Ogden and Richards published a full book "The Meaning of Meaning" in 1923. It is also a subject of a lot of research by a broad spectrum of scholars & scientists. But they have identified only 3 elements of meaning but we found FIVE. Hence, PENTAGON of Meaning moving from their TRIANGLE of Meaning.
The five elements are: Speaker S, Concept X in her mind, Text T to express X, Listener L, who creates Concept X' from T. Out of these only S, T and L are public, open for observation. The concepts X and X' are private separately to S and L and the meaning is X for S and X' for L. That is subject of this PPT. It is elaborated and discussed.
From here we need to arrive at common and open meaning of T. We have another PPT for that.
There is a full paper Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability, which you can find on slideshare soon.
Please leave a comment.
This is a sequel to Pentagon of MEANING. Here we point out that what we generally accept as meaning of text is its most valid interpretation according to published grammar & vocabulary of the language.
Such meaning is arrived at by sharing and negotiation of the text and its interpretation / clarification etc.
The secret of reaching a common meaning is NOT long negotiation but it is: creating most unambiguous text. This is possible with the help of machine aided drafting of text.
This is the subject of full paper by the author "Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability" which will be uploaded shortly.
Please take a look and give your views.
Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE 04AUG22.pdfPutcha Narasimham
Framework for Online Software Evolution: FOSE
Abstract
Business Application Software BAS malfunctions often during early stages of development and deployment. They are inevitable and unavoidable. They are costly and time consuming to fix. There are two kinds of errors that cause BAS malfunction, (1) Errors in Business Policies, Rules, Information and Data (2) Software Errors of BAS. It is here proposed that some means of quick and safe correction and relaunching process be built into software design and operation. There are two separate proposals for (1) and (2). The second is discussed here.
ASIS (current) Process Map shows BAS running on its platform with its actors. The software development system (CI/CD Server) with BAS Developers is NOT connected to BAS or actors of BAS. The proposed Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE is added to interconnect BAS Developer, CI/CD Server, and Platform of BAS online (while running).
Business Actor of BAS initiates Software Correction Request and online Business Authority (specially added actor of BAS) approves it for transmission to FOSE. Approved Software Correction Requests flow from BAS to FOSE and FOSE to BAS Developer. The BAS Developer then identifies the affected parts of BAS that need correction and works on the source code of BAS available in CI/CD Server. Then he or she corrects parts of BAS and tests them to generate a corrected trial version of BAS. The corrected trial version of BAS is available to the end users of BAS for evaluation of how their requests have been processed and met. The corrected and tested parts of BAS are then released to the Platform of BAS. The framework FOSE is notified of this for updating the status of approved software correction requests maintained in FOSE. Then FOSE allows launch of the new version of BAS. Making end users initiate “software correction requests”, approving them and passing them through FOSE to online BAS Developers in a closed loop, are the key factors for software evolution.
Thus, the BAS together with FOSE, becomes robust BAS continually. Here the software itself is Agile---not the software development. Incomplete software can safely be launched and run without frequent crashes. Unspecified user requirements get systemically captured from the business actors and met.
---III---
See examples and explanation in a separate word document
Normal Business Application Software BAS provides ONLY the business functionality, which is good enough if it works well. However that is never the case particularly for the new functionality offered for the first time. Invariably unforeseen business and software situations arise and the the BAS needs modifications often at design level of the business logic and or the BAS itself. All this has to be done off line. Here it is proposed that both Business Support and Software Development Support be brought ONLINE. Here the Application Software itself becomes AGILE in operation---NOT just the software development process.
This is facilitated by two radical design changes.
First, the BAS it self is restructured and designed to bring Business Authority ONLINE and set up a Business Policy and Rules Repository BPRR.
Second, an additional Framework for Online Software Evolution is provided to bring the BAS Developers and the software development system online.
See how the combination works in this and two supplementary PPTs.
Plan Anything personally or professionally. Planning is a preparation for the future with a GOAL for some one. I dentify all of them. There are two major branches: Resource Planning and Action Planning. Planning can be elaborate or simple. Select the factors for quick success of your mission. Drop what is not relevant but do not miss anything vital. Best wishes,
Machine mediated meaning for semantic interoperability pvn 120109 pdfPutcha Narasimham
Definition of meaning applicable in human and machine contexts is proposed. This points out that what is taken as meaning of an expression is an equivalent expression but NOT meaning. Meaning is the result of acting out what is implied in the expression or execution of the expression. This is valid for machines and humans interchangeably.
This is a sequel to Pentagon of MEANING. Here we point out that what we generally accept as meaning of text is its most valid interpretation according to published grammar & vocabulary of the language.
Such meaning is arrived at by sharing and negotiation of the text and its interpretation / clarification etc.
The secret of reaching a common meaning is NOT long negotiation but it is: creating most unambiguous text. This is possible with the help of machine aided drafting of text.
This is the subject of full paper by the author "Machine Mediated Meaning for Semantic Interoperability" which will be uploaded shortly.
Please take a look and give your views.
Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE 04AUG22.pdfPutcha Narasimham
Framework for Online Software Evolution: FOSE
Abstract
Business Application Software BAS malfunctions often during early stages of development and deployment. They are inevitable and unavoidable. They are costly and time consuming to fix. There are two kinds of errors that cause BAS malfunction, (1) Errors in Business Policies, Rules, Information and Data (2) Software Errors of BAS. It is here proposed that some means of quick and safe correction and relaunching process be built into software design and operation. There are two separate proposals for (1) and (2). The second is discussed here.
ASIS (current) Process Map shows BAS running on its platform with its actors. The software development system (CI/CD Server) with BAS Developers is NOT connected to BAS or actors of BAS. The proposed Framework for Online Software Evolution FOSE is added to interconnect BAS Developer, CI/CD Server, and Platform of BAS online (while running).
Business Actor of BAS initiates Software Correction Request and online Business Authority (specially added actor of BAS) approves it for transmission to FOSE. Approved Software Correction Requests flow from BAS to FOSE and FOSE to BAS Developer. The BAS Developer then identifies the affected parts of BAS that need correction and works on the source code of BAS available in CI/CD Server. Then he or she corrects parts of BAS and tests them to generate a corrected trial version of BAS. The corrected trial version of BAS is available to the end users of BAS for evaluation of how their requests have been processed and met. The corrected and tested parts of BAS are then released to the Platform of BAS. The framework FOSE is notified of this for updating the status of approved software correction requests maintained in FOSE. Then FOSE allows launch of the new version of BAS. Making end users initiate “software correction requests”, approving them and passing them through FOSE to online BAS Developers in a closed loop, are the key factors for software evolution.
Thus, the BAS together with FOSE, becomes robust BAS continually. Here the software itself is Agile---not the software development. Incomplete software can safely be launched and run without frequent crashes. Unspecified user requirements get systemically captured from the business actors and met.
---III---
See examples and explanation in a separate word document
Normal Business Application Software BAS provides ONLY the business functionality, which is good enough if it works well. However that is never the case particularly for the new functionality offered for the first time. Invariably unforeseen business and software situations arise and the the BAS needs modifications often at design level of the business logic and or the BAS itself. All this has to be done off line. Here it is proposed that both Business Support and Software Development Support be brought ONLINE. Here the Application Software itself becomes AGILE in operation---NOT just the software development process.
This is facilitated by two radical design changes.
First, the BAS it self is restructured and designed to bring Business Authority ONLINE and set up a Business Policy and Rules Repository BPRR.
Second, an additional Framework for Online Software Evolution is provided to bring the BAS Developers and the software development system online.
See how the combination works in this and two supplementary PPTs.
Plan Anything personally or professionally. Planning is a preparation for the future with a GOAL for some one. I dentify all of them. There are two major branches: Resource Planning and Action Planning. Planning can be elaborate or simple. Select the factors for quick success of your mission. Drop what is not relevant but do not miss anything vital. Best wishes,
Machine mediated meaning for semantic interoperability pvn 120109 pdfPutcha Narasimham
Definition of meaning applicable in human and machine contexts is proposed. This points out that what is taken as meaning of an expression is an equivalent expression but NOT meaning. Meaning is the result of acting out what is implied in the expression or execution of the expression. This is valid for machines and humans interchangeably.
Relation in set theory of math is flawed. It remains undetected and uncorrected even now. This 11 slide PPT point outs the errors with examples, corrects them, giving a better definition. It may be too elementary but how can math live with errors in fundamentals?
UseCase modeling is very diverse, often inconsistent and erroneous. This is due to imprecise and incomplete definition and specification of UML which does not have any glossary of terms and fails to formally define the terms--UseCase in particular. The very nature of UseCase is undefined and uncertain though all the versions of UML. I noticed these factors and discovered UseCase to be fundamentally a DIALOG of messages which in turn are composed of information and data in 2008. I have been uploading my analyses and proposals to SlideShare since 2010. Here is a new summary of my analyses and proposals in light of BPMN's definition of "conversation" which is essentially the same as my "dialog". The linked in discussions prompted model UseCase as an Association Class and remodel what is called UseCase Diagram as a new Class Diagram without the old misleading "UseCase Ovals" inside System under Consideration. I also recommend treating UML Actor as an External Entity playing multiple roles which is any done by default.
I welcome review and feedback. Thanks
Harmonizing use cases, dialogs or conversations, process maps, usecase diagra...Putcha Narasimham
UseCase concept is unique and profound concept to represent the needs of businesses and users from their view point. Based on UseCase and Actor identification, the System to be Developed can be specified and evolved systematically. This summary updates and integrates many proposals made earlier. It logically integrates all the concepts of the title.
How to study any publication deeply for analysis and research. The process and reporting format are presented with examples. This paves way for incremental discovery and innovation and validation / consolidation.
Allocation of resources to generate high value in services or designing most cost effective means for high customer satisfaction are NOT always done systematically or with quantification. But it is possible and worth doing.
Are there any generic tools to analyze and assess documents? Here are some suggestions including Procedure to Cluster Concepts & Check for their Coupling in a document.
I found it helpful. I suppose something like this or even better would be available.
Describing something new poses very serious problems. Dictionaries and encyclopedia have met this requirement fairly well but those methods and techniques are NOT within the reach of millions of us who have to "describe things or introduce things" for teaching, documenting, modeling for analysis and design etc.
Here is my proposal to do it with a simple table. Yes, it is derived from class definition and description of OOAD but it is very effective for use in general. See how it works and let's help millions of students and teachers who struggle to describe things. Here is a structure to it which solves 80% of the problem. Cheers!
Software is very special. I is grand, spectacular, regenerative and perpetual source of value---like nothing else we know.
Perhaps for this very reason it is misused and wasted. By cooperatively REUSING ALL ARTIFACTS of software, we can reap unheard of benefits repeatedly. Here is an outline of how we can do it. That is ReSAR. Let's start.
Multiple Actors DO interact with the SuC, which is why the SuC exists in the first place, but NO TWO of them can do so through a single UseCase. There can be NO Second Actor in a UseCase.
Each interaction, more appropriately the dialog, can only have two members actively involved in the dialog.
First is the SuC and the second is the associated Actor.
The nature of UseCase and its implications were well discussed in
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/usecase-case-is-a-dialog-not-a-process
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/use-casesingle-session
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/one-use-case-one-actor
Yet there are discussions and justifications for associating multiple actors with the same UseCase.
UseCase is a DIALOG involving only one SuC and One Actor per Session. There is NO scope for another actor to take part in that dialog. Here is an example ATM Cash withdrawal. It needs THREE separate UCs.
This is explained using Process Maps to show the separation and how to separate.
This should end the confusion and persistent misunderstanding and misrepresentation.
Combined UseCase Description, MockUp Screens & System Sequence DiagramPutcha Narasimham
There are different artifacts (documents) for Use Case Description, Mock-up Screens and System Sequence Diagram. That is because each UML diagram (or table or description, Use Case Description has no diagram) can accommodate only a few modeling elements.
Analysts often need a set of UML diagrams and descriptions to evolve and represent concepts. They have to be drawn quickly and iteratively to formulate and express the business concepts and requirements. They need to be created and edited together, not in isolation.
It is here claimed that the contents of these three UML artifacts can be combined into a single text-document with tables & without drawings.
Concept Maps are very effective for language-free expression and communication of concepts visually. The fundamental structures, which are not all graphic, are also very elegant for encoding knowledge for machine processing.
The building blocks of knowledge (Nodes and Links) are NOT sufficiently "expressive & precise". HyperPlex fills this need. See the PPT by that name in https://www.slideshare.net/putchavn
Both the concepts are explained with examples.
Good for general use and a prerequisite for knowing what is knowledge and how to represent it. Leave a comment.
[1] A view that a UseCase (UC) is a "dialog" between the System under Consideration (SuC) and an Actor (for a specific UC) brings focus to what "messages need to be exchanged between the SuC and Actor to reach UC Goal".
[2] Agreeing on and specifying UC Goal is related to business or application. UC Goal would be the right first step of UC description.
[3] There are many "means" of generating "messages from SuC", through various internal activities within the SuC. They need not be (I would even say should not be) specified in UC Description.
[4] The concept of UseCase is profound and useful because it is a "dialog" but NOT a process. This distinction is not defined and clarified which is why, I think, the full benefits of UC modeling are not widely realized.
[5] This view of UC (as per 1, 2 & 3) clearly separates the "internal processes" of the SuC from UC. The "internal processes" can be hypothesized and evolved separately using UML Sequence Diagrams. All the business / user needs can be specified with sufficient precision and rigor through the “messages” of UC dialog. There are no external dependencies, though constraints may exist and have to be taken care of.
I have REVISED & uploaded the PPT with TWO Sections, Section 2 First.
[6] I would like to study applications and demonstrate how the "dialog" view of UseCase would simplify & clarify UseCase description for the business user as well as system developer without sacrificing precision and usefulness.
02 FEB 14
Returning part of output back to input is considered feedback but this is NOT valid in all cases. This identifies what is missing in a complete FEEDBACK model: The User or Customer of the output. The feedback must come from the User of the output based on using the output. What such user gives is TRUE feedback. Many cases in which feedback works effectively it is because the feedback is TRUE. Such cases are discussed to support this view.
Use this and let me know your cases and how you are using TRUE feedback.
BA and RE Coaching, Training, Teaching,through Quizzes, Assignments, Mini Projects. Learning by DOING with MINIMUM LECTURING
Short intense Single Module Courses....of 4 to 6 Sessions.
Most Process Models show ONLY 3 Basic out of 6 Elements
The THREE well known elements are: input, process and output. Here the PERFORMER of process or activity or task is ignored. This is a very serious lapse. The process runs because of the PERFORMER (human or machine or software agent) and must be modelled. By limiting modelling only to THREE BASIC ELEMENTS, the other vital and essential elements (Undesirable Inputs and outputs, Process Facilities and Consumables and FEEDBACK) are left out.
Furthermore, many Business Process models show “ONLY flow of control” but NOT the inputs which get processed and outputs that flow out to other processes. Such models are over simplified and remain incomplete (and so useless).
Here is a comprehensive model using all SIX elements with emphasis on PERFORMER and FEEDBACK. All the details are not given. This is just an outline.
I have revised it twice in the last few days. I have removed all the cross references to other PPTs and added PERFORMER. Hope this would be better. Have a look and leave a comment. I welcome FEEDBACK in process modelling and to my SIX element model.
It is essential to show what flows from process to process and distinguish the physical flows (People, Material, Signals and Energy) from logical flows (data and information).
The oversimplified models implicitly assume that ONLY desirable inputs flow in and desirable outputs flow out while in fact undesirable inputs and outputs come mixed with what is desired. They need to be separated out with special processes in real-world processes. Input filtering and separation and disposal of waste / byproducts are unavoidable.
All processes need process resources and consumables which are different from the "inputs". They are very crucial for proper modeling and design of processes.
FEEDBACK is another vital element of every practical and useful process but it is NOT modeled or modeled incorrectly.
These additional THREE elements are added and explained in the SIX ELEMENT Process Model proposed here. This is just an introduction to FOUR sub-modules (part of kenablersys Single Module Course of 4-6 Sessions).
See TRUE FEEDBACK Extended Abstract on SlideShare
Recommended for Business Analysis, Requirements Engineering and Software Engineering.
CONTEXT of Context of the System(s) to be DevelopedPutcha Narasimham
Context Diagram or Use Case Diagram are created directly without many principles or guidelines for the validity of them. Many implicit assumptions and informal designs come into play. There is a need for the CONTEXT of context. It is here pointed out that Explicit TO BE Process is very helpful to overcome the limitations to prepare and assure that CD or UCD is valid and reliable. Three examples are added in this revision. An 8 Process example is used to show the method. See how it helps. Let's discuss.
Relation.....too fundamental to be ill-defined but is it well defined? Is it useful? Not quite according to me. I have my questions and reasons to redefine relation radically. Here is the proposal.
These are TQM Quality Improvements Methods and Tools adapted for BA and RE. They are simple but potent if used with deep understanding and commitment.
All the tools are not discussed. End-Means Tree is excellent for planning and innovation.
Transcript: Selling digital books in 2024: Insights from industry leaders - T...BookNet Canada
The publishing industry has been selling digital audiobooks and ebooks for over a decade and has found its groove. What’s changed? What has stayed the same? Where do we go from here? Join a group of leading sales peers from across the industry for a conversation about the lessons learned since the popularization of digital books, best practices, digital book supply chain management, and more.
Link to video recording: https://bnctechforum.ca/sessions/selling-digital-books-in-2024-insights-from-industry-leaders/
Presented by BookNet Canada on May 28, 2024, with support from the Department of Canadian Heritage.
Relation in set theory of math is flawed. It remains undetected and uncorrected even now. This 11 slide PPT point outs the errors with examples, corrects them, giving a better definition. It may be too elementary but how can math live with errors in fundamentals?
UseCase modeling is very diverse, often inconsistent and erroneous. This is due to imprecise and incomplete definition and specification of UML which does not have any glossary of terms and fails to formally define the terms--UseCase in particular. The very nature of UseCase is undefined and uncertain though all the versions of UML. I noticed these factors and discovered UseCase to be fundamentally a DIALOG of messages which in turn are composed of information and data in 2008. I have been uploading my analyses and proposals to SlideShare since 2010. Here is a new summary of my analyses and proposals in light of BPMN's definition of "conversation" which is essentially the same as my "dialog". The linked in discussions prompted model UseCase as an Association Class and remodel what is called UseCase Diagram as a new Class Diagram without the old misleading "UseCase Ovals" inside System under Consideration. I also recommend treating UML Actor as an External Entity playing multiple roles which is any done by default.
I welcome review and feedback. Thanks
Harmonizing use cases, dialogs or conversations, process maps, usecase diagra...Putcha Narasimham
UseCase concept is unique and profound concept to represent the needs of businesses and users from their view point. Based on UseCase and Actor identification, the System to be Developed can be specified and evolved systematically. This summary updates and integrates many proposals made earlier. It logically integrates all the concepts of the title.
How to study any publication deeply for analysis and research. The process and reporting format are presented with examples. This paves way for incremental discovery and innovation and validation / consolidation.
Allocation of resources to generate high value in services or designing most cost effective means for high customer satisfaction are NOT always done systematically or with quantification. But it is possible and worth doing.
Are there any generic tools to analyze and assess documents? Here are some suggestions including Procedure to Cluster Concepts & Check for their Coupling in a document.
I found it helpful. I suppose something like this or even better would be available.
Describing something new poses very serious problems. Dictionaries and encyclopedia have met this requirement fairly well but those methods and techniques are NOT within the reach of millions of us who have to "describe things or introduce things" for teaching, documenting, modeling for analysis and design etc.
Here is my proposal to do it with a simple table. Yes, it is derived from class definition and description of OOAD but it is very effective for use in general. See how it works and let's help millions of students and teachers who struggle to describe things. Here is a structure to it which solves 80% of the problem. Cheers!
Software is very special. I is grand, spectacular, regenerative and perpetual source of value---like nothing else we know.
Perhaps for this very reason it is misused and wasted. By cooperatively REUSING ALL ARTIFACTS of software, we can reap unheard of benefits repeatedly. Here is an outline of how we can do it. That is ReSAR. Let's start.
Multiple Actors DO interact with the SuC, which is why the SuC exists in the first place, but NO TWO of them can do so through a single UseCase. There can be NO Second Actor in a UseCase.
Each interaction, more appropriately the dialog, can only have two members actively involved in the dialog.
First is the SuC and the second is the associated Actor.
The nature of UseCase and its implications were well discussed in
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/usecase-case-is-a-dialog-not-a-process
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/use-casesingle-session
http://www.slideshare.net/putchavn/one-use-case-one-actor
Yet there are discussions and justifications for associating multiple actors with the same UseCase.
UseCase is a DIALOG involving only one SuC and One Actor per Session. There is NO scope for another actor to take part in that dialog. Here is an example ATM Cash withdrawal. It needs THREE separate UCs.
This is explained using Process Maps to show the separation and how to separate.
This should end the confusion and persistent misunderstanding and misrepresentation.
Combined UseCase Description, MockUp Screens & System Sequence DiagramPutcha Narasimham
There are different artifacts (documents) for Use Case Description, Mock-up Screens and System Sequence Diagram. That is because each UML diagram (or table or description, Use Case Description has no diagram) can accommodate only a few modeling elements.
Analysts often need a set of UML diagrams and descriptions to evolve and represent concepts. They have to be drawn quickly and iteratively to formulate and express the business concepts and requirements. They need to be created and edited together, not in isolation.
It is here claimed that the contents of these three UML artifacts can be combined into a single text-document with tables & without drawings.
Concept Maps are very effective for language-free expression and communication of concepts visually. The fundamental structures, which are not all graphic, are also very elegant for encoding knowledge for machine processing.
The building blocks of knowledge (Nodes and Links) are NOT sufficiently "expressive & precise". HyperPlex fills this need. See the PPT by that name in https://www.slideshare.net/putchavn
Both the concepts are explained with examples.
Good for general use and a prerequisite for knowing what is knowledge and how to represent it. Leave a comment.
[1] A view that a UseCase (UC) is a "dialog" between the System under Consideration (SuC) and an Actor (for a specific UC) brings focus to what "messages need to be exchanged between the SuC and Actor to reach UC Goal".
[2] Agreeing on and specifying UC Goal is related to business or application. UC Goal would be the right first step of UC description.
[3] There are many "means" of generating "messages from SuC", through various internal activities within the SuC. They need not be (I would even say should not be) specified in UC Description.
[4] The concept of UseCase is profound and useful because it is a "dialog" but NOT a process. This distinction is not defined and clarified which is why, I think, the full benefits of UC modeling are not widely realized.
[5] This view of UC (as per 1, 2 & 3) clearly separates the "internal processes" of the SuC from UC. The "internal processes" can be hypothesized and evolved separately using UML Sequence Diagrams. All the business / user needs can be specified with sufficient precision and rigor through the “messages” of UC dialog. There are no external dependencies, though constraints may exist and have to be taken care of.
I have REVISED & uploaded the PPT with TWO Sections, Section 2 First.
[6] I would like to study applications and demonstrate how the "dialog" view of UseCase would simplify & clarify UseCase description for the business user as well as system developer without sacrificing precision and usefulness.
02 FEB 14
Returning part of output back to input is considered feedback but this is NOT valid in all cases. This identifies what is missing in a complete FEEDBACK model: The User or Customer of the output. The feedback must come from the User of the output based on using the output. What such user gives is TRUE feedback. Many cases in which feedback works effectively it is because the feedback is TRUE. Such cases are discussed to support this view.
Use this and let me know your cases and how you are using TRUE feedback.
BA and RE Coaching, Training, Teaching,through Quizzes, Assignments, Mini Projects. Learning by DOING with MINIMUM LECTURING
Short intense Single Module Courses....of 4 to 6 Sessions.
Most Process Models show ONLY 3 Basic out of 6 Elements
The THREE well known elements are: input, process and output. Here the PERFORMER of process or activity or task is ignored. This is a very serious lapse. The process runs because of the PERFORMER (human or machine or software agent) and must be modelled. By limiting modelling only to THREE BASIC ELEMENTS, the other vital and essential elements (Undesirable Inputs and outputs, Process Facilities and Consumables and FEEDBACK) are left out.
Furthermore, many Business Process models show “ONLY flow of control” but NOT the inputs which get processed and outputs that flow out to other processes. Such models are over simplified and remain incomplete (and so useless).
Here is a comprehensive model using all SIX elements with emphasis on PERFORMER and FEEDBACK. All the details are not given. This is just an outline.
I have revised it twice in the last few days. I have removed all the cross references to other PPTs and added PERFORMER. Hope this would be better. Have a look and leave a comment. I welcome FEEDBACK in process modelling and to my SIX element model.
It is essential to show what flows from process to process and distinguish the physical flows (People, Material, Signals and Energy) from logical flows (data and information).
The oversimplified models implicitly assume that ONLY desirable inputs flow in and desirable outputs flow out while in fact undesirable inputs and outputs come mixed with what is desired. They need to be separated out with special processes in real-world processes. Input filtering and separation and disposal of waste / byproducts are unavoidable.
All processes need process resources and consumables which are different from the "inputs". They are very crucial for proper modeling and design of processes.
FEEDBACK is another vital element of every practical and useful process but it is NOT modeled or modeled incorrectly.
These additional THREE elements are added and explained in the SIX ELEMENT Process Model proposed here. This is just an introduction to FOUR sub-modules (part of kenablersys Single Module Course of 4-6 Sessions).
See TRUE FEEDBACK Extended Abstract on SlideShare
Recommended for Business Analysis, Requirements Engineering and Software Engineering.
CONTEXT of Context of the System(s) to be DevelopedPutcha Narasimham
Context Diagram or Use Case Diagram are created directly without many principles or guidelines for the validity of them. Many implicit assumptions and informal designs come into play. There is a need for the CONTEXT of context. It is here pointed out that Explicit TO BE Process is very helpful to overcome the limitations to prepare and assure that CD or UCD is valid and reliable. Three examples are added in this revision. An 8 Process example is used to show the method. See how it helps. Let's discuss.
Relation.....too fundamental to be ill-defined but is it well defined? Is it useful? Not quite according to me. I have my questions and reasons to redefine relation radically. Here is the proposal.
These are TQM Quality Improvements Methods and Tools adapted for BA and RE. They are simple but potent if used with deep understanding and commitment.
All the tools are not discussed. End-Means Tree is excellent for planning and innovation.
Transcript: Selling digital books in 2024: Insights from industry leaders - T...BookNet Canada
The publishing industry has been selling digital audiobooks and ebooks for over a decade and has found its groove. What’s changed? What has stayed the same? Where do we go from here? Join a group of leading sales peers from across the industry for a conversation about the lessons learned since the popularization of digital books, best practices, digital book supply chain management, and more.
Link to video recording: https://bnctechforum.ca/sessions/selling-digital-books-in-2024-insights-from-industry-leaders/
Presented by BookNet Canada on May 28, 2024, with support from the Department of Canadian Heritage.
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with ParametersSafe Software
Are you looking to streamline your workflows and boost your projects’ efficiency? Do you find yourself searching for ways to add flexibility and control over your FME workflows? If so, you’re in the right place.
Join us for an insightful dive into the world of FME parameters, a critical element in optimizing workflow efficiency. This webinar marks the beginning of our three-part “Essentials of Automation” series. This first webinar is designed to equip you with the knowledge and skills to utilize parameters effectively: enhancing the flexibility, maintainability, and user control of your FME projects.
Here’s what you’ll gain:
- Essentials of FME Parameters: Understand the pivotal role of parameters, including Reader/Writer, Transformer, User, and FME Flow categories. Discover how they are the key to unlocking automation and optimization within your workflows.
- Practical Applications in FME Form: Delve into key user parameter types including choice, connections, and file URLs. Allow users to control how a workflow runs, making your workflows more reusable. Learn to import values and deliver the best user experience for your workflows while enhancing accuracy.
- Optimization Strategies in FME Flow: Explore the creation and strategic deployment of parameters in FME Flow, including the use of deployment and geometry parameters, to maximize workflow efficiency.
- Pro Tips for Success: Gain insights on parameterizing connections and leveraging new features like Conditional Visibility for clarity and simplicity.
We’ll wrap up with a glimpse into future webinars, followed by a Q&A session to address your specific questions surrounding this topic.
Don’t miss this opportunity to elevate your FME expertise and drive your projects to new heights of efficiency.
JMeter webinar - integration with InfluxDB and GrafanaRTTS
Watch this recorded webinar about real-time monitoring of application performance. See how to integrate Apache JMeter, the open-source leader in performance testing, with InfluxDB, the open-source time-series database, and Grafana, the open-source analytics and visualization application.
In this webinar, we will review the benefits of leveraging InfluxDB and Grafana when executing load tests and demonstrate how these tools are used to visualize performance metrics.
Length: 30 minutes
Session Overview
-------------------------------------------
During this webinar, we will cover the following topics while demonstrating the integrations of JMeter, InfluxDB and Grafana:
- What out-of-the-box solutions are available for real-time monitoring JMeter tests?
- What are the benefits of integrating InfluxDB and Grafana into the load testing stack?
- Which features are provided by Grafana?
- Demonstration of InfluxDB and Grafana using a practice web application
To view the webinar recording, go to:
https://www.rttsweb.com/jmeter-integration-webinar
Builder.ai Founder Sachin Dev Duggal's Strategic Approach to Create an Innova...Ramesh Iyer
In today's fast-changing business world, Companies that adapt and embrace new ideas often need help to keep up with the competition. However, fostering a culture of innovation takes much work. It takes vision, leadership and willingness to take risks in the right proportion. Sachin Dev Duggal, co-founder of Builder.ai, has perfected the art of this balance, creating a company culture where creativity and growth are nurtured at each stage.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
Search and Society: Reimagining Information Access for Radical FuturesBhaskar Mitra
The field of Information retrieval (IR) is currently undergoing a transformative shift, at least partly due to the emerging applications of generative AI to information access. In this talk, we will deliberate on the sociotechnical implications of generative AI for information access. We will argue that there is both a critical necessity and an exciting opportunity for the IR community to re-center our research agendas on societal needs while dismantling the artificial separation between the work on fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics in IR and the rest of IR research. Instead of adopting a reactionary strategy of trying to mitigate potential social harms from emerging technologies, the community should aim to proactively set the research agenda for the kinds of systems we should build inspired by diverse explicitly stated sociotechnical imaginaries. The sociotechnical imaginaries that underpin the design and development of information access technologies needs to be explicitly articulated, and we need to develop theories of change in context of these diverse perspectives. Our guiding future imaginaries must be informed by other academic fields, such as democratic theory and critical theory, and should be co-developed with social science scholars, legal scholars, civil rights and social justice activists, and artists, among others.
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...UiPathCommunity
💥 Speed, accuracy, and scaling – discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Mining™:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing – with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs – GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
👨🏫 Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
👩🏫 Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...DanBrown980551
Do you want to learn how to model and simulate an electrical network from scratch in under an hour?
Then welcome to this PowSyBl workshop, hosted by Rte, the French Transmission System Operator (TSO)!
During the webinar, you will discover the PowSyBl ecosystem as well as handle and study an electrical network through an interactive Python notebook.
PowSyBl is an open source project hosted by LF Energy, which offers a comprehensive set of features for electrical grid modelling and simulation. Among other advanced features, PowSyBl provides:
- A fully editable and extendable library for grid component modelling;
- Visualization tools to display your network;
- Grid simulation tools, such as power flows, security analyses (with or without remedial actions) and sensitivity analyses;
The framework is mostly written in Java, with a Python binding so that Python developers can access PowSyBl functionalities as well.
What you will learn during the webinar:
- For beginners: discover PowSyBl's functionalities through a quick general presentation and the notebook, without needing any expert coding skills;
- For advanced developers: master the skills to efficiently apply PowSyBl functionalities to your real-world scenarios.
Connector Corner: Automate dynamic content and events by pushing a buttonDianaGray10
Here is something new! In our next Connector Corner webinar, we will demonstrate how you can use a single workflow to:
Create a campaign using Mailchimp with merge tags/fields
Send an interactive Slack channel message (using buttons)
Have the message received by managers and peers along with a test email for review
But there’s more:
In a second workflow supporting the same use case, you’ll see:
Your campaign sent to target colleagues for approval
If the “Approve” button is clicked, a Jira/Zendesk ticket is created for the marketing design team
But—if the “Reject” button is pushed, colleagues will be alerted via Slack message
Join us to learn more about this new, human-in-the-loop capability, brought to you by Integration Service connectors.
And...
Speakers:
Akshay Agnihotri, Product Manager
Charlie Greenberg, Host
Neuro-symbolic is not enough, we need neuro-*semantic*Frank van Harmelen
Neuro-symbolic (NeSy) AI is on the rise. However, simply machine learning on just any symbolic structure is not sufficient to really harvest the gains of NeSy. These will only be gained when the symbolic structures have an actual semantics. I give an operational definition of semantics as “predictable inference”.
All of this illustrated with link prediction over knowledge graphs, but the argument is general.
2. This is also Section 4 of
Semantic Web:
Dealing with Knowledge & Meaning
Putcha V. Narasimham
Knowledge Enabler Systems
putchavn@yahoo.com
3. Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
Pentagon of MEANING
Meaning is a FIVE ELEMENT concept--- 1923 book identifies only
THREE. Inherently meaning of an expression (one of the 5 elements)
is subjective and private to speaker and listener ( 2 more elements)..
3
4. What is the meaning of ……
Consider the following
1: cat
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
2: billi or pilli (or better still marjalam)
These are Hindi, Telugu & Sanskrit words for cat
2: a2 + 2ab + b2
Is 2 the meaning of 1 or vice versa?
1: (a+b)2
Think …..
Ms Tabasum ( B Tech 3 year) of Muffackhram Jah
College of Engineering & Technology, Hyderabad
gave the correct answer with reasons in a
seminar on 14 DEC 13. Very rare and remarkable
4
5. Wrong view of meaning & correction
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
Most people
think it is true
but
NO, Not True
Then?
See the
possibilities
In the case of cat and billi
We can only say they are equivalent
labels referring to a specific animal
The concept of referent was welldefined through Meaning Triangle
By Ogden and Richard 1910-1923
5
6. Meaning Triangle: Thought, Word & Thing
Thought or Reference
meaning
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
Stands for
Word
Symbol
Not direct
Object
Thing or Referent
Ogden & Richard say in
The Meaning of Meaning (1923)
The need for meaning has arisen
Because humans (live beings) use
Signs or symbols for
communications / interactions
6
7. 22 JAN 14
A visual grimace, gesture, or
movement
An audible utterance, sound, music
Natural language speech or
Our
Natural language text
Focus
Objects,
Phenomena
-------------------- Concepts
Emotions
Mental
Pentagon of MEANING
Concrete
Typical Signs or Symbols and Referents
7
8. Meaning of Symbol is Referent
Thought or Reference
meaning
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
Stands for
Word
Symbol
Is
Object
Referent
The meaning of a sign or symbol
Is what they referred to
When the symbol is Natural
Language Text—NLT
The symbols tend to be complex
And referent is difficult to identify
Correctly and precisely
8
9. Meaning: Significance Created in Mind
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
According to dictionary
It is valid through NOT complete
Essentially meaning is a concept
Ogden and Richard identified
Three Elements of it
We see there are FIVE ELEMENTS
So we move from
Triangle of
meaning to
Pentagon of
meaning
9
10. The FIVE ELEMENTS of Meaning
Internal
1. The original concept X in the
22 JAN 14
3.
4.
5.
External
X
Text T
External
Pentagon of MEANING
2.
mind of
Speaker S or writer who
Expresses X in Text T of a
natural language
Listener L receives T & forms
Some concept X’ in his mind
Internal
External
S
Internal
L
X’
10
11. Five Elements together create Meaning
Internal
Pentagon of MEANING
Internal
22 JAN 14
X
External
Text T
S
Internal
X’
L
Meaning is just not
interpretation of T in
isolation
Meaning is dependent
on all the FIVE Elements
Let’s study how they
together determine the
meaning
11
12. Speaker and Expression of Concept X
Internal
Pentagon of MEANING
S
22 JAN 14
Speaker S:
X
Internal
Text T
External
X
Has concept X
Expresses X in
Text T of some
language
T is not X
X may be
multimodal
Speaker S
12
13. Listener creates her own Meaning X’ of T
22 JAN 14
Listener L
Listener gets T &
External
Constructs X’ privately
Text T
& Subjectively
To her, T MEANS X’
X’ is often NOT X, both
L
being private
Listener NO direct way to know
X’
X & X’
Internal
Pentagon of MEANING
x’
13
14. Subjective Nature of Meaning
x’
Pentagon of MEANING
X’ is a concept, an idea in mind
22 JAN 14
It is private & personal
It is the only meaning listener can get
Known only to the individual listener
So meaning is subjective
Listener
14
15. Meaning: Generated or recalled, NOT given
x’
Text (signals) which encode X
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
Listener
Can be transmitted but
X & X’ remain as concepts with S or L
Concepts or Meaning have to be
GENERATED from T mentally &
privately or RECALLED from memory
Concepts as such cannot be GIVEN
15
16. Five Elements: S, X, T, L and X’
Pentagon of MEANING
X
22 JAN 14
1-S thinks 2-X
& presents it as 3-T
4-L gets T & creates
5-X’ in her mind
private
S
Open &
Common
Text T
L
X’
private
16
17. Relating S, X, T, L and X’
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
X & X’ are private to S and L
They must be brought out
into open common view
To share and make meaning
common and public
Explained in the PPT: Shared
and Machine Mediated
Meaning
X
private
S
Open &
Common
Text T
L
X’
private
17
18. Conclusion: Pentagon of Meaning
Pentagon of MEANING
22 JAN 14
Identified 5 elements of meaning
Used them to define meaning in
human context
Discussed subjective nature of
meaning and
The need to share private
concepts to arrive at common
meaning
Did not discuss ‘understanding’
1-S thinks 2-X
& presents it as 3-T
4-L gets T & creates
5-X’ in her mind
Keep
Going
18