Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add uncertainty axioms #1989

Open
5 tasks
LillyG901 opened this issue Dec 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
5 tasks

Add uncertainty axioms #1989

LillyG901 opened this issue Dec 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
[B] restructure Restructuring existing parts of the ontology To do Issues that haven't got discussed yet

Comments

@LillyG901
Copy link
Contributor

LillyG901 commented Dec 7, 2024

Description of the issue

The terms needed for describing uncertainties in model(#1829) were added in several different pull requests, which didn't allow for us to add all necessary axioms.

Axioms still needed:

  1. relation between uncertainty and uncertainty location
    [2) give model system boundary, technical model implementation, conceptual model, input data and output data the location of uncertainty role] -> has been moved to Add model uncertainty location #1990
  2. relation between model system boundary and conceptual model
  3. relation between model system boundary and system

Ideas of solution

Proposal/Ideas for axioms to be used:

  1. uncertainty of a model SubClass Of has uncertainty location some uncertainty location
    [2) ~ SubClass Of has role some location of uncertainty role ]

3)/4) I could imagine using model system boundary SubClass Of part of some ~
It has also been suggested by @stap-m to use is about.
This does make sense, but would require model system boundary to be an information content entity.

Workflow checklist

  • I discussed the issue with someone else than me before working on a solution
  • I already read the latest version of the workflow for this repository
  • The goal of this ontology is clear to me

I am aware that

  • every entry in the ontology should have a definition
  • classes should arise from concepts rather than from words
@LillyG901 LillyG901 added [B] restructure Restructuring existing parts of the ontology To do Issues that haven't got discussed yet labels Dec 7, 2024
@stap-m stap-m moved this to To do in Issues Dec 7, 2024
@stap-m stap-m added this to Issues Dec 7, 2024
@LillyG901 LillyG901 self-assigned this Dec 7, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[B] restructure Restructuring existing parts of the ontology To do Issues that haven't got discussed yet
Projects
Status: To do
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant