ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] System Components

To: "Ontology Summit 2012 discussion" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:25:35 -0500
Message-id: <e889bbadc68560730d7a96e496a0995c.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Pat,
> Makes sense to me.
> May we include an attribute on role signfying effect-iveness? Role
> effectiveness will partially depend on actor (if you have ever seen Peter
> Sellers play Hamlet).
> Jack    (01)

Ontologize the role playing as an object in its own right -- a Situation.
This would be a Davidsonian approach. Then you could make whatever
assertions about it are needed.    (02)

This could be done something like this:
  Define the specification and its roles:
  (isa Spec20384720873 PhysicalSystemSpecification)
  <properties of this spec>    (03)

  (isa Spec20384720873_RoleP101 RoleInPhysicalSystemSpecification)
  <properties of this role>
  <other roles of this spec>    (04)

  Define the part:
  (isa S3556 Pump)
  <properties of S3556>    (05)

  Define the part playing the role situation:
  (isa P101PlayedByS3556 PartRoleInPhysicalSystemSituation)
  (startsDuring P101PlayedByS3556 <date-1>)
  (endsDuring P101PlayedByS3556  <date-2>)
  (rolePlayerInRolePlayingSituation
                              P101PlayedByS3556
                              Spec20384720873)
  (roleInSpecification Spec20384720873_RoleP101
                              Spec20384720873)    (06)

-- doug    (07)

> On Feb 1, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
>> Very good question, Matthew. Let me try out an idea on you. Your P101 is
>> actually a role played by a pump, rather than a pump itself. Think of it
>> as being like Hamlet, as played by Lawrence Olivier (P101 as played by
>> S3556). You can change actors, and Hamlet is still Hamlet - same role -
>> and while Olivier is playing the role, he *is* Hamlet, at least in a
>> sense. But this second "is" cannot be identity, since you can kick the
>> actor, but you can't kick a role.
>>
>> Both a pump and a pump-role are spatiotemporal entities, but they have
>> different identity conditions. The identity of a pump, like any other
>> physical object, is determined by the disposition of pieces of material
>> stuff (metal, plastic, rubber), but the identity of  the role is
>> determined by its interfaces to the rest of the system (being connected
>> to this pipe in this place and operated by this controller, etc..)
>>
>> You can identify a pump-phase (temporal slice) with a pump-role-phase,
>> but you must not identify the actual individuals, so its safer to
>> actually have a relation of 'functioning as' of the like to attach a
>> role-playing thing to its role. Or, you can treat the role as a
>> time-dependent property of the physical thing, but you will probably
>> need a CL-style ability to have properties of properties if you go that
>> (elegant) route.
>>
>> Make sense?
>>
>> Pat
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:48 AM, Matthew West wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>
>>> Last Thursday I complained that most ontologies do not give adequate
>>> treatment to what I call system components, and if ontology is going to
>>> gain
>>> traction within the systems world, it needs to get a better
>>> understanding of
>>> this central idea in systems engineering.
>>>
>>> I illustrated the issue by telling the (simplified) life story of a
>>> system
>>> component: the pump, P101, at the bottom of a distillation column. Here
>>> is
>>> its story.
>>>
>>> The designer creates a drawing of the distillation column including at
>>> the
>>> bottom of the column a pump to pump away the column bottoms. He labels
>>> it
>>> P101, decides that one pump will be sufficient, and gives the
>>> specification
>>> for the pump in terms of Net Positive Suction Head, differential head,
>>> flow
>>> rate, materials of construction, and many other things.
>>>
>>> The construction engineer picks up the drawing and specification and
>>> notices
>>> he has to install a pump as P101. Fortunately, he has a pump in stock
>>> from a
>>> previous project, that has been in stores unused for 5 years which
>>> exactly
>>> meets the specification. On it is stamped Serial No S3556.
>>>
>>> The designer and the Operator comes to see the pump be installed, and
>>> once
>>> the connections are made, he gives the pump a friendly kick and says to
>>> the
>>> construction engineer "It's good to see P101 realized at last". The
>>> construction engineer says in return "Yes, and it's good to get S3556
>>> off my
>>> hands at last." He turns to the operator and says "Why don't we change
>>> your
>>> drawings to show S3556 instead of P101?" The operator says "No, don't
>>> do
>>> that, it's a replaceable part, and one day another pump will be put
>>> there,
>>> and I don't want to have to change all the drawings and other
>>> documentation
>>> that refers to P101 each time it is replaced, as far as I am concerned
>>> it's
>>> the same pump whatever is installed there."
>>>
>>> Some time later the pump breaks down and needs to be taken back to the
>>> workshop. The maintenance engineer says to the operator "Hi, can I take
>>> S3556 installed as P101 back to the workshop?" The operator replies
>>> "Sure,
>>> but what am I supposed to do without my P101? If it does not exist I
>>> cannot
>>> operate my distillation column." The maintenance engineer responds, "I
>>> understand. We have another pump S4567, that meets the same
>>> specification as
>>> P101. We'll replace S3556 with it and you will only be without P101 for
>>> a
>>> few hours. I don't understand how you can continue to call it P101
>>> though
>>> when all the parts have changed at once." The operator replies "I don't
>>> care
>>> about that. What I care about is what is connected in my system to pump
>>> the
>>> liquid from the bottom of the column. As long as it does that, it is
>>> P101 to
>>> me."
>>>
>>> Later the distillation column is demolished. The operator says, "A sad
>>> end,
>>> I was very fond of P101, but it is no more." The demolition engineer
>>> says,
>>> "Yes indeed. Fortunately, we can take S4567 and use it on another
>>> plant."
>>>
>>> It's probably worth summarising the key characteristics of a system
>>> component:
>>> - It comes into existence the first time it is installed.
>>> - It is identical to the equipment items installed, whilst they are
>>> installed (but not before or after).
>>> - It can survive complete replacement of all its parts at once.
>>> - It can survive periods of non-existence.
>>> - It ceases to exist when the system it is a component of ceases to
>>> exist.
>>>
>>> This is clearly rather different from the life of ordinary physical
>>> objects.
>>> However, relatively few ontologies recognise that such things exist.
>>> Many
>>> try to fob system components off as being classes, or abstract
>>> individuals,
>>> though these clearly do not have the required characteristics.
>>>
>>> Ontologists need to step up to the mark here and provide proper
>>> recognition
>>> for system components.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Matthew West
>>> Information  Junction
>>> Tel: +44 1489 880185
>>> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
>>> Skype: dr.matthew.west
>>> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
>>> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>>>
>>> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>>> England
>>> and Wales No. 6632177.
>>> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
>>> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>>> Subscribe/Config:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>>> Community Wiki:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
>> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
>> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
>> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
>> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>> Subscribe/Config:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki:
>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>    (08)



_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/   
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (09)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>