Dear All,
By the way, I think I just made a statement below about principles.
Would you regard this as noteworthy as principles?
Best,
Martin
On 4/30/2023 6:36 PM, Martin Doerr wrote:
Dear Wolfgang,
Your questions well-taken, but please do not seek a logical surrogate
of reality. It does not exist. The logic can be not more than an
overlay, approximating and simplifying reality, in more detail:
On 4/21/2023 1:59 PM, Wolfgang Schmidle via Crm-sig wrote:
Here's a diff:
* label:
OLD O13 triggers (is triggered by)
NEW O13 triggered (was triggered by)
(in the examples it was already called "triggered" rather than
"triggers")
* scope note:
Part 1 is unchanged:
This property associates an instance of E5 Event that triggers
another instance of E5 Event with the latter. It identifies the
interaction between events: an event can activate (trigger) other
events in a target system that is in a situation of sustained
tension, such as a trap or an unstable mountain slope giving way to a
land slide after a rain or earthquake.
Part 2:
OLD In that sense the triggering event is interpreted as a cause.
However, the association of the two events is based on their temporal
proximity, with the triggering event ending when the triggered event
starts.
NEW The distinction of the triggering event from the triggered one
lies in their difference of nature: The starting of the triggered
event is the result of an interaction of constituents with the
triggering one, but not a continuation of the kinds of processes of
the latter. Therefore the triggering event must spatiotemporally
overlap with the initial time and area of the triggered event, and
the spreading out of the subsequent phenomena must initiate from this
area and time and not from multiple independent areas.
* FOL:
O13(x,y) ⇒ P182(x,y) removed
(Domain, range, quantification, examples are unchanged)
About the changes:
Scope note part 2: If there needs to be an interaction of
constituents and thus a spatiotemporal overlap, then I am not sure I
understand the 1966 flood example. There is an overlap between the
flood and a book getting wet and an overlap between a book being wet
as a result and the growing of the mould, but is there an obvious
interaction between the flood and the mould beginning to grow on a
book? I am assuming O13 is not meant to be transitive?
What is the initial time and area of "mould growth on books stored in
flooded library rooms"? Is it obvious that this area is connected and
not multiple independent areas?
Well, it is obvious to any expert. The silent assumption of such a
case of "causality" is that the interaction would not have happened
under "normal" circumstances. The books obviously became wet by the
flood. No normal library would make the books wet otherwise. The
statement that the flood "triggered" actually approximates and
simplifies the statement that the books became wet by the flood in a
way that cold not be remedied readily by the library. In general, is
not possible to break down such processes into discrete atomic logical
steps.
There is a considerable logical-philosophical complexity to any
concept of causality. Therefore we have refused so far to introduce
such a concept into CRMbase. To my understanding, the reasoning is
about defaults of the environment, blaming the more exceptional to be
the "cause", whereas others could equally blame the lack of foresight
and protective measures, or any other random factor, just as someone
getting in the path of a bullet by walking.....
Would that explanation satisfy your question?😁
FOL / superproperties: The new scope note suggests P132
"spatiotemporally overlaps with", as well as P176 "starts before the
start of" (also suggested by Thanasis) and P173i "ends after or with
the start of"?
Additional questions:
Scope note part 1: What is the sustained tension in the target system
(books stored in library rooms) in the 1966 flood example? Or in a
house that is destroyed by an earthquake or a wildfire?
The sustained tension in this case is the sensitivity of the material
to humidity. Whatever would raise humidity sufficiently would
"trigger" such a process.
Examples: Since we want to get rid of fictitious examples, would it
make sense to replace the earthquake/landslide example?
Non-fictitious examples would be
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise,_California#2018_fire or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_Things_Go (an artistic cascade
of triggering events)
Sure, I wonder if colleagues from FORTH could recover landslide
examples from the European InGeoClouds project.
Good examples could also be some houses falling down at the seaside
around Santa Barbara coast in California, because of landing erosion
approaching them.
All the best,
Martin
Best,
Wolfgang
Am 20.04.2023 um 14:01 schrieb Martin Doerr via Crm-sig
<[email protected]>:
Dear All,
Here my first go:
OLD
O13 triggers (is triggered by)
Domain:
E5 Event
Range:
E5 Event
Quantification:
many to many (0,n:0,n)
Scope note:
This property associates an instance of E5 Event that triggers
another instance of E5 Event with the latter. It identifies the
interaction between events: an event can activate (trigger) other
events in a target system that is in a situation of sustained
tension, such as a trap or an unstable mountain slope giving way to
a land slide after a rain or earthquake. In that sense the
triggering event is interpreted as a cause. However, the association
of the two events is based on their temporal proximity, with the
triggering event ending when the triggered event starts.
Examples:
The earthquake of Parnitha in 1999 triggered the rotational
landslide that was observed along the road on the same day.
(fictitious)
The explosion at the Montserrat massif in 2007 (near Barcelona,
Spain) triggered the rock fall event happened on 14 February 2007
(Vilajosana et al., 2008).
The 1966 flood in Florence triggered mould growth on books stored
in flooded library rooms (Rubinstein, N., 1966)
In First Order Logic:
O13(x,y) ⇒ E5(x)
O13(x,y) ⇒ E5(y)
O13(x,y) ⇒ P182(x,y)
NEW
O13 triggered (was triggered by)
Domain:
E5 Event
Range:
E5 Event
Quantification:
many to many (0,n:0,n)
Scope note:
This property associates an instance of E5 Event that triggers
another instance of E5 Event with the latter. It identifies the
interaction between events: an event can activate (trigger) other
events in a target system that is in a situation of sustained
tension, such as a trap or an unstable mountain slope giving way to
a land slide after a rain or earthquake.
The distinction of the triggering event from the triggered one lies
in their difference of nature: The starting of the triggered event
is the result of an interaction of constituents with the triggering
one, but not a continuation of the kinds of processes of the latter.
Therefore the triggering event must spatiotemporally overlap with
the initial time and area of the triggered event, and the spreading
out of the subsequent phenomena must initiate from this area and
time and not from multiple independent areas.
Examples:
The earthquake of Parnitha in 1999 triggered the rotational
landslide that was observed along the road on the same day.
(fictitious)
The explosion at the Montserrat massif in 2007 (near Barcelona,
Spain) triggered the rock fall event happened on 14 February 2007
(Vilajosana et al., 2008).
The 1966 flood in Florence triggered mould growth on books stored
in flooded library rooms (Rubinstein, N., 1966)
In First Order Logic:
O13(x,y) ⇒ E5(x)
O13(x,y) ⇒ E5(y)
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:
[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
_______________________________________________
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
