Dear all,
Dear Stephen, George, Martin and Olivier,
It appears that I misread the CRMinf documentation, and thought that
every I2 Belief should be associated to a I7 Belief Adoption. I was
not able to deduce from the scope notes of I7 that it " is the
acceptance of somebody else's conclusion about some state of affairs".
Stephen's wording is extremely clear.
And thank you George for pointing out that S4 is a subclass of I1.
This leads to the very simple pattern: S4 ---[J2]---> I2
Olivier, thank you very much for the wonderful conceptual and
graphical resources you have posted. They will be very useful for our
further work.
Thank you all for helping me better understand CRMinf 🙏🏼
——
Thomas Bottini
Institut de Recherche en Musicologie — IReMus UMR CNRS 8223
DE : Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> au nom de Olivier Marlet
<olivier.mar...@univ-tours.fr>
DATE : mercredi 8 juillet 2020 à 11:19
À : "crm-sig@ics.forth.gr" <crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
OBJET : Re: [Crm-sig] CRMinf -> Belief Adoption
Dear Thomas,
For the logicist publication of the Rigny archaeological excavations,
we used the CRMinf to model the principle of logicist argumentation
according to Jean-Claude Gardin, which is rather convenient since the
CRMinf is directly inspired by this theory.
In our case, we have distinguished 3 processes: 1/ argumentation based
on observation or comparison data; 2/ external reference data (what is
known and acquired elsewhere, taken from a bibliographical source for
example); 3/ arguments built from previous conclusions.
1/ For a proposition based on OBSERVATION DATA or COMPARISON DATA,
mapping could be:
S15_Observable_Entity → _O11_was_described_by_ →
S6_Data_evaluation (_IsA_ I5_Inference_Making _IsA_
I1_Argumentation) → _J2_conclued_that_ → I2_Belief → _J4_that_
→ I4_Proposition_Set
I5_Inference_Making → _J3_applies_ → I3_Inference_Logic
2/ For a proposition based on REFERENCE DATA, mapping could be:
E31_Document (_IsA_ E73_Information_Object) →_
__J7_is_evidence_for_ → I7_Belief_Adoption (_IsA_
I1_Argumentation) → _J6_adopted_ → I2_Belief → _J4_that_ →
I4_Proposition_Set
3/ For intermediate or final propositions, mapping could be:
I4_Proposition_Set → _J4_is_subject_of_ → I2_Belief →
_J1_was_premise_for_ → S8_Categorical_hypothesis_building (_IsA_
I5_Inference_Making _IsA_ I1_Argumentation) → _J2_conclued_that_
→ I2_Belief → _J4_that_ → I4_Proposition_Set
I invite you to read our online article :
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/2/1/49 [1]
and to consult the resulting online publication in TEI format:
https://www.unicaen.fr/puc/rigny/ [2]
Here is the schema that helps me to better understand the organization
of the CRMinf.
Hope it will be useful.
Best,
Olivier
olivier.mar...@univ-tours.fr
Ingénieur CNRS
Laboratoire Archéologie et Territoires - Tours
UMR 7324 - CITERES - MSH Val de Loire
BP 60449
37204 TOURS cedex 03
02 47 36 15 06
http://citeres.univ-tours.fr/lat [3]
http://masa.hypotheses.org [4]
-------------------------
DE: "Martin Doerr" <mar...@ics.forth.gr>
À: "crm-sig" <crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
ENVOYÉ: Lundi 6 Juillet 2020 20:35:08
OBJET: Re: [Crm-sig] CRMinf -> Belief Adoption
On 7/6/2020 7:37 PM, George Bruseker wrote:
Dear Thomas,
As I would read it, S4 Observation is a subclass of I1
Argumentation, therefore inheriting all of its properties. This
being the case, an observation can lead an actor involved in it to
come to conclude in a belief (J2). Therefore if the situation is
that the scientist goes and analyzes the object (instance of S4)
looking at certain properties, and then comes to some sort of
belief, then this belief can be documented using J2 concluded that
I2 Belief and then continue from there.
Belief adoption, to my understanding, should be used when the belief
that one is taking up is not founded in one's own observational
acts, but is rather simply taken over from some external authority.
Therefore, you would not need two events, the observing, and the
belief adopting. Rather you would need one event, the observation,
which directly leads to a belief state.
Without any further context, that is how I imagine it should be
modelled. CRMinfers, do I have it right?
Absolutely! "Belief Adaption" means "adopt another one's belief.
Whatever is found on a physical thing is an observation by human
senses or other instruments receiving signals, including from chemical
reactions, x-ray reflection and transmission, tactile etc.
There may be non-trivial INFERENCEs subsequent to primary observation.
For instance, abrasions at amphora handles regarded to stem FROM ROPES
that tied cargo in a ship.
Some instruments contain firmware that cannot be separated from the
primary signal. We regard then the result as the primary observation,
having in mind how the instrument works.
Best,
Martin
Best,
George
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 6:46 PM BOTTINI Thomas
<thomas.bott...@cnrs.fr> wrote:
Dear all,
We try to use CRMinf to model a scientific controversy about the
attribution of a museum item (the Marie-Antoinette’s travel
kit).
We would like to express the fact that a researcher adopts a
belief (I7 Belief Adoption) after having studied the item at the
museum (S4 Observation).
Why can’t the range of a J7 (is based on evidence from) be a S4
Observation (meaning a E7 Activity)?
In our case, we don’t have any evidence of E73 (Information
Object) type, the observation activity carried out by the
researcher IS the evidence.
Thank you very much, in advance,
——
Thomas Bottini
Institut de Recherche en Musicologie — IReMus UMR CNRS 8223
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
Center for Cultural Informatics
Information Systems Laboratory
Institute of Computer Science
Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)
N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,
GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email: mar...@ics.forth.gr
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
Links:
------
[1] https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/2/1/49
[2] https://www.unicaen.fr/puc/rigny/
[3] http://citeres.univ-tours.fr/lat
[4] http://masa.hypotheses.org/
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
