[kepler-dev] Re: [seek-kr-sms] UI

Ferdinando Villa ferdinando.villa at uvm.edu
Thu Jun 10 10:14:19 PDT 2004


It may be just semantic nitpicking, but I think what makes things
complex are the names more than the concepts. As long as we model the
Shannon index and not the process that calculates it, things are
extremely simple. Instead of defining the analytical process that
calculates the index, we recognize it as a concept and create an
instance of it. Its definition (in the relevant ontology) guides the
modeling and query process through all the required relationships. Then
SMS/AMS - not the user - creates the "model". Can we envision what is
the ultimate concept that the GARP process calculates? Distribution of a
species? Modeling that concept (using a GARP-aware subclass of the base
ecological concept) will guide the user through the retrieval of
compatible data (incrementally narrowing the space/time context to
search as new required data are added), then create a GARP pipeline and
run it - and modeling a subclass of it that's defined in another way
will create GARP version 2.... 

2 more cents, of an Euro as always....
ferdinando

On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 13:03, penningd at lternet.edu wrote:
> I think these are all excellent ideas, that we should follow up on.  These are
> closely related to the whole UI issue.  Ferdinando and I have talked about
> trying to generate a prototype of his IMA approach using the GARP workflow.  I
> think we should do the same thing with GME.  Or maybe, if we look at them
> together, they are closely linked and could be used together.  I think
> "meta-model" really conveys the idea here, and that it is the level at which our
> scientists are most likely to work.  Generating a working model from a
> meta-model seems to be the difficult step, but that's where semantically-created
> transformation steps would be extremely useful.  
> 
> Deana
> 
> 
> Quoting Edward A Lee <eal at eecs.berkeley.edu>:
> 
> > 
> > Apologies for my ignorance, but what is "IMA"?
> > 
> > On a quick glance (hindered by lack of comprehension of TLA's),
> > these ideas strike me as related to some work we've been doing
> > on meta-modeling together with Vanderbilt University...  The notion
> > of meta-modeling is that one constructs models of families of models
> > by specifying constraints on their static structure...  Vanderbilt
> > has a tool called GME (generic modeling environment) where a user
> > specifies a meta model for a domain-specific modeling technique,
> > and then GME synthesizes a customized visual editor that enforces
> > those constraints.
> > 
> > Conceivably we could build something similar in Kepler, where
> > instead of building workflows, one constructs a meta model of a family
> > of workflows... ?
> > 
> > Just some random neuron firing triggered by Ferdinando's thoughts...
> > 
> > Edward
> > 
> > 
> > At 06:44 PM 6/8/2004 -0400, Ferdinando Villa wrote:
> > >Hi Deana,
> > >
> > >I've started thinking along these lines some time ago, on the grounds
> > >that modeling the high-level logical structure (rather than the
> > workflow
> > >with all its inputs, outputs and loops) may be all our typical user
> > is
> > >willing to do. Obviously I'm biased by interacting with my own user
> > >community, but they're probably representative of the wider SEEK user
> > >community. So I fully agree with you here.
> > >
> > >However, I don't think that we can achieve such an high-level
> > paradigm
> > >simply by augmenting the actors specifications. For the IMA I've done
> > a
> > >pretty thorough analysis of the relationship between the logical
> > >structure of a model/pipeline/concept and the workflow that
> > calculates
> > >the states of the final "concept" you're after; as a result of that,
> > I'm
> > >pretty convinced that they don't relate that simply. In Edinburgh
> > (while
> > >not listening to the MyGrid presentation) I wrote down a rough
> > >explanation of what I think in this regard (and what I think that my
> > >work can contribute to SEEK and Kepler), and circulated to a small
> > group
> > >for initial feedback. I attach the document, which needs some
> > patience
> > >on your part. If you can bear with some dense writing with an Italian
> > >accent, I think you'll find similarities with what you propose, and
> > I'd
> > >love to hear what you think.
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >ferdinando
> > >
> > >On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 17:04, Deana Pennington wrote:
> > > > In thinking about the Kepler UI, it has occurred to me that it
> > would
> > > > really be nice if the ontologies that we construct to organize the
> > > > actors into categories, could also be used in a high-level
> > workflow
> > > > design phase.  For example, in the niche modeling workflow, GARP,
> > neural
> > > > networks, GRASP and many other algorithms could be used for that
> > one
> > > > step in the workflow.  Those algorithms would all be organized
> > under
> > > > some high-level hierarchy ("StatisticalModels").  Another example is
> > the
> > > > Pre-sample step, where we are using the GARP pre-sample algorithm,
> > but
> > > > other sampling algorithms could be substituted.  There should be a
> > > > high-level "Sampling" concept, under which different sampling
> > algorithms
> > > > would be organized.  During the design phase, the user could
> > construct a
> > > > workflow based on these high level concepts (Sampling and
> > > > StatisticalModel), then bind an actor (already implemented or
> > using
> > > > Chad's new actor) in a particular view of that workflow.  So, a
> > > > workflow would be designed at a high conceptual level, and have
> > multiple
> > > > views, binding different algorithms, and those different views would
> > be
> > > > logically linked through the high level workflow.  The immediate
> > case is
> > > > the GARP workflow we are designing will need another version for
> > the
> > > > neural network algorithm, and that version will be virtually an
> > exact
> > > > replicate except for that actor.  Seems like it would be better to
> > have
> > > > one workflow with different views...
> > > >
> > > > I hope the above is coherent...in reading it, I'm not sure that it
> > is  :-)
> > > >
> > > > Deana
> > > >
> > >--
> > 
> > ------------
> > Edward A. Lee, Professor
> > 518 Cory Hall, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720
> > phone: 510-642-0455, fax: 510-642-2739
> > eal at eecs.Berkeley.EDU, http://ptolemy.eecs.berkeley.edu/~eal
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > seek-kr-sms mailing list
> > seek-kr-sms at ecoinformatics.org
> > http://www.ecoinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/seek-kr-sms
> > 
-- 




More information about the Seek-kr-sms mailing list