> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Namens
> doug foxvog
> Verzonden: dinsdag 30 oktober 2012 19:41
> Aan: '[ontolog-forum] '
> Onderwerp: Re: [ontolog-forum] Binary versus N-ary relations
>
> On Tue, October 30, 2012 09:15, Andries van Renssen wrote:
> > doug foxvog on 6 september 2012 at 22:22 wrote:
> >> On Thu, September 6, 2012 11:38, Andries van Renssen wrote:
> >> ...
> >> > A property measurement example has two angles:
>
> >> It appears that you are referring to a measurement series. "A" (single)
> >> "measurement" sounds like an individual data point, to me.
>
> > [AvR] I refer a to continuous measurement over a period in time. This is
> > an illustration of a property, such as a temperature T or
> > speed, that is a phenomenon that lasts continuously over a period of time.
>
> This is a useful concept. IMHO, it would be useful to distinguish it from
> a single
> measurement. Would the tern "measurement series" seem reasonable?
>
[AvR] The measurement itself is also a continuous process and delivers a
continuous signal.
Neither the property nor the measurement nor the signal is discrete. A possible
discretization occurs when we relate the continuous
property to discrete numeric values. (01)
> > Such a property
>
> If referring to a property value over a period of time, instead of a
> series of
> measurements over time, a generic term such as "temporally varying property"
> might be useful.
>
[AvR] IMHO properties have a life time by nature and their magnitude may change
over time.
If a property is related to only one value on a scale, that does not imply that
the property is by nature not continuous over time.
It probably means that the property is constant over time. (02)
> > can be quantified on a scale by relating
> > it e.g. to a mathematical function, such as T = f(a.t+b), for t1 < t < t2
> > (with t=time) for a linear increasing temperature, or it
> > can be quantified at various moments in time by multiple relations with
> > discrete values on a scale. However, e.g. temperature is not
> > discrete in itself. The various relations between T and the discrete
> > values do not mean that there are several temperatures. It is
> > one temperature (over time) that has several quantification relations with
> > discrete numbers.
>
> I suggest that distinguishing a "temperature" (single value) from a
> "temperature
> series over time", and both from a "temporally varying temperature" would be
> useful. Relations could inter-relate the concepts.
>
[AvR] This would be an unnecessary complication. The supertype of those three
concepts is 'temperature'.
The definition of that concept defines what a temperature is, and its nature
includes time duration. (it has something to do with
vibrations of subatomic particles).
Only discrete quantification requires series of (relations with) numbers, not
series of temperatures.
Subtypes such as 'constant temperature' and 'changing temperature', temporally
varying, location varying, increasing, decreasing,
etc. etc. might be valuable in some domains, but they have as disadvantage that
e.g. if a constant temperature suddenly changes,
then the classification has to change. Therefore, these subtypes tricky and
they are superfluous. (03)
> >> > The measurement process, in which various things are involved over
> >> > time in different roles
>
> >> > And the results of the measurements as follows:
>
> >> > Object A <has property> T
>
> >> > T <is classified as a> temperature
>
> >> >From the below, it appears that T is an instance of a
> >> time-vs-temperature-of-object graph.
> >> A more semantic name than "T" would be
> >> "TimeTemperatureGraphOfObjectA".
>
> > [AvR] No, T is the temperature itself. A graph might be a graphical
> > representation of that temperature, but my expressions do not
> > describe a graph.
>
> I wrote carelessly. You are referring to a time versus temperature function,
> which can be depicted in a graph, not to the graph itself.
>
> The word "temperature" usually refers to a quantity (or quantity range)
> or to the relation between a physical object and such a quantity. You
> are using the word to refer to neither the quantity, nor the relation, but
> to state of affairs of an object having a temperature over time.
>
> Using the same word for this additional meaning can be confusing. I'd
> suggest a different term, such as "temperature over time" or
> "time-temperature function". Then
>
> ... the results of the measurements would be:
>
> Object A <has property> TimeTemperatureFunctionOfObjectA
>
> TimeTemperatureFunctionOfObjectA <is classified as a> temperatureOverTime
>
[AvR] I appreciate that you try to say in your words what you think I mean.
However I do not recognize myself in your words when you
say that when I use the term 'temperature' that I then refer to a: "state of
affairs of an object having a temperature over time".
There is indeed a "state of affairs of an object having a temperature". This
state lasts for a period of time.
And I refer with the term 'temperature' to the word 'temperature' in this
latter expression, being what is possessed by the object
that has it.
That phenomenon is time dependent. (04)
We are discussing what a temperature is, but you seem to be discussing what
quantification of temperature is. And from your concept
of a single number that quantifies a phenomenon, you conclude that the
phenomenon is by definition single valued.
Maybe we come closer to each other when we look at your word 'quantity'.
For me it is unclear whether your term 'quantity' refers to the temperature or
to a numeric value (on a scale).
A (varying) degree of hotness can be related to a number of numeric values
(mathematical numbers).
Do you think that in the case of a temperature there is by definition a one to
many relation between number and temperature?
Or do you agree that there can be a many-to-many relation between number and
temperature? (05)
> >> > When the value of T varies over time we can create a sequence of
> >> > relations between T and numeric values on a scale, such as:
> >>
> >> > T <has a value lower than> 50 C on t1
> >>
> >> > T <has a value equal to> 50 C on t2
> >>
> >> > T <has a value equal to> 51 C on t3
> >>
> >> > Etc.
> >>
> >> > Without the need to respecify the object A and the classification of
> >> > T.
>
> >> Since ObjectAsTimeTemperatureGraph is an object that has
> >> one functional property that relates it to Object A and another
> >> functional property that relates it to a specific temperature at
> >> some defined times (and to no temperature at other times).
>
> > [AvR] No. It is since a temperature
>
> A "temperatureOverTime"
>
> > is not a discrete property that allows for one value only,
> > but it is a property that is
> > continuous over time and can be related with many numeric values at
> > different moments in time.
> > A temperature is in fact a property that is also continuous in the space
> > of the object that has the temperature and can be related
> > to various numeric values that are valid at various positions in space and
> > time!
>
> This is true for a "temperatureOverTime". Redefining the word "temperature"
> to have this new meaning is confusing.
>
[AvR] I am not redefining temperature, you are constraining its definition.
Probably you have an average temperature in mind
(averaged over time). (06)
> I am simply urging that the two distinct concepts be maintained and that
> their
> definitions be made clear. I have no complaint with the model, just the
> reuse
> of term with re-defined meanings.
>
[AvR] You mean: rephrasing an existing definition of temperature which does not
conform with the concept you had in mind. (07)
With kind regards,
Andries (08)
> -- doug foxvog
>
> >> > With kind regards,
> >> >
> >> > Andries
> >> > ...
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> >> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> >> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> >> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> >> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (010)
|