Dear all, Martin,
Looking for things without certain types of features is indeed very
useful. NTP46 and NTP56 are meant to do exactly that (if you have the
time check
https://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/typed-properties-and-negative-typed-properties-dealing-type-observations-and-negative-1
and also here: https://github.com/linked-conservation-data/crmntp )
I agree with Athina, if I understand Martin's point correctly, the
proposed property "misses part of type" brings the added semantics of
the part being there originally on purpose. I do not think it is
necessary to introduce such a property for two reasons:
1) In terms of retrieval, being able to juxtapose
E18 Physical Thing → P46 is composed of → E18 Physical Thing
E18 Physical Thing → TP46 is composed of physical thing of type → E55 Type
E18 Physical Thing → NTP46 is not composed of physical thing of type →
E55 Type
is enough for typical research scenarios. Also my understanding is that
from P46 or P56 we cannot deduct any intentionality during production.
It is just a statement about parts.
2) One can point to technique types or design and procedures to express
the original elements of the object if necessary.
The choice of the type of things that are marked as non-existing depends
on the expertise of the observer, the mini closed world that they
decided to set, any existing types that are known etc. It is a question
of types, not of properties, right?
For damage, I often use S18 Alteration from CRMsci to express things
being changed without an agent. Isn't that appropriate?
All the best,
Thanasis
On 20/10/2023 15:20, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig wrote:
Dear All,
Indeed, I see two characteristic cases:
A) broken surfaces:
This is characteristic for statues, which miss heads or limbs, but also
for architectural elements. The Roman statues without heads have
characteristic places where to place the head. There is the reasoning
that people hardly produced a statue with a broken-off arm in antiquity.
These parts have not been discrete before being broken of. In other
cases, there may be traces of mortar or other cement to the connected
component, or damaged joining features, such as corrupted screw holes etc.
B) If an object is found in a context of /use/, rather than in a
/factory/, we can assume that it contained all essential components.
I agree with Oeyvind that a part removal is not adequate for a
deterioration happening when some objects down etc. Therefore I raised
the issue, because there is no obvious workaround in CRM currently.
The property should be used when there is enough plausibility that the
object was complete. I do not assume someone went to a battle field with
a chariot without wheels. Even if, the cases are so marginal they are
irrelevant for the purpose of the CRM.
See also our paper, in which we analyzed a lot of situations:
DOI:10.1007/3-540-45581-7_31 <https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45581-7_31>
Corpus ID: 46464138
A Metamodel for Part - Whole Relationships for Reasoning on Missing
Parts and Reconstruction
M. Doerr <https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/M.-Doerr/38587181>, D.
Plexousakis
<https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/D.-Plexousakis/1705358>, C.
Bekiari <https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/C.-Bekiari/2861757>
Published in International Conference on Conceptual Modeling
<https://link.springer.com/conference/er er> ER 2001: Conceptual
Modeling — ER 2001
<https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/3-540-45581-7> pp 412–425
Best,
Martin
On 10/17/2023 10:33 AM, athinak wrote:
Dear Martin,
maybe I misunderstood, but how can we explicitly know thw
circumstances of leading to this state, described by the property?
what I mean is, that this property seems to me related to the
definition of situations and to inference (how can we assert the
validity of missing parts? and what about the FOL? can it support it?
It seems useful but isn't it a kind of inference? just a question or
maybe I am missing something
Athina
On 2023-10-16 22:12, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig wrote:
Dear All,
In the discussion about typed negative properties, I have the
impression that a property:
"misses part of type" may be utterly useful for finding archaeological
object in a global search,
such as the head or arms of a statue, characteristic elements of
buildings etc.
Admittedly, it poses the question where to stop the non-existence, and
what missing parts would have a chance to be found.
Would a part lost by accident be a part removal? Would that be an
alternative way of documenting missing parts?
Opinions?
Best,
Martin
--
------------------------------------
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
--
------------------------------------
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
--
------------------------------------
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
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
