Ontolog Panel Discussion: Strawman for a UoM_Ontology_Standard - Thu 24-Sep-2009    (210E)

Archives    (21AI)

Conference Call Details    (210M)

Resources    (21B7)

Attendees    (21BO)

Abstract and Thoughts on this Session:    (21C2)

Topic: Strawman for a UoM_Ontology_Standard - [ opening slides ]    (21C3)

 by: DavidPrice, EdBarkmeyer, FrankOlken, HowardMason, PeterYim & SteveRay    (21C4)

During the OntologySummit2009_Symposium, the "Quantities and Units of Measure" was identified as a candidate ontology-based standard that folks from the standards community and the ontology community can (and should) work together on. Further momentum has been developing through the active discussion among the community members on this matter in the [ontology-summit] mailing list brought forth our first virtual session on this UoM_Ontology_Standard initiative, which was held on 16-Jun-2009 (ref. ConferenceCall_2009_06_19). A dedicated listserv, [ uom-ontology-std ] was then deployed and much discussion has been exchanged since.    (21C5)

At today's session, we are going to get presentations on QUDT and UCUM during this session by the authors themselves. These are two important and very relevant effort, which we missed hearing about in our last (2009.06.19) session.    (21C6)

Additionally, it is time to take inventory on where this initiative stands now, and what else needs to be done to move our UoM_Ontology_Standard effort forward.    (21C7)

We have planned a face-to-face workshop for Fri 30-Oct-2009, at NSF (Arlington, Virginia, USA) in the hope that we will be closer to drafting up a candidate standard which we can then move over to a proper SDO (standards development organization) setting, and work that towards adoption. We hope participants in this session will contribute to identifying the process, players and the work plan (especially between now and end October,) to help make our "Quantities and Units of Measure Ontology-based Standard" a reality.    (21C8)

Here are abstracts of the briefings from our panelists:    (21C9)

Abstract: The Quantities, Units, Dimensions and Data Types (QUDT) Ontology is a set of OWL ontologies and named graphs currently being developed by TopQuadrant as part of the NASA Exploration Initiatives Ontology Models (NExIOM) project. QUDT is intended to support NASA's Constellation Program in two ways:    (21CB)

o By providing a unified model for measurable quantities, units of measure, numerical expression of magnitude with respect to a unit of measure, and the structure of unit (and quantity) systems that distinguish between base and derived units (quantities).    (21CC)

o By populating the model with the instance data (quantities, units, quantity values, systems, etc.) that supports the system engineering life-cycle needs of the Constellation Program community.    (21CD)

I will present the subset of this ontology, discuss the similarities and differences between it and the strawman UoM model documented on the Ontolog UoM wiki, provide examples of quantities expressed in the ontology, and illustrate several functions (defined in the SPARQL Inference Notation) which use the ontology to perform unit conversions and calculate the product or quotient of two quantities. Finally, I will discuss continuing and future work on the ontology motivated by its application within and beyond the Constellation Program.    (21CE)

ref. QUDT - http://www.qudt.org/    (21CF)

Agenda & Proceedings    (21CN)

Agenda    (21CO)

1. Opening by session Chair -- FrankOlken / DavidPrice    (21CP)

2. Briefings from Panelists -- DavidLeal, ChipMasters, GuntherSchadow, EdBarkmeyer    (21CQ)

3. Q & A and Open Discussion (All) -- please refer to process above    (21CR)

4. Summary and Next Steps -- FrankOlken / DavidPrice    (21CS)

Proceedings    (21CT)

Please refer to the archives above    (21CU)

IM Chat Transcript captured during the session: ... (lightly edited for clarity)    (21CV)

 VNC2: Welcome to the Ontolog Panel Discussion: Strawman for a UoM_Ontology_Standard - Thu 24-Sep-2009    (21ES)
 * Session Chair: Dr. FrankOlken (NSF) & Mr. DavidPrice (Eurostep)    (21ET)
 * Panelists: 
   o  Mr. DavidLeal -- "An initial organization of some concepts defined within the VIM (International Vocabulary of Metrology)"
   o  Dr. JamesMasters -- "QUDT: An OWL Ontology for Measurable Quantities, Units, Dimension Systems, and Dimensional Data Types" 
   o  Dr. GuntherSchadow -- "Unified Code for Units of Measure (UCUM)" 
   o  Mr. EdwardBarkmeyer -- "A standard ontology for Units of Measure -- Status: 24 Sept 2009"    (21EU)
 VNC2: please refer to session page at: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2009_09_24    (21EV)
 anonymous morphed into PeterYim    (21EW)
 anonymous1 morphed into DavidPrice    (21EX)
 anonymous morphed into MatthewWest    (21EY)
 anonymous morphed into KurtConrad    (21EZ)
 anonymous morphed into MarkLinehan    (21F0)
 anonymous1 morphed into StuartTurner    (21F1)
 anonymous2 morphed into BrandNiemann    (21F2)
 anonymous1 morphed into PavithraKenjige    (21F3)
 anonymous1 morphed into MarkLin    (21F4)
 anonymous2 morphed into FrankOlken    (21F5)
 PatHayes: Peter, I will have to bow out in 30 mins for another meeting, but will get back ASAP. - Pat Hayes.    (21F6)
 anonymous1 morphed into ChipMasters    (21F7)
 anonymous morphed into henson graves    (21F9)
 anonymous morphed into RexBrooks    (21FA)
 anonymous morphed into KurtConrad    (21FB)
 anonymous morphed into GuntherSchadow    (21FC)
 EdBarkmeyer: Generic quantity is a property of an unspecified thing that has a value; Particular quantity is a property 
 of a specific thing    (21FD)
 anonymous morphed into BobbinTeegarden    (21FE)
 MatthewWest: David L.: What is the difference between a Particular Quantity and a Magnitude of Quantity?    (21FF)
 RaviSharma: measure is defined differently in David's slides?    (21FG)
 MikeBennett: It seems to me that each of these boxes should have a written definition behind them, to ground the meaning 
 in natural language terms, to clarify what these are when we try to interpret how they relate to one another.    (21FH)
 EdBarkmeyer: Please, not "measure" for "generic quantity" -- a measure(ment) is what you get by measuring    (21FI)
 RaviSharma: it is not the same as Frank just meant.    (21FJ)
 RaviSharma: i agree with Ed    (21FK)
 RexBrooks: If you download the slide deck, there is much more detail and subsequent elaboration than the few slides 
 shown.    (21FL)
 FrankOlken: I understand particular quantity to be Frank Olken's waist size, generic quantity to be waist size,    (21FM)
 EdBarkmeyer: To Mike B, David's model document has definitions, mostly taken directly from the VIM text, but this is an 
 area in which the VIM is ambiguous    (21FN)
 RexBrooks: like class and instance?    (21FO)
 RaviSharma: Rex - I did download but that is what measure there means as Ed describes it    (21FP)
 FrankOlken: and kind of quantity to be length (as an example)    (21FQ)
 RexBrooks: True, I was just commenting that there is much more to it than what was shown.    (21FR)
 MikeBennett: @Ed, thanks. That would hopefully capture the meanings that were being asked after here.    (21FS)
 RaviSharma: Chip - You have lot more in terms of context setting before you can talk of terms and meaning a particular 
 Vocabulary as compared to say a satellite that does not have humans or life support systems?    (21FT)
 FrankOlken: Another example from previous presentation, height, length, depth are all generic quantities, where kind of 
 quantity is length, particular quantity is height of a specific piece of furniture.    (21FU)
 DavidLeal: Matthew: I think a member of magnitude of quantity is an equivalence class. Hence "1.3 m" is the equivalence 
 class of all point pairs that have that separation. In this case, a particular quantity is a particular point pair.    (21FV)
 RaviSharma: Chip - tuples do not have to be always in Powers of, but a set of units in the same sysytem generally 
 interrelatable (counterexample would be (centimeters, feet, hectare)?    (21FW)
 FrankOlken: QUDT does not seem to have generic quantities, only kind of quantity and particular quantity.    (21FX)
 MatthewWest: David L.: OK, but then what is the distinction between that and a particular quantity. Looks rather like a 
 trope to me.    (21FY)
 DavidLeal: Probably this is reasonable. Often the different "generic quantities" are handled as relationships. Hence 
 waist size is a relationship between person an length.    (21FZ)
 EdBarkmeyer: Do you define "standard uncertainty"?    (21G0)
 DavidLeal: Matthew: It does. This is why I want to work on it. If "1.3 m" is a class of point pairs and "1.3 kg" is a 
 class of quantities of matter, we have got rid of it.    (21G1)
 MatthewWest: Afraid I have to go now.    (21G2)
 FrankOlken: Peter, Can I mute my phone? how?    (21G3)
 DavidPrice: *2 mutes a phone    (21G4)
 DavidPrice: *3 unmutes    (21G5)
 FrankOlken: Thanks. I just muted my phone - I can not control the noise level here.    (21G6)
 GuntherSchadow: Peter, I know you don't like it but I'm afraid I have to dial in with Skype, I just connected, but 
 still in my meeting.    (21G7)
 PeterYim: @Gunther ... ChipMasters is going into the last couple of his last slide now ... how soon can you call in?    (21G8)
 GuntherSchadow: I am on    (21G9)
 MikeBennett: Gunther, ith Skype make sure Skype has the focus, then the *3 should work    (21GA)
 anonymous1 morphed into JoeCollins    (21GB)
 RaviSharma: Chip - thanks - you may want to send email on tuples query above, thanks for your response.    (21GC)
 FrankOlken: Dr. Masters: I believe that vector magnitude should be an integer not a float. Do you have example?    (21GD)
 RaviSharma: Vector is a continuous value hence depending on the measure of units, a fraction for each dimension of 
 vector, similarly for tensor.    (21GE)
 EdBarkmeyer: Note: a "rational" power (based on a polynomial expansion) is not a "float"; i.e., the exact ratio of  
 two integers. I suspect that the only fractional power commonly in use is square root (1/2).    (21GF)
 MikeBennett: So, are there standard Roman equivalents for each of those greek letters e.g. you have u for mu.    (21GG)
 PavithraKenjige: Peter, I can not open Dr GuntherSchadow's slides.. but i was able to open other slides..    (21GH)
 PavithraKenjige: Can other people open Dr. Gunther's slides?    (21GI)
 DavidPrice: I can open the PDF file I dowbloaded    (21GJ)
 MikeBennett: @Pavithra it is a 12 megabtyte file, I can open on a fast line    (21GK)
 PavithraKenjige: ok, thanks    (21GL)
 RaviSharma: What is meant by commensurable - is it defined anywhere?    (21GM)
 RaviSharma: Dr. Schadow -Who are the users of UCUM medical, clinical, logistics, equipment, procedures of medical 
 tretment, phrmaceutical, etc?    (21GN)
 RaviSharma: Dr. Schadow - how could we understand the semantic algeraic concepts, are these set of tuples of related 
 measures, units used in a particular medical community?    (21GO)
 FrankOlken: Gunther, I agree with EdBarkmeyer. algebraic dimensional equivalence is not the same as comparability ! 
 There is also the issue of interval    (21GP)
 FrankOlken: measures vs. coordinates.    (21GQ)
 ChipMasters: Frank: Coulomb's Law states that the force exerted between two charged particles is proportional to the 
 square of the distance between them; i.e. if F denotes force, Q for electric charge, L - length, M - mass, T - time, we 
 can state a weaker form of Coulomb's Law as a proportionality (where '~' denotes 'proportional to')    (21GR)
   F ~ Q^2 L^-2    (21GS)
   Replace F with its expression in base quantity kinds (L, M, T)    (21GT)
   F = L^1 M^1 T^-2    (21GU)
   Then solve for Q to get    (21GV)
   Q ~ L^3/2 M^1/2 T^-1    (21GW)
   So in CGS the dimension vector for electric charge is (3/2, 1/2, -1)    (21GX)
 PatHayes: Can anyone give an example of what Ed is talking about? Differnt Q kinds with the same ISO units?    (21GY)
 PatHayes: cgm units    (21GZ)
 MikeBennett: @Pat - torque versus energy is a better example I believe    (21H0)
 PatHayes: OK, thanks.    (21H1)
 PeterYim: we will need to address the UCUM IPR issue at some point ( ... perhaps we could start a dialog about it now) 
 ... I'm proposing that the UCUM folks consider (following the IEEE model) allowing the use of UCUM by the 
 UoM_Ontology_Standard working group with the understanding that it will be given an "open" license iff 
 UoM_Ontology_Standard makes it to International Standard (which the group will decide to pursue) ... the understanding 
 also goes the other way, i.e. if UoM_Ontology_Standard does not make it to International Standard, you still keep your 
 proprietary rights.    (21H2)
 FrankOlken: We are now at 2 hours into the teleconference. We were shooting to wrap this up in 2.5 hours.    (21H3)
 PatHayes: Hmm, but Mike, UCUM has angle as a basic unity. Doesn't that resolve the energy/torque example? Are there any 
 others?    (21H4)
 MikeBennett: I think it does. My understanding was that that's what that exchange was about, but I think dimensions / 
 angles are part of the answer and are handled in one std but not the other. If I understand this correctly.    (21H5)
 PeterYim: @EdBarkmeyer & PatHayes - ref. Ed's slide#4 ... should the FOL language of choice be CLIF or CLIF+IKL?    (21H6)
 PatHayes: @peter, regarding IKL. It should be CLIF, because 1. IKL expressiveness isnt likely to be relevant here 2. IKL 
 is not yet standardized 3. (recent unpublished work) IKL is reducible to CLIF in any case.    (21H7)
 PeterYim: @PatHayes ... thank you for the enlightening answer    (21H8)
 RaviSharma: ED- Chip-Does SPIN allow full ontology using- SPARQL is that equivalent to OWL usage?    (21H9)
 ChipMasters: Ravi: Let's discuss SPIN offline, since it is off topic for this discussion. You can reach me at 
 cmasters [at] topquadrant.com. Please send your email and I will respond with more information about SPIN.    (21HA)
 RaviSharma: ravisharma [at] comcast.net    (21HB)
 PavithraKenjige: I can do it.. who is going to fund it?    (21HC)
 PeterYim: @DavidLeal - further to Ed's slide#7 ... let's work offline, and dedicate a page for the "strawman"    (21HD)
 DavidLeal: Peter: Good    (21HE)
 anonymous morphed into LinZhang    (21HF)
 LinZhang: Hi, Peter ... How long time has the meeting been going? Thanks!    (21HG)
 PeterYim: @LinZhang - Hi Forest, this has been on for about 2Hr 20 min now    (21HH)
 LinZhang: @Peter - Thanks a lot for update the attendees list.    (21HI)
 FrankOlken: Ed, I think that we should think about using some sort of issue management system (bug tracker ...) once we 
 try to move forward on a standard.    (21HJ)
 JoelBender: BAH! I just lost all telephone traffic off campus.    (21HK)
 RaviSharma: Ed thanks for a ver yconcise presentation.    (21HL)
 FrankOlken: I also think we should develop the standard directly in XHTML.    (21HM)
 PatHayes: Ed, amen to that last point -- That going from an agreed consensus (even when we get to that) to a 
 final standard is a LOT of work.    (21HN)
 PeterYim: Frank ... please document your point about "tracking" on the chat ...    (21HO)
 RaviSharma: Ed, are we going to interrelate different units of measure in an ontology that defines how many types of 
 relations different type    (21HP)
 JoelBender: If we are going to be using UML graphs in our documents, I am interested in finding a plain text language 
 that can be used to exchange UML models and be consistently rendered. I and found http://www.umlgraph.org/, are there 
 others?    (21HQ)
 EdBarkmeyer: Joel, there is an OMG standard for textual representation of UML, and I believe it has several 
 implementations. (There is as yet no standard for exchanging UML diagrams.)    (21HR)
 FrankOlken: I think we will also need to ensure that there is a need to have some sort of authorative online server for 
 the ontology.    (21HS)
 FrankOlken: I agree on the need to differentiate between coordinates and interval masures.    (21HT)
 FrankOlken: I favor restricting our agenda to "physical units". Currency can be done later.    (21HU)
 RaviSharma: Mike Bennett: Thanks for the comment, for ODM you may want to contact Evan Wallace or Elisa Kendall .    (21HV)
 MikeBennett: @ Frank - if and only if the wider framework fdoesn't somehow preclude that. I think David's point on the 
 voice right now aplies: people need to be able to add their own units from their own spaces.    (21HW)
 FrankOlken: I favor the use of OWL 2 Full or CLIF for formal specification.    (21HX)
 MikeBennett: UML - ontological impliucations are unclear if we use informal UML. If we use ODM, the semantics are 
 clearer.    (21HY)
 FrankOlken: I also think we should be able to support customary units, but initial focus should be on SI and perhaps 
 some bastard    (21HZ)
 FrankOlken: quasi metric units such as mg/ml.    (21I0)
 RaviSharma: Mike - I agree    (21I1)
 MikeBennett: @Ravi - I'm using (adapted) ODM already. I've spoken with Elisa at length on this.    (21I2)
 PatHayes: It is easy to forget to lower ones hand.    (21I3)
 DavidLeal: I think that Ed's summary in natural language of the four types of "quantity", which is loosely derived from 
 the UML diagrams, is the best starting point for a formal ontology. This part at least can probably be represented in 
 OWL.    (21I4)
 FrankOlken: Ed, I may have a little more time to work on this this fiscal year.    (21I5)
 PatHayes: Regarding restricting ourselves to SI and doing currency later: big risk of settling on a neat but limited 
 framework that does not extend. UCUM is a very good example.    (21I6)
 DavidPrice: I share Peter Yim's concerns in his current comments. Any ontology this effort produces must be freely 
 available on the Web with no limits on its use.    (21I7)
 MikeBennett: @Pat exactly my point. If we get it right it won't be a problem. If we don't, I'm stuck.    (21I8)
 FrankOlken: Pat, I understand, but am worried about mission creep and our ability to finish in a timely fashion.    (21I9)
 EdBarkmeyer: Frank, I may have less. We have new management at two levels, and I don't know what our brief will be.    (21IA)
 RexBrooks: I think the IPR discussion is probably something that will take several discussion sessions.    (21IB)
 MikeBennett: @Frank - fixing something later because it's broken takes longer than getting the overall framework and 
 context right in the first go.    (21IC)
 PatHayes: @Frank, I think we can be sufficiently general without undue creep    (21ID)
 DavidLeal: There is a view that currencies are commodities not units.    (21IE)
 MikeBennett: @David. They are. Actually they are contracts of a kind. But things are measured in them. Hence the need to 
 get the framework right at the most general level.    (21IF)
 PatHayes: @Mike: you may be able to tweak them.    (21IG)
 MikeBennett: @Pat good point.    (21IH)
 PeterYim: Frank announces: for the Friday 30-Oct-2009 workshop at NSF, National Science Foundation, 
 Arlington, Virginia, USA (Washington DC "Ballston" metro station)    (21II)
 FrankOlken: the Oct. 30 meeting will be in Room 1235 at National Science Foundation in Arlington VA. We need 
 participants to preregister to get badges, and to bring photo IDs, e.g., either driver's licenses or passports 
 (foreign nationals). I will provide the email address for a contact person about badges.    (21IJ)
 MikeBennett: Bother, I've just booked flights in and out of North America, leaving Friday morning.    (21IK)
 PeterYim: from EdBarkmeyer: we'll need volunteers ... and a management call too (in short order)    (21IL)
 RaviSharma: Thanks everyone    (21IM)
 DavidLeal: Good night    (21IN)
 PeterYim: Thanks everyone ... great session! ... bye bye and out!    (21IO)
 -- end of chat-transcript --    (21IP)

Further Question & Remarks:    (21IQ)

Audio Recording of this Session    (21CZ)

For the record ...    (21D8)

How To Join (while the session is in progress)    (21D9)