Translation of assumptions into exogenous data

[l-emele]

Assumptions (which can be very general) are "translated" into exogenous data that are used in a model calculation. So the current setup is OK. We want to add the axiom: exogenous data is about some assumption.

Maybe we can make it a subclass of exogenous data and define it as XYZ is exogenous data that is about some assumptions. XYZ EquivalentTo 'exogenous data' and 'is about' some assumption. We might label XYZ as input data, then we would have a nice parallel class to the already existing output data. But maybe there is an even better label for such a class.

Originally posted by @l-emele in https://github.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/ontology/issues/970#issuecomment-1153976403

[l-emele]

@OpenEnergyPlatform/oeo-domain-expert-energy-modelling @OpenEnergyPlatform/oeo-domain-expert-linked-open-data : Any thoughts on this issue?

[chrwm]

I'm unsure whether I understand the goal of the issue. It seems you want to be able to make the statement:

We want to add the axiom: exogenous data is about some assumption.

from l-emele comment in #970

Btw, we already have a distinction between:

* `assumption`: _An assumption is an information content entity about a property of a system or process. It determines a part of a scenario content._

* `exogenous data`: _Exogenous data is a data item whose quantity value is determined outside of a model and is imposed on a model._

So the exogenous data can be about some assumption, but also about about different things like historic data. Do you think that we need a special class, something like exogenous assumption data?

From this, I understand you wanted to point, out that exogenous data / input data can be historical data and hence is not an assumption.

Hence I tend to your suggestion introducing a subclass (whatever the final name will be) like exogenous assumption data and is about some assumption

[stap-m]

From this, I understand you wanted to point, out that exogenous data / input data can be historical data and hence is not an assumption.

From my point of view, the usage of historic data in a model calculation/scenario can also be derived from an assumption. If I choose wheather data from year X, it implies that I assume that the weather in my scenario year will me similar to the one in year X, for whatever reason.

I think the point is, that an assumption is not yet necessarily a useful dataset for my model. Maybe my assumption is climate neutrality for the respective scenario year. This assumption has to be "translated" into data sets that can be digested by my model.

[stap-m]

Maybe we can create a more specific relation (subrelation of is about?!) that really catches the core of the issue? E.g. 'exogenious data' 'based on' assumption? I'm wondering, is there exogenous data that is not based on an assumption?

[l-emele]

I'm wondering, is there exogenous data that is not based on an assumption?

That's the key question!