Definitions for entities in realities/qualities/classifications

[nelekoehler]

As already discussed in #1510 we have many quantity values without an entity in reality (but not every quantity value needs an entity in reality).

About Quantity values: “There are always four separate things: 
(1) the entity in reality (some sort of specifically dependent continuant, perhaps, or a process) 
(2) a number 
(3) a unit. The entity then has_value some 
(4) quantity value entity, that has_unit the unit. (And may have a specified value with a data property). The relationship between the quantity value entity (4) and the entity in the world (1) is is_about.” Issue #434, comment by @jannahastings

It could be helpful for us to recognise concepts of types of quantities in order to classify quantity values, define qualities such as density, size or length and thus also determine entities in reality (rather in the form of concepts than individuals) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iqttYN3ng9hSmbQNvOpwPi7dg7__dNIjx2GNFUsWRkc/edit#gid=0 (here previous relationships between quantity values and entities in reality are collected).

Ideas of solution

suggested definitions:

Density: "The amount of something per unit size." (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCIT_C45781) (suggested Axiom: areal energy density is_about density. )

Length: "A 1-D extent quality which is equal to the distance between two points" (http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/NCIT_C25334.) —> underlying concept of hub height, rotor diameter, .. (each have axiom: has_quantity value length value) (suggested Axiom: length value is_about length )

Size: "A morphology quality inhering in a bearer by virtue of the bearer's physical magnitude" (imported in many ontologies) (Axiom: area value is_about size)

another definition of size: "The magnitude or dimensions of a thing. More specifically, geometrical size (or spatial size) can refer to linear dimensions (length, width, height, diameter, perimeter), area, or volume. Size can also be measured in terms of mass, especially when assuming a density range." —> less specific, but perhaps too unspecific because it is difficult to distinguish from density and length.

[nelekoehler]

We have spent the last few weeks looking in detail at the VIM (International vocabulary of metrology) and how the oeo relates to it. Property in the VIM would therefore include both qualities and process attributes, because in the VIM there are quantities (measurable properties) and nominal properties (not measurable). An implementation of the VIM in the oeo would be possible according to the schema, but would lead to a splitting that would involve a lot of effort. Therefore, the proposal would be to introduce the Quantity class under Quality. The quantity values then refer to these. According to the VIM, it should ultimately also be possible for Quantity Values to refer to Process Attributes. However, the first step would be to introduce Quantities. We also need to tidy up our existing quantity values because labels and definitions are often contradictory. (Entities are often Quantities according to the label, but Quantity Values according to the definition) I started sorting this out in the following table: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iqttYN3ng9hSmbQNvOpwPi7dg7__dNIjx2GNFUsWRkc/edit#gid=297800768

[areleu]

You are onto something important that I also recently noticed. Please read: https://github.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/ontology/issues/205 The whole idea of process attributes seems to me to be a little bit out of place. And I don't completely understand why was process profilenot used.

It think it is important to indicate that the definition of property in VIM is more in line with what we usually refer as ObjectProperties, so relations. ~I think the definition of quantityin VIM is pretty much the same as quantity value~

Quantity: "property (R, owl:ObjectProperty) of a phenomenon (y, bfo:occurrent), body, or substance (y, bfo: material entity), where the property (R) has a magnitude (x) that can be expressed as a number (z) and a reference (k)"

I understand magnitude as quantity value and quantity as a property:

(forall (x)
    (if (Magnitude x)
        (and (exists (y,z,k)
             (and (or (MaterialEntity y) (Occurrent y))
                  (and (and (Number z) (Reference k))
                       (and (R y x)
                            (and (has_reference x k)
                                 (has_number x z)
                     )
                )
             )
        )
    )

Quantity value: "A quantity value (x) is an information content entity(x) defined by a numeral (z) together with a unit of measurement (k) to quantify an entity(y)."@en

Ours looks as something like, so the only difference is the domain where VIM uses Occurents or material entities, we let the property has_quantity the domain Entity which is pretty much every thing:

(forall (x)
    (if (QuantityValue x)
        (and (exists (y,z,k)
             (and (Entity(y))
                  (and (and (Numeral z) (Unit k))
                       (and (has_quantity_value y x)
                            (and (has_number x z)
                                 (has_unit x k)
                          )
                     )
                )
             )
        )
    )

But I don't think they are incompatible with each other so no need to implement Quantity, maybe addd an alternative label? or am I missing something @fabianneuhaus? :-).

I edited the axiom so its congruent with what I wrote earlier