Hi Anders, Firstly apologies for not replying sooner. I have asked about the public availability of MODEM and been told it is in the process of publication by the relevant Government authorities. I see you have a Swedish email address. Sweden is a member of the IDEAS group, so maybe you can find a contact in Sweden who has access to the details. I suppose it all depends upon what you mean by ‘tendency’. My guess would be a kind of disposition that was not sure-fire – that sometimes happened and sometimes did not. This would make it a sub-type rather than a super-type. In the fields in which MODEM is deployed, they are more interested in sure-fire than non-sure-fire dispositions. One wants an aircraft that flies – not that has a tendency to fly, etc. I’m not sure that I’ve seen a contract for delivery of equipment with a tendency in this sense. If you want more background on how capability is used in industry, I would recommend looking at the MODAF and DODAF Enterprise architectures. These give a good feel for the way they think about tendency. Best regards, Chris From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anders Tell
Sent: 09 February 2013 11:58
To: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Dispositions and powers for applied ontologies? I would also be interested in MODEM since Im conducting research on (cap-)abiliites. Btw Tendency, is there a reason why (cap-)ability is not a subtype of Tendency? Anders On Jan 8, 2013, at 4:48 PM, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:
Thanks, Chris. I’m trying to find actual ontology-modeled dispositions and manifestations, etc. I understand about capabiities. Indeed, most architectural frameworks have notions of capabilities. Is there a version of MODEM you can share? Dispositions and their counterpart manifestations are in MODEM (a recently released ontological foundation for MODAF) and also play a part in DoDAF -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DODAF (whose first purpose, according to the wiki, is ‘Capabilities Integration and Development (JCIDS)’. Dispositions and powers (from metaphysics) are sometimes used for scientific theories/ontologies. Does anyone actually use these analyses to develop applied ontologies? I see it used, e.g., in some analyses of quantum theory. The only paper I know of on this topic is: Arp, R. & Smith, B. (2008). Function, role, and disposition in basic formal ontology. In Proceedings of Bio-Ontologies Workshop (ISMB 2008) (pp. 45–48). Available from Nature Precedings at: http://hdl.handle.net/10101/npre.2008.1941.1. _____________________________________________ Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305 Fax: 703-983-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
_________________________________________________________________
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 (01)
|