporal notions. >>> >>> >>> The following Provenir terms were approximately to OPM terms during >>> the mapping exercise, but often represented broader notions of >>> provenance (see the mapping wiki for details). These terms need to be >>> considered during the refinement of the corresponding OPM terms: >>> 1. provenir:data >>> Definition: This class models BFO continuant entities that represent >>> the starting material, intermediate material, end products of a >>> scientific experiment, and parameters that affect the execution of a >>> scientific process. Data inherit the properties of continuants such as >>> enduring or existing while undergoing changes. >>> Example: A protein sample, digested with trypsin proteolytic enzyme, >>> used as input in a proteome analysis experiment. >>> >>> >>> 2. provenir:process >>> Definition: This class models the occurrent entities that affect >>> (process, modify, create, delete among other dynamic activities) >>> individuals of data. >>> Example: The proteome analysis experiment is a process and its >>> constituent steps, are also processes >>> >>> >>> 3. provenir:agent >>> Definition: This class models the continuant entities that causally >>> affect the individuals of process. >>> Example: The researcher performing the proteome analysis experiment >>> and microarray instrument used in the experiment are agents. >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Paul Groth <pgroth@gmail.com <mailto:pgroth@gmail.com>> >>> Date: Monday, November 22, 2010 4:43 pm >>> Subject: Suggested Concepts for Charter >>> To: "<public-xg-prov@w3.org <mailto:public-xg-prov@w3.org>>" >>> <public-xg-prov@w3.org <mailto:public-xg-prov@w3.org>> >>> Cc: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk >>> <mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> >>> >>> > Hi All, >>> > >>> > As we discussed on the call from Friday last week, below is the >>> > list of >>> > core concepts from OPM that we think should be in the list that >>> > goes >>> > with the charter. >>> > >>> > I actually think there is quite a bit of overlap with the >>> > suggested >>> > concepts from Jim McCusker. Also, from the mappings activity, we >>> > know >>> > these overlap with most of the provenance ontologies. >>> > >>> > If no one objects, I would like to put all the concepts we are >>> > all >>> > sending to the mailing list on the wiki and start to group them >>> > together. >>> > Does that sound good to everyone? >>> > >>> > Comments are appreciated especially if any concept is thought to >>> > be >>> > unnecessary. I'm looking forward to seeing the proposed concepts >>> > from >>> > everyone else. >>> > >>> > Hopefully, we can reach a consensus soon. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Paul >>> > >>> > >>> > Suggest Concepts from OPM >>> > We use opm: as a short cut for open provenance model. >>> > >>> > Graph: >>> > - opm:OPMGraph >>> > Definition: a provenance graph is defined to be a record of a >>> > past execution >>> > Example: Bob's Website Factory provides proof in the form >>> > of a >>> > provenance graph that the contract was executed as agreed. >>> > >>> > - opm:Account >>> > Definition: An account of the some past execution. Accounts >>> > offer >>> > different levels of explanation for the same execution >>> > Example: Bob's Website Factory and Customers Inc both provide >>> > two >>> > different and conflicting sets of information (i.e. accounts) >>> > describing >>> > the provenance of the production of the the same website. >>> > >>> > >>> > Nodes: >>> > - opm:Artifact >>> > Definition: Immutable piece of state, which may have a physical >>> > embodiment in a physical object, or a digital representation in >>> > a >>> > computer system. >>> > Example: BlogAgg would like to know the state of an image before >>> > and >>> > after modification to see if it was modified appropriately >>> > >>> > >>> > - opm:Process >>> > Definition: Action or series of actions performed on or depend >>> > upon >>> > artifacts, and resulting in new artifacts. >>> > Example: Alice collects data from public sources and >>> > "natural >>> > experiment" data. Alice then processes and interprets the >>> > results and >>> > writes a report summarizing the conclusions. All these steps >>> > should be >>> > captured. >>> > >>> > - opm:Agent (*1) >>> > Definition: Contextual entity acting as a catalyst of a process, >>> > enabling, facilitating, controlling, or affecting its execution. >>> > Example: Alice starts and facilities the tool SPSS when doing >>> > data analysis. >>> > >>> > >>> > Edges: >>> > - opm:Time (*2) >>> > Example: BlogAgg wants to find the correct originator of the >>> > microblog >>> > who first got the word out. >>> > >>> > - opm:Role >>> > Definition: A role designates an artifact’s or agent’s function >>> > in a process >>> > Example: Whether a data file was used as a training or test data >>> > set >>> > when running machine learning algorithms. >>> > >>> > - opm:Used, opm:UsedStar >>> > Definition: property to express that an artifact was used by a >>> > process.Example: The panda image was used by BlogAgg to generate >>> > a thumbnail image. >>> > >>> > - opm:WasGeneratedBy, opm:WasGeneratedByStar, >>> > Definition: property to express that an artifact was generated >>> > by a process. >>> > Example: A thumbnail image was generated by Blog Agg using the >>> > panda image. >>> > >>> > - opm:WasControlledBy (*1) >>> > Definition : property to express that a process was controlled >>> > an agent. >>> > Example: SPSS was controlled by Alice. >>> > >>> > - opm:WasDerivedFrom, opm:WasDerivedFromStar, >>> > Definition: property to express that an artifact was derived >>> > from >>> > another artifact. >>> > Example: The thumbnail image was derived from the panda image. >>> > >>> > - opm:WasTriggeredBy >>> > Definition: property to express that a process was triggered by >>> > another >>> > process. >>> > Example: Report writing was triggered by the interpretation of >>> > results. >>> > >>> > Extensibility (*3): >>> > - Some form of annotation, based on predicate-value pairs. >>> > Example: The data is of type a customer sales records. The data >>> > has size >>> > 100 megabytes. >>> > >>> > - Profile mechanisms, including common types, common annotations, >>> > and common graph templates >>> > Example: The image has a creative commons attribution license. >>> > This >>> > pattern represents the exchange of messages in the http protocol. >>> > >>> > >>> > (*) indicates terms that require refinement >>> > (*1) Requires better, stricter guidelines for better inter-operabiltiy >>> > (*2) To be better aligned on Time ontology >>> > (*3) To be better specified to facilitate extensibility and to >>> > be better aligned with RDF-like annotations >>> > >>> > >
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2010 07:18:00 UTC