How to confuse the analyst. Part Three Verbs and numerals
In the last article, I proposed an approach to modeling nouns and adjectives in such a way as to obtain a repository of the subject area that does not require changing its structure when new knowledge is added to it. It turned out the following:
I conducted mental experiments on the integration of storage facilities in order to check the created storage structure for its capacity: I studied what could be included in it and what would not fit without reworking the structure.
We dealt with nouns and adjectives. I would also like to easily understand the verbs. However, with the verbs so simply does not work.
We first clarify our presentation. Until now, we considered our world static. If this is a car, then forever, if it is yellow, then forever. In reality, of course, everything is wrong. The same accounting object at different times by the same subject can be classified differently. This is the consideration of the life cycle of the object. Therefore, the objects of accounting that we model in IP are not objects as a whole, but their temporal parts. For example, we do not model the entire car that existed from 1990 to 2010, but only its temporal part — the condition of the car when it was yellow: from 1995 to 1999. The temporal parts of the accounting object are also accounting objects. This means that any accounting object can be divided into parts, which are also accounting objects.
')
The saying: “Martynov sold the machine” seems obvious and natural. Who! Martynov. What did you do? Sold What did Martynov sell? Machine. Just like in the 6th grade of the school. And it seems to everyone that there is nothing strange in this. It seems that the subject has performed the action, and this is normal. But the question is: can a subject perform actions? And this question is not philosophical, to which Descartes answered. This is a modeling issue. Can I build models based on the hypothesis that objects and subjects perform actions, for example, can I assume that a car is driving?
I asked a similar question in the last article: can I build models based on the hypothesis that objects have attributes? The answer was no. This is simply explained: if an object has a property, then you might think that the object has a property by its nature. However, the properties are given by the subject. At the same time, different subjects will endow one accounting object with different properties.
In order to understand whether it is possible to endow objects with properties, I conducted a mental experiment to combine two information repositories. The merge check showed that two storages can be merged when attributes are separated from types, and their values are from objects.
If we talk about verbs, the analogy is the same: only the subject can say who was the performer of one or another action, while different subjects can give different answers to this question. Therefore, there is a hypothesis that the performer can not do anything in the same way that an object cannot have a property.
Let's continue the mental experiment.
Suppose there are two storages of models, one of which is written: Martynov sold the machine. In the second storage it is said: Gavrilov bought a machine. How to combine storage, so it was clear that it was a single operation?
In OOP, actions are modeled by methods. It creates a class whose objects are capable of doing something. For example, a class of people. Objects of this class are able to sell and buy. And there are two entries that Martynov completed the method of sale, and Gavrilov completed the method of purchase. To merge these two records into one, there must be one record that looks from the point of view of Martynov as the execution of the method to sell, and from the point of view of Gavrilov as the execution of the method to buy. To do this, we can create a method in which we will make Martynov, Gavrilov and a machine, classify this method for Martynov as a sale, and for Gavrilov as a purchase. Thus, we equate the degree of participation of participants in the operation, denying participants the right to do something, at the same time invented functional programming.
It is very important: if we want to build expandable repositories of models, we will have to take for granted that there are no performers of operations, but there are participants in the operations. A performer is no more than one of the many interpretations of the participation of one of the participants in the operation.
Once a lecturer was late for a lecture. It was in Japan, where being late is a serious violation of etiquette. I wondered how he would get out, but he just said: “I did everything I could. Circumstances were above me. ” So in any operation - we can think of anyone as a performer, but in reality it turns out that nature is stronger.
A little more closely examine the concept of operation. An operation is an object of accounting. Only in contrast to “static” accounting objects such as a machine, the operation is dynamic and fleeting. On the other hand, “static” objects, for example, Martynov and a machine tool, can take part in the operation. In other words, there is an object of accounting, parts of which are Martynov and the machine tool, which the author of the model treats as a selling operation. But parts of the operation Martynov and the machine were not completely, but only partially. The operation lasted only one hour, and all participants live much longer, therefore not Martynov and the machine participate in the operation, but their temporal parts. Therefore, the operation model looks like this: there is an accounting object that the author interprets as a sales operation. This accounting object includes the temporal parts of the accounting objects, which are treated as Martynov and machine. The temporal part of Martynov, which is part of the object of accounting treated as an operation, is treated as the perpetrator of the operation. All interpretations are subjective. This model of operation is expandable. If its new interpretations appear, for example, as a purchase, or new participants, for example, Gavrilov, it will be easy to add them to the model.
We obtained the following: to simulate verbs, it is necessary to create a model that takes into account the relationship between objects of the “part-whole” type of accounting.
It is often thought that lengths, time intervals, weights, and other properties expressed in numerical values are natural properties of objects. But in reality there are no properties outside of our consciousness. All these attributes, units of measure and methods of scaling exist in our mind and depend on the tasks we solve.
For example, if you are an artist, then the color will be convenient to model using the names. If you are a physicist, then, depending on the field of physics, you will simulate color by comparing with a standard:
If we are talking about scales and numbers, then in addition to the standard, you must choose a method of comparison with this standard. For example, you can ask a question: how many times is a tree above the reference meter? It seems that ten times. But this seems obvious. In fact, you could use another method to compare. For example, use the logarithmic scale. Then the tree would be two meters higher.
The choice of the method of comparison with the standard depends on the problem being solved. At the same time, operations on attribute values will model operations that we perform on objects of the real world. For example, the addition of the masses of two bodies makes sense when it is necessary to find out the mass of a body composed of two bodies. However, the addition of the wavelengths of two light quanta is an operation devoid of meaning. But you can add the energy of these quanta to get the amount of radiated energy.
Without answering the question about the standard, the method of comparison with it and without describing which operations on objects are modeled by which operations on the numerical values of attributes, the value of the attribute itself is meaningless. It is correct to say this: the numerical value of an attribute is obtained by comparing with a standard (unit of measurement) performed in the indicated manner within the framework of solving certain tasks.
And then you will learn, for example, that the height of a building is measured from a zero mark, which coincides with the level of overlap of the first floor. You may know that to describe the properties of an electron called spin, the numerical values are not enough, and you have to turn to matrices. And, perhaps, you will learn that in addition to one-dimensional scales there are multidimensional and even infinite-dimensional scales.
- We model accounting objects
- With the help of nouns and adjectives, we model their classification.
- Classification is always subjective and therefore it is necessary to indicate the subject who produced this classification.
I conducted mental experiments on the integration of storage facilities in order to check the created storage structure for its capacity: I studied what could be included in it and what would not fit without reworking the structure.
We dealt with nouns and adjectives. I would also like to easily understand the verbs. However, with the verbs so simply does not work.
We first clarify our presentation. Until now, we considered our world static. If this is a car, then forever, if it is yellow, then forever. In reality, of course, everything is wrong. The same accounting object at different times by the same subject can be classified differently. This is the consideration of the life cycle of the object. Therefore, the objects of accounting that we model in IP are not objects as a whole, but their temporal parts. For example, we do not model the entire car that existed from 1990 to 2010, but only its temporal part — the condition of the car when it was yellow: from 1995 to 1999. The temporal parts of the accounting object are also accounting objects. This means that any accounting object can be divided into parts, which are also accounting objects.
')
What is behind the verbs?
The saying: “Martynov sold the machine” seems obvious and natural. Who! Martynov. What did you do? Sold What did Martynov sell? Machine. Just like in the 6th grade of the school. And it seems to everyone that there is nothing strange in this. It seems that the subject has performed the action, and this is normal. But the question is: can a subject perform actions? And this question is not philosophical, to which Descartes answered. This is a modeling issue. Can I build models based on the hypothesis that objects and subjects perform actions, for example, can I assume that a car is driving?
I asked a similar question in the last article: can I build models based on the hypothesis that objects have attributes? The answer was no. This is simply explained: if an object has a property, then you might think that the object has a property by its nature. However, the properties are given by the subject. At the same time, different subjects will endow one accounting object with different properties.
In order to understand whether it is possible to endow objects with properties, I conducted a mental experiment to combine two information repositories. The merge check showed that two storages can be merged when attributes are separated from types, and their values are from objects.
If we talk about verbs, the analogy is the same: only the subject can say who was the performer of one or another action, while different subjects can give different answers to this question. Therefore, there is a hypothesis that the performer can not do anything in the same way that an object cannot have a property.
Let's continue the mental experiment.
Suppose there are two storages of models, one of which is written: Martynov sold the machine. In the second storage it is said: Gavrilov bought a machine. How to combine storage, so it was clear that it was a single operation?
In OOP, actions are modeled by methods. It creates a class whose objects are capable of doing something. For example, a class of people. Objects of this class are able to sell and buy. And there are two entries that Martynov completed the method of sale, and Gavrilov completed the method of purchase. To merge these two records into one, there must be one record that looks from the point of view of Martynov as the execution of the method to sell, and from the point of view of Gavrilov as the execution of the method to buy. To do this, we can create a method in which we will make Martynov, Gavrilov and a machine, classify this method for Martynov as a sale, and for Gavrilov as a purchase. Thus, we equate the degree of participation of participants in the operation, denying participants the right to do something, at the same time invented functional programming.
It is very important: if we want to build expandable repositories of models, we will have to take for granted that there are no performers of operations, but there are participants in the operations. A performer is no more than one of the many interpretations of the participation of one of the participants in the operation.
Once a lecturer was late for a lecture. It was in Japan, where being late is a serious violation of etiquette. I wondered how he would get out, but he just said: “I did everything I could. Circumstances were above me. ” So in any operation - we can think of anyone as a performer, but in reality it turns out that nature is stronger.
A little more closely examine the concept of operation. An operation is an object of accounting. Only in contrast to “static” accounting objects such as a machine, the operation is dynamic and fleeting. On the other hand, “static” objects, for example, Martynov and a machine tool, can take part in the operation. In other words, there is an object of accounting, parts of which are Martynov and the machine tool, which the author of the model treats as a selling operation. But parts of the operation Martynov and the machine were not completely, but only partially. The operation lasted only one hour, and all participants live much longer, therefore not Martynov and the machine participate in the operation, but their temporal parts. Therefore, the operation model looks like this: there is an accounting object that the author interprets as a sales operation. This accounting object includes the temporal parts of the accounting objects, which are treated as Martynov and machine. The temporal part of Martynov, which is part of the object of accounting treated as an operation, is treated as the perpetrator of the operation. All interpretations are subjective. This model of operation is expandable. If its new interpretations appear, for example, as a purchase, or new participants, for example, Gavrilov, it will be easy to add them to the model.
We obtained the following: to simulate verbs, it is necessary to create a model that takes into account the relationship between objects of the “part-whole” type of accounting.
Numeric Attributes
It is often thought that lengths, time intervals, weights, and other properties expressed in numerical values are natural properties of objects. But in reality there are no properties outside of our consciousness. All these attributes, units of measure and methods of scaling exist in our mind and depend on the tasks we solve.
For example, if you are an artist, then the color will be convenient to model using the names. If you are a physicist, then, depending on the field of physics, you will simulate color by comparing with a standard:
- Lengths (wavelengths, if you do wave optics)
- Frequencies (frequencies of waves, if you are a radio physicist)
- Energy (energy quanta, if you are engaged in quantum optics)
If we are talking about scales and numbers, then in addition to the standard, you must choose a method of comparison with this standard. For example, you can ask a question: how many times is a tree above the reference meter? It seems that ten times. But this seems obvious. In fact, you could use another method to compare. For example, use the logarithmic scale. Then the tree would be two meters higher.
The choice of the method of comparison with the standard depends on the problem being solved. At the same time, operations on attribute values will model operations that we perform on objects of the real world. For example, the addition of the masses of two bodies makes sense when it is necessary to find out the mass of a body composed of two bodies. However, the addition of the wavelengths of two light quanta is an operation devoid of meaning. But you can add the energy of these quanta to get the amount of radiated energy.
Without answering the question about the standard, the method of comparison with it and without describing which operations on objects are modeled by which operations on the numerical values of attributes, the value of the attribute itself is meaningless. It is correct to say this: the numerical value of an attribute is obtained by comparing with a standard (unit of measurement) performed in the indicated manner within the framework of solving certain tasks.
And then you will learn, for example, that the height of a building is measured from a zero mark, which coincides with the level of overlap of the first floor. You may know that to describe the properties of an electron called spin, the numerical values are not enough, and you have to turn to matrices. And, perhaps, you will learn that in addition to one-dimensional scales there are multidimensional and even infinite-dimensional scales.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/332506/
All Articles