search

hed-standard / hed-specification

Specification documents for HED (Hierarchical Event Descriptors)
https://hed-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
8 stars 11 forks source link

Global restructuring: Item subtree #43

Closed VisLab closed 4 years ago

VisLab commented 4 years ago

The Item subtree currently has the following top level things:

Item

This is an odd collection of top level elements. Further, body parts appear under Participant. I think Body parts should be moved to the Item tree.

Can we do better on top-level categories?

dungscout96 commented 4 years ago

We can group 2D shape and 3D shape under a new subtree Geometric shape as proposed in issue #25 . I think we should move Person and Animal out of Object, create a new subtree Natural that has Animal and Natural scene (which can be Scene instead) under it. We can create a subtree Human and put Person (which can be changed to Role) and Body part in it, and move Face under Body part. And we can group Drawing and Film clip under Multimedia.

I feel like Pattern could be put under a subtree somehow but not sure what. Also the three acronyms.

So the new top level for Item could be:

VisLab commented 4 years ago

IAPS is a database of pictures designed to provide a standardized set of pictures for study emotion. I think it should be under Multimedia in the new scheme: Item/Multimedia/IAPS image

Similarly IADS is a database of sounds that are used as affective stimuli.

I think that it should be Item/Multimedia/IADS sound

SAM is a scale for rating emotion. I am not sure where that should go with that. There are other rating scales that should probably also be incorporated. IAPS, IADS, and SAM were something that I believe was inherited from CogPO.

I would suggest that instead of Geometric shape, we put Geometric. We can then group 2D shape, 3D shape, and Pattern under there.

bigdelys commented 4 years ago

I agree with Dung's suggestions, except that Humans are technically objects, so I am not sure how we can justify not placing them under it. Also 'Natural' is a very fuzzy concept and I am not sure if we should include it under Item. 'Natural Scene' makes sense but what is 'Natural' and what is not?

smakeig commented 4 years ago

Re: Object/Shape dimensionality -- There may be 3D shapes presented in a 2D virtual space ('scene') in a 2D window on a 2D screen, else 3D objects themselves (e.g., presented tachistoscopically) We have data from an experiment focused on that contrast ... Or, 3D shapes presented in a 3D VR (or AR!) space, in a 3D head-mounted display, or ... etc. 3D objects themselves may be line drawings, realistic renderings, photographic renderings, or 3D photographic renderings.

Thus sensory presentation|visual screen window scene all have dimension attributes.

Object: The old 'Human, Animal, Vegetable, Mineral' (+ Manmade) taxonomy captures important high-level distinctions. I wonder how much of the hierarchy below is in the schema?

Object Manmade Household Room feature Furniture Furnishing Kitchen Bathroom Transport Landscape City Town Road Building Tower Tomb Tool Personal Human Famous Unknown Age Infant Toddler Child Adolescent Young Adult Mature Adult Older Adult Aged Adult Gender Male Female Other Animal Mammal Bird Fish Reptile Worm Insect Cellular Vegetable Tree Bush Plant Cactus Seaweed Grass Drug Mineral Boulder Rock Crystal Crushed Geographic Feature Peak Cliff Valley River Island Lake Ocean

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:49 AM VisLab notifications@github.com wrote:

IAPS is a database of pictures designed to provide a standardized set of pictures for study emotion. I think it should be under Multimedia in the new scheme: Item/Multimedia/IAPS image

Similarly IADS is a database of sounds that are used as affective stimuli.

I think that it should be Item/Multimedia/IADS sound

SAM is a scale for rating emotion. I am not sure where that should go with that. There are other rating scales that should probably also be incorporated. IAPS, IADS, and SAM were something that I believe was inherited from CogPO.

I would suggest that instead of Geometric shape, we put Geometric. We can then group 2D shape, 3D shape, and Pattern under there.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hed-standard/hed-specification/issues/43?email_source=notifications&email_token=AKN2SFWRRB6KUB2OLGPALMDQ6B6ZBA5CNFSM4KHJWVR2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEJERGFI#issuecomment-575214357, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKN2SFTM6UPWHALVUADAPELQ6B6ZBANCNFSM4KHJWVRQ .

-- Scott Makeig, Research Scientist and Director, Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience, Institute for Neural Computation, University of California San Diego, La Jolla CA 92093-0961, http://sccn.ucsd.edu/~scott

VisLab commented 4 years ago

We obviously need to add some things..... Again, we need to enable drilling down without a huge flat hierarchy.... Otherwise it is too hard to tag.

Some things listed under Human above are more like attributes. There is also a whole section on body parts and faces.

dungscout96 commented 4 years ago

We can create a new ID Type called "Collection", put IAPS, IADS, SAM underneath it, and remove them from the Item subtree. Thus, to specify an image is part of the IAPS collection: (Item/Photo, Attribute/ID/Collection/IAPS/32) The notation assumes our proposed change to Attribute/ID in #22

- Scott & Dung

dungscout96 commented 4 years ago

Per Nima's suggestion I found the hierarchical ontology of dbpedia: http://mappings.dbpedia.org/server/ontology/classes/

Some relevancy I noticed from having a first pass at it: