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*Inference*s 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 <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
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: [email protected]
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
