Permanent link to this class
Sustainability Core Ontology - Segment U
loading...| Preferred Name |
system |
| Definitions |
SCO definition adapted to comply with UFO ontological view: An object consisting of multiple components that are causally integrated. SCO developer comment: We envision discussions with subject matter experts regarding whether the current SCO representation of system-system component (and related environment) parthood is suitable or whether a proper parthood-based representation is more adequate. Insights for discussion may be found in Calhau et al. (2024) and Ubbiali et al. (2024). Calhau, R. F., Prince Sales, T., Oliveira, Í., Kokkula, S., Ferreira Pires, L., Cameron, D., Guizzardi, G., & Almeida, J. P. A. (2024). A System Core Ontology for Capability Emergence Modeling. In H. A. Proper, L. Pufahl, D. Karastoyanova, M. Van Sinderen, & J. Moreira (A c. Di), Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing (Vol. 14367, pp. 3–20). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46587-1_1 Ubbiali, G. A., Borghini, A., & Lange, M. C. (2024). Ontologies for Sustainability: Theoretical Challenges. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/z8uqr SCO developer comment: Despite minor differences, SCO representation of systems and related architecture and composition is compatible with that of the System Core Ontology (Calhau et al., 2024). The system Core Ontology centers on socio-techno systems, primarily pointing to an intention/goal-directed representation of these systems. SCO representation, instead, adopts a more neutral modeling approach for complex systems, seeking to account for a wider range of systems. SCO is also more compact than the system Core Ontology. This is, however, adequate for the current purposes of SCO. We envision employing the system Core Ontology as a starting point to extend SCO representation of system architecture, situations, properties, and functions. We also envision possible alignments and reciprocal implementations between these two ontologies. Calhau, R. F., Prince Sales, T., Oliveira, Í., Kokkula, S., Ferreira Pires, L., Cameron, D., Guizzardi, G., & Almeida, J. P. A. (2024). A System Core Ontology for Capability Emergence Modeling. In H. A. Proper, L. Pufahl, D. Karastoyanova, M. Van Sinderen, & J. Moreira (A c. Di), Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing (Vol. 14367, pp. 3–20). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46587-1_1 Ubbiali, G. A., Borghini, A., & Lange, M. C. (2024). Ontologies for Sustainability: Theoretical Challenges. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/z8uqr |
| ID |
https://www.w3id.org/sco/sco-u#SCO_0000068 |
| comment |
SCO developer comment: We envision discussions with subject matter experts regarding whether the current SCO representation of system-system component (and related environment) parthood is suitable or whether a proper parthood-based representation is more adequate. Insights for discussion may be found in Calhau et al. (2024) and Ubbiali et al. (2024). Calhau, R. F., Prince Sales, T., Oliveira, Í., Kokkula, S., Ferreira Pires, L., Cameron, D., Guizzardi, G., & Almeida, J. P. A. (2024). A System Core Ontology for Capability Emergence Modeling. In H. A. Proper, L. Pufahl, D. Karastoyanova, M. Van Sinderen, & J. Moreira (A c. Di), Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing (Vol. 14367, pp. 3–20). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46587-1_1 Ubbiali, G. A., Borghini, A., & Lange, M. C. (2024). Ontologies for Sustainability: Theoretical Challenges. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/z8uqr SCO developer comment: Despite minor differences, SCO representation of systems and related architecture and composition is compatible with that of the System Core Ontology (Calhau et al., 2024). The system Core Ontology centers on socio-techno systems, primarily pointing to an intention/goal-directed representation of these systems. SCO representation, instead, adopts a more neutral modeling approach for complex systems, seeking to account for a wider range of systems. SCO is also more compact than the system Core Ontology. This is, however, adequate for the current purposes of SCO. We envision employing the system Core Ontology as a starting point to extend SCO representation of system architecture, situations, properties, and functions. We also envision possible alignments and reciprocal implementations between these two ontologies. Calhau, R. F., Prince Sales, T., Oliveira, Í., Kokkula, S., Ferreira Pires, L., Cameron, D., Guizzardi, G., & Almeida, J. P. A. (2024). A System Core Ontology for Capability Emergence Modeling. In H. A. Proper, L. Pufahl, D. Karastoyanova, M. Van Sinderen, & J. Moreira (A c. Di), Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing (Vol. 14367, pp. 3–20). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46587-1_1 Ubbiali, G. A., Borghini, A., & Lange, M. C. (2024). Ontologies for Sustainability: Theoretical Challenges. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/z8uqr |
| definition |
SCO definition adapted to comply with UFO ontological view: An object consisting of multiple components that are causally integrated. SCO developer comment: We envision discussions with subject matter experts regarding whether the current SCO representation of system-system component (and related environment) parthood is suitable or whether a proper parthood-based representation is more adequate. Insights for discussion may be found in Calhau et al. (2024) and Ubbiali et al. (2024). Calhau, R. F., Prince Sales, T., Oliveira, Í., Kokkula, S., Ferreira Pires, L., Cameron, D., Guizzardi, G., & Almeida, J. P. A. (2024). A System Core Ontology for Capability Emergence Modeling. In H. A. Proper, L. Pufahl, D. Karastoyanova, M. Van Sinderen, & J. Moreira (A c. Di), Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing (Vol. 14367, pp. 3–20). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46587-1_1 Ubbiali, G. A., Borghini, A., & Lange, M. C. (2024). Ontologies for Sustainability: Theoretical Challenges. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/z8uqr SCO developer comment: Despite minor differences, SCO representation of systems and related architecture and composition is compatible with that of the System Core Ontology (Calhau et al., 2024). The system Core Ontology centers on socio-techno systems, primarily pointing to an intention/goal-directed representation of these systems. SCO representation, instead, adopts a more neutral modeling approach for complex systems, seeking to account for a wider range of systems. SCO is also more compact than the system Core Ontology. This is, however, adequate for the current purposes of SCO. We envision employing the system Core Ontology as a starting point to extend SCO representation of system architecture, situations, properties, and functions. We also envision possible alignments and reciprocal implementations between these two ontologies. Calhau, R. F., Prince Sales, T., Oliveira, Í., Kokkula, S., Ferreira Pires, L., Cameron, D., Guizzardi, G., & Almeida, J. P. A. (2024). A System Core Ontology for Capability Emergence Modeling. In H. A. Proper, L. Pufahl, D. Karastoyanova, M. Van Sinderen, & J. Moreira (A c. Di), Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing (Vol. 14367, pp. 3–20). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46587-1_1 Ubbiali, G. A., Borghini, A., & Lange, M. C. (2024). Ontologies for Sustainability: Theoretical Challenges. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/z8uqr |
| definition source | |
| label |
system |
| prefixIRI |
sco-u:SCO_0000068 |
| prefLabel |
system |
| seeAlso | |
| subClassOf |
| Delete | Subject | Author | Type | Created |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No notes to display |