Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
Thanks Bo for the clarification
the concept of macroeconomic scenario which is not present in the dataPlease see the BONSAI glossary:
I've seen this, my concern is that the EXIOBASE data does not contain any explicit information about this, right?
So this information should come from somewhere else(?) and how this is represented in the database should be defined.
At the moment my best guess is to have a "named graph" with associated metadata (I can explain better in the call).
That the coal C4 from CM2 is actually used as the input coal C1 for SP1.Yes, there are in fact (at least) two different instances of the database:
I think I understand this. Again this information may come from different sources (e.g., the algorithms).
We need to extend the model so this is represented correctly.
Also, I had a quick chat with Massimo so that I could better understand the technicality of input & output and how they are read.
I think this is in line to this two versions of the data as referred by Bo.
In general, I agree that the two classes (input/output) are redundant in a sense.
We could remove the classes and keep only the predicates and we will not lose information.
Note that the two classes are to distinguish the Flow, not the Flow-object (or the object that flows).
So the object that flows can flow out from an activity and into another one (here are the two flows).
The reason of the two classes is to help formulating the right query: if you ask if a flow is an input or an output, having the two classes you can ask exactly that, without the two classes you need to ask : is there an activity this flow is an input of?
You still get the same answer, but you need a different question.
Department of Computer Science