IW Meeting 2013-10-17

From Inference Web

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Meeting Information

Agenda

  • TODO: Tim make pml:Map modeling for mapping {literals, resources} to {literals, resources}
  • TODO: Cynthia to find examples of belief and trust (and ask Paulo)
  • TODO: group to review Belief and Trust model proposals.
  • TODO: Jim to figure out why PML3 OMN files don't load in recent Protege versions. (precondition for other Jim tasks) Todo: also update a static link to an owl file of the newer version (once previous version is debugged )


Belief and Trust remodel

Approach is to reuse the Directed Qualification Pattern that PROV uses. Create an unqualified binary relation pml:believes, then permit qualification of it using pml:qualifiedBelief, pml:Belief, and prov:entity in the same way that PROV qualifies any of its unqualified relations.

:dinosaurs_still_roam_the_earth
  a pml:Information, prov:Entity;
  prov:value "Dinosaurs still roam the earth.";
.

:joe
   a prov:Agent;
   pml:believes :dinosaurs_still_roam_the_earth;
   pml:qualifiedBelief [
       a pml:Belief;
       prov:entity :dinosaurs_still_roam_the_earth;
       what:goesHere .95;
   ];
.


The property what:goesHere describing the Belief above could be prov:value, up:assertionConfidence, or up:contentConfidence. (See http://www2013.org/companion/p167.pdf for up:):

  • prov:value provides "direct representation" of the pml:Belief, but the value ".95" doesn't seem to cover enough of the Belief. It's too ambiguous, so we wont' use it.
  • Still waiting to here back from Tom on which of assertionConfidence and contentConfidence is appropriate.

The same pattern can be used for trust: the unqualified property pml:trusts, then permit qualification of it using pml:qualifiedTrust, pml:Trust, and prov:entity. The same property what:goesHere can be reused for Belief and Trust (and, any other weighting). The prov:entity is always used to indicate the trustee regardless of the type of trustee. If the trusted Entity happens to be a prov:Agent, then it will be typed as such.

:sally a prov:Agent .

:joe
   a prov:Agent;
   pml:trusts :sally;
   pml:qualifiedTrust [
       a pml:Trust;
       prov:entity :sally;
       what:goesHere .95;
   ];
.

Attendees

Meeting Preparation

Around the room

* Add a section for yourself 2 hours before meeting.
* Mark any discussion point that you would like to raise during meeting (with DURING MEETING). 
* Otherwise, assume that others will read the rest before meeting. 
* Also, please be considerate and read others' discussion points before the meeting starts.

Tim

Nothing provenance related.

Jim

  • Further work on ReDrugS and Consent Management, nothing provenance-oriented on it yet.

James

Cynthia

Paulo

Patrice

Patrick

Deborah

  • provenance of medical information in social media information and also from instrumentation will have a role in the nsf proposal with evan and patrice - going in as soon as fastlane opens
  • I have a hard stop for a 4:30 meeting on watson

Discussions

Agenda

  • TODO: Tim make pml:Map modeling for mapping {literals, resources} to {literals, resources}
    • Hasn't tackled it yet, has some concerns with a property to refer to a literal in the qualification pattern. Will work through it when I write it up.
  • TODO: Cynthia to find examples of belief and trust (and ask Paulo)
    • Cynthia didn't find any.
    • TODO: Cynthia to email Paulo.
  • TODO: group to review Belief and Trust model proposals.
  • DONE: Jim to figure out why PML3 OMN files don't load in recent Protege versions. (precondition for other Jim tasks) Todo: also update a static link to an owl file of the newer version (once previous version is debugged )


Belief and Trust

QUESTION: Is Trust a Belief? And, if so, is that worth modeling? Belief is by Agents of Information, Trust is by Agents of Entities. To warp Trust as a Belief is to say that an Agent believes the Information that an Entity will (likely) maintain a condition in a future situation. And I think that's too intricate to bother modeling at this point.

Deborah: Okay to generalize Trust to be of Entities (and Belief of Information) Deborah: Okay to have Trust and Belief to be two independent classes (i.e. no subclass relationship)


PROPOSE: Add pml:believes domain prov:Agent, range pml:Information

CONSENSUS: accept.


PROPOSE: Rename BeliefElement to pml:Belief as a qualification class: Belief subclass (exactly 1 on prov:entity), (prov:entity allValuesFrom pml:Information)

CONSENSUS: use the qualified pattern for Belief

PROPOSE: Add pml:qualifiedBelief domain prov:Agent range pml:Belief

  • The previous two proposals imply that we deprecate hasBelievedInformation and hasBelievingAgent

pml:Belief would be a subclass of prov:Influence (the top-level class for the qualification classes in PROV)

CONSENSUS: use the qualified pattern for Belief


POLL: FloatBelief subclass Belief min 1 up:??Confidence

POLL: FloatTrust subclass Trust min 1 up:??Confidence

PROPOSE: deprecate FloatMetric

CONSENSUS: use the qualified pattern for Belief


PROPOSE: Add pml:trusts domain prov:Agent, range pml:Entity

PROPOSE: Rename TrustElement to pml:Trust as a qualification class: Trust subclass (exactly 1 on prov:entity)

  • This implies that we deprecate hasTrustee and hasTrustor


CONSENSUS: use the qualified pattern for Belief

Facts about IW Meeting 2013-10-17RDF feed
Date17 October 2013  +
Personal tools
Navigation