1. main@bonsai.groups.io
   Date   
Re: Two votes - please participate!

romain
 

DCABFGHE

/Romain
Re: Two votes - please participate!

Carlos David Gaete <cdgaete@...>
 

AFCED


On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 15:54, Chris Mutel <cmutel@...> wrote:
FYI:

1. The vote on BEP 1 is trending towards acceptance; the voting will stop if two more people participate and approve.

2. We currently have 5 votes in our nomenclature discussion. Here are the average ranks:
  • A 2.0
  • B 4.2
  • C 2.8
  • D 2.6
  • E 5.2
  • F 4.2

I have updated the table with the alternatives suggested by Miguel R. You are, of course, allowed to alter your votes if you want.

Re: Two votes - please participate!

Massimo Pizzol
 

DCAFBEGH

"The 'flow' of an 'item' from/to an 'activity'" 
Is quite close to the way we colloquially talk about these things IMO, e.g. "10 kg of carbon dioxide from electricity production". I know 'item' might be appear too generic, but we have decided that we don't want to accept the mental limitations of predefined categories (like e.g. 'product', 'emission', etc.) so the chosen term actually has to be quite generic to allow us to identify almost everything...
Re: Two votes - please participate!

Brandon Kuczenski
 

I'm afraid I do not understand the voting options here- we are selecting from rows in which the final column is always 'activity', so we are choosing terms for the first two columns- but what do those columns signify? general and specific / abstract and concrete? "flow quantity" is not comparable to exchange or elementary flow or anything else in the table so I am at a loss. I do think that any system that doesn't recognize quantities as a distinct class is incomplete, but voting for "F" shows a misconception of what a quantity is.

If I were to apply my own perspective, it would be "abstract entity" and "concrete / observed thing" so my votes would be: BGEACDH0. I would prefer "Flowable | Exchange" over "Flowable | Flow" but it is not a choice.


On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 7:36 AM Massimo Pizzol <massimo@...> wrote:
DCAFBEGH

"The 'flow' of an 'item' from/to an 'activity'" 
Is quite close to the way we colloquially talk about these things IMO, e.g. "10 kg of carbon dioxide from electricity production". I know 'item' might be appear too generic, but we have decided that we don't want to accept the mental limitations of predefined categories (like e.g. 'product', 'emission', etc.) so the chosen term actually has to be quite generic to allow us to identify almost everything...



--
Brandon Kuczenski, Ph.D.
Associate Researcher

University of California at Santa Barbara
Institute for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131

email: bkuczenski@...
Re: Two votes - please participate!

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

Hi Brandon,

I think if you look at the ontology for Flow

and at this example

you will see why I proposed Flow quantity:
in the current definition Flow is subclass of om2:Measure, because it instantiate the measured quantity of something that has been input/output of an activity.


I hope this can clarify a little bit the case.

Cheers,
Matteo

From: main@bonsai.groups.io [main@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of Brandon Kuczenski via Groups.Io [bkuczenski@...]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2019 7:30 PM
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [bonsai] Two votes - please participate!

I'm afraid I do not understand the voting options here- we are selecting from rows in which the final column is always 'activity', so we are choosing terms for the first two columns- but what do those columns signify? general and specific / abstract and concrete? "flow quantity" is not comparable to exchange or elementary flow or anything else in the table so I am at a loss. I do think that any system that doesn't recognize quantities as a distinct class is incomplete, but voting for "F" shows a misconception of what a quantity is.

If I were to apply my own perspective, it would be "abstract entity" and "concrete / observed thing" so my votes would be: BGEACDH0. I would prefer "Flowable | Exchange" over "Flowable | Flow" but it is not a choice.

On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 7:36 AM Massimo Pizzol <massimo@...> wrote:
DCAFBEGH

"The 'flow' of an 'item' from/to an 'activity'" 
Is quite close to the way we colloquially talk about these things IMO, e.g. "10 kg of carbon dioxide from electricity production". I know 'item' might be appear too generic, but we have decided that we don't want to accept the mental limitations of predefined categories (like e.g. 'product', 'emission', etc.) so the chosen term actually has to be quite generic to allow us to identify almost everything...



--
Brandon Kuczenski, Ph.D.
Associate Researcher

University of California at Santa Barbara
Institute for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131

email: bkuczenski@...
Re: #ontology Can we come up with a better term than "Flow Object"? #ontology

Chris Mutel
 

After a community vote on nomenclature, we are essentially tied between the following options: "flow object", "item", "flow item." This vote was announced as informative and non-binding, so it is up to the ontology working group to decide what to propose in BEP 5, and this discussion should be summarized and referenced in the final BEP. For the time being, it makes sense to continue using "flow object."

Here are the vote results (options are listed here):

Final average rank (where 1 is the best):
Flow object: 2.33
Flow item: 2.88
Item: 2.88

In instant run-off voting, the final tally is 5 first-place votes for "flow object", and 4 first-place votes for "item".

(While these results may look like they reveal a clear preference, they are quite sensitive - any single person changing their vote could flip this preference, and some people might be tempted to do so when the initial results are presented. Therefore I think the only fair interpretation under uncertainty is to regard these as tied.)
Re: #ontology Can we come up with a better term than "Flow Object"? #ontology

Søren
 

I agree with Matteo in this case:
"... the current definition is extremely clear, as it related the Flow and the Object of the Flow (aka Flow Object). [...] all other proposal are much more confusing (Flow and Exchange are two dynamic terms)"

 
/Søren
Re: Two votes - please participate!

Rutger Schurgers
 

Hi all,

 

Back at the office it takes me some time to respond as I’m busy as usual. My preferences:

 

BACDEHGF

 

Regards,

 

Rutger

 

From: main@bonsai.groups.io [mailto:main@bonsai.groups.io] On Behalf Of Chris Mutel
Sent: 06 April 2019 00:03
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: [bonsai] Two votes - please participate!

 

Dear all-

1. If you haven't voted for or against BEP 1, please do it now! If not enough people participate, the proposal will automatically fail.

2. We have had a lively discussion on the terminology used in the ontology, and have several different options before us. It would be nice to get a sense of the broader groups preferences through an indicative, though not necessarily binding, vote. When multiple option are present, ranked choice voting (in this case in the form of instant runoff) is a decent polling choice. So please visit the list of candidates: https://github.com/BONSAMURAIS/BONSAI-ontology-RDF-framework/blob/master/Terminology-discussion.md, and reply to this email with your preferences in order by letter, from first to last. For example, here are my personal preferences:

BDACFE

Please rank all six possibilities, so we can get complete statistics.

Re: Two votes - please participate!

Søren
 

ACDFGHEB
Re: Two votes - please participate!

Stefano Merciai
 

DACBEH


Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#69) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [stefano.merciai@...]

_._,_._,_

-- 
Best,
S.
Re: Two votes - please participate!

tomas Navarrete
 

AECBDFGH
Re: Two votes - please participate!

Agneta
 

BADCFEHG is my choice

Not sure if we have a consensus yet on the final terminology

 
[hackathon] follow up meeting 5th May 2019 #meetingminutes #knowledgemanagement #issues

Agneta
 

Hi everyone

We had a short catch up meeting this morning, where we followed up with the working groups. We identified a few issues that need support, and the need for some deadlines to help in the progress of the project. Here's a short summary:

Need support:
--> RDF conversion of EXIOBASE data and Bentso data
     -- How do we re name product (e.g. electricity) coming from market ?
--> Correspondence tables – how to aggregate / disaggregate (e.g emission groups (e.g. HFCs) to emissions (e.g. HFC-134a, HFC-23...) as different emissions have different characterization factors.


Suggestions:
--> Please update github repos we are individually involved in
      -- Add issues where we are stuck (e.g. need info or support from other repos to progress)
      --Add labels to identify relevance of issue to reach nearest goals.

Project deadlines (focus on closest milestones):

  • 21st June: Paper submission to Semantic Web for Social Good workshop @ ISWC'19
  • 30th June: Report on Hackathon for IJLCA
  • 1st week of September:  Presentation at LCM, Poznan

    Other news:
  • Full paper presentation by ML @ Slovenia (1st week June)
  • If agreed all manuscripts written on overleaf.
  • A poll to schedule weekly catch up meetings. Having meetings scheduled in advance will be useful.
Best regards

Agneta

 
Re: [hackathon] follow up meeting 5th May 2019 #meetingminutes #knowledgemanagement #issues

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

Hi all,
I've commited code for the exiobase conversion and started the conversion (it generates 2.2GB of csv data, so it will take some time, do not try it on the HUSE file on your laptop unless you need to heat your room - also you'll need a lot of RAM)

I've also found some issues with the output of the arborist code. I've submitted a pull request.

If all goes well tomorrow I'll upload to the <http://db.bonsai.uno/> the Exiobase flow and activity instance data.
Please let me know if you have any comment/feedback.

Thanks,
Matteo







From: main@bonsai.groups.io [main@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of Agneta via Groups.Io [agneta.20@...]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2019 12:08 PM
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: [bonsai] [hackathon] follow up meeting 5th May 2019 #meetingminutes #knowledgemanagement #issues

Hi everyone

We had a short catch up meeting this morning, where we followed up with the working groups. We identified a few issues that need support, and the need for some deadlines to help in the progress of the project. Here's a short summary:

Need support:
--> RDF conversion of EXIOBASE data and Bentso data
     -- How do we re name product (e.g. electricity) coming from market ?
--> Correspondence tables – how to aggregate / disaggregate (e.g emission groups (e.g. HFCs) to emissions (e.g. HFC-134a, HFC-23...) as different emissions have different characterization factors.


Suggestions:
--> Please update github repos we are individually involved in
      -- Add issues where we are stuck (e.g. need info or support from other repos to progress)
      --Add labels to identify relevance of issue to reach nearest goals.

Project deadlines (focus on closest milestones):

  • 21st June: Paper submission to Semantic Web for Social Good workshop @ ISWC'19
  • 30th June: Report on Hackathon for IJLCA
  • 1st week of September:  Presentation at LCM, Poznan

    Other news:
  • Full paper presentation by ML @ Slovenia (1st week June)
  • If agreed all manuscripts written on overleaf.
  • A poll to schedule weekly catch up meetings. Having meetings scheduled in advance will be useful.
Best regards

Agneta

 
db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

Hi all,
I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and I've inserted only 2-3gb worth of data, another 10GB are waiting).
I'm not sure how/why this happened.

Who is managing the server, what can we do?

Thanks,
Matteo
Re: db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

Bo Weidema
 

Hi,

Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.uno domain should only be used for the namespace info.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-05-31 kl. 19.55 skrev Matteo Lissandrini (AAU):

Hi all,
I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and I've inserted only 2-3gb worth of data, another 10GB are waiting).
I'm not sure how/why this happened.

Who is managing the server, what can we do?

Thanks,
Matteo
--

Re: db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

tomas Navarrete
 

HI,

Matteo means the test server we rented (from DigitalOcean)

I'll see what I can do.

cheers,

"Bo Weidema" ---05/31/2019 09:55:14 PM---Hi, Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.

From: "Bo Weidema" <bo.weidema@...>
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Date: 05/31/2019 09:55 PM
Subject: Re: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues
Sent by: main@bonsai.groups.io




Hi,

Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.uno domain should only be used for the namespace info.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-05-31 kl. 19.55 skrev Matteo Lissandrini (AAU):

    Hi all,
    I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and I've inserted only 2-3gb worth of data, another 10GB are waiting).
    I'm not sure how/why this happened.

    Who is managing the server, what can we do?

    Thanks,
    Matteo
--


Re: db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
 

Thanks all.

I think I will move to the AAU one,
I will try to contact Søren

Thanks,
Matteo

From: main@bonsai.groups.io [main@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of tomas Navarrete via Groups.Io [tomas.navarrete@...]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 2:45 PM
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

HI,

Matteo means the test server we rented (from DigitalOcean)

I'll see what I can do.

cheers,

"Bo Weidema" ---05/31/2019 09:55:14 PM---Hi, Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.

From: "Bo Weidema" <bo.weidema@...>
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Date: 05/31/2019 09:55 PM
Subject: Re: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues
Sent by: main@bonsai.groups.io




Hi,

Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.uno domain should only be used for the namespace info.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-05-31 kl. 19.55 skrev Matteo Lissandrini (AAU):

    Hi all,
    I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and I've inserted only 2-3gb worth of data, another 10GB are waiting).
    I'm not sure how/why this happened.

    Who is managing the server, what can we do?

    Thanks,
    Matteo
--


Re: db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

tomas Navarrete
 

I checked, and there are about 70 GB of data in the docker volume of jena, for the bonsai database.
(and since the machine ran out of space, nothing much works)


"Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)" ---06/04/2019 02:54:54 PM---Thanks all. I think I will move to the AAU one,

From: "Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)" <matteo@...>
To: "main@bonsai.groups.io" <main@bonsai.groups.io>
Date: 06/04/2019 02:54 PM
Subject: Re: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues
Sent by: main@bonsai.groups.io




Thanks all.

I think I will move to the AAU one,
I will try to contact Søren

Thanks,
Matteo


From: main@bonsai.groups.io [main@bonsai.groups.io] on behalf of tomas Navarrete via Groups.Io [tomas.navarrete@...]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 2:45 PM
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Subject: Re: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

HI,

Matteo means the test server we rented (from DigitalOcean)

I'll see what I can do.

cheers,

"Bo Weidema" ---05/31/2019 09:55:14 PM---Hi, Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.

From: "Bo Weidema" <bo.weidema@...>
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Date: 05/31/2019 09:55 PM
Subject: Re: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues
Sent by: main@bonsai.groups.io




Hi,

Are you using the AAU server with Fuseki? There should be 500 GB as far as I recall. The bonsai.uno domain should only be used for the namespace info.

Best regards

Bo

Den 2019-05-31 kl. 19.55 skrev Matteo Lissandrini (AAU):

Hi all,
I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and I've inserted only 2-3gb worth of data, another 10GB are waiting).
I'm not sure how/why this happened.

Who is managing the server, what can we do?

Thanks,
Matteo
--



Re: db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues

tomas Navarrete
 

I purged the volumes from docker in the db.bonsai.uno server, and since there was no container using it, the volume created for the fuseki image was removed.
This gave the Virtual Machine 74 GB of space back !

This makes me think that maybe, uploading 2-3GB of data requires a lot more than the the 2-3GB.

"Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)" ---05/31/2019 07:55:18 PM---Hi all, I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and

From: "Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)" <matteo@...>
To: main@bonsai.groups.io
Date: 05/31/2019 07:55 PM
Subject: [bonsai] db.bonsai.uno FULL! #infrastructure #issues
Sent by: main@bonsai.groups.io




Hi all,
I was not considering disk space... it appears that the disk on db.bonsai.uno  is full (and I've inserted only 2-3gb worth of data, another 10GB are waiting).
I'm not sure how/why this happened.

Who is managing the server, what can we do?

Thanks,
Matteo

81 - 100 of 300  
More
Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups About Features Pricing Updates Terms Help Twitter