Role Class Ontological

Issue

After a review of Role Class Ontological, there appears to be some room for change.

Discussion

Current State of Role Class Ontological

Role Class Ontological

A relationship in which the scoping Entity defines or specifies what the playing Entity is. Thus, the player's "being" (Greek: ontos) is specified.

EQUIV (equivalent entity)

Specifies the player Entity (the equivalent Entity) as an Entity that is considered to be equivalent to a reference Entity (scoper). The equivalence is in principle a symmetric relationship, however, it is expected that the scoper is a reference entity which serves as reference entity for multiple different equivalent entities. An innovator's medicine formulation is the reference for "generics", i.e., formulations manufactured differently but having been proven to be biologically equivalent to the reference medicine. Another example is a reference ingredient that serves as basis for quantity specifications (basis of strength, e.g., metoprolol succinate specified in terms of metoprolol tartrate.) If the example here uses a generic medicine, then surely GRIC should be a subtype of EQUIV, not a subtype of GEN?

Suggest that the generic medicine example be removed, but that the reference strength example remains.

Could an alternative example – such as equivalent qualifications – be added? Are qualifications entities? Probably not! Looking at the entity concepts, I could not think of any other good example. Is that concerning? We use the equivalence (reference substance) role a lot in the Common Product Model context.

SAME (same)

The "same" role asserts an identity between playing and scoping entities, i.e., that they are in fact two records of the same entity instance, and, in the case of discrepancies (e.g different DOB, gender), that one or both are in error. playing and scoping entities must have same classCode, but need not have identical attributes or values.

Usage: playing and scoping entities must have same classCode, but need not have identical attributes or values. a provider registry maintains sets of conflicting demographic data for what is reported to be the same individual.

Is this "synonymy" (A denotes the same as B)? If so, could we say so explicitly please? The application of this role would imply that the two entities (player and scoper) are functionally interchangeable in the context of use.

SUBY (subsumed by)

Relates a prevailing record of an Entity (scoper) with another record (player) that it subsumes.

Constraints: Both the player and scoper must have the same classCode. Examples: Show a correct new Person object (scoper) that subsumes one or more duplicate Person objects that had accidentally been created for the same physical person. Subsumption: the "is_a" relationship; concept A is a subset of concept B.

This often implies inheritance of properties. This means that A is a specialisation of B, and that B is a generalisation of A. But given that a generalisation role class already exists, why does this role class also exist as, if the player and scoper entities are swapped, the semantics are exactly the same, surely?

GEN (has generalization)

Relates a specialized material concept (player) to its generalization (scoper).

Add examples:

Would be better worded as "is generalisation" than "has generalisation, as the "has_a" (partiative) relationship is different from the is_a one, and we have that in a separate section in the role class hierarchy.

GRIC (has generic)

A special link between pharmaceuticals indicating that the target (scoper) is a generic for the source (player).

Move to child of GRIC. Put "generic" example from EQUIV here

INST (instance)

An individual piece of material (player) instantiating a class of material (scoper).

Examples?? Might be better termed "instance of"

SUBS (subsumer)

An entity that subsumes the identity of another. Used in the context of merging documented entity instances. Both the player and scoper must have the same classCode. The use of this code is deprecated in favor of the term SUBY which is its inverse and is more ontologically correct.

Proposed State of Role Class Ontological

Role Class Ontological

A relationship in which the scoping Entity defines or specifies what the playing Entity is. Thus, the player's "being" (Greek: ontos) is specified.

EQUIV (equivalent entity)

Specifies the player Entity (the equivalent Entity) as an Entity that is considered to be equivalent to a reference Entity (scoper). The equivalence is in principle a symmetric relationship, however, it is expected that the scoper is a reference entity which serves as reference entity for multiple different equivalent entities. A reference substance that serves as basis for quantity specifications (basis of strength, e.g., metoprolol succinate specified in terms of metoprolol tartrate.)

SAME (same)

The "same" role asserts an identity between playing and scoping entities, i.e., that they are in fact two records of the same entity instance, and, in the case of discrepancies (e.g different DOB, gender), that one or both are in error. playing and scoping entities must have same classCode, but need not have identical attributes or values.

This role describes functional (contextual) synonymy between entities ((A denotes the same as B)? The use of this role states that the two entities (player and scoper) are functionally interchangeable in the context of use.

Usage: playing and scoping entities must have same classCode, but need not have identical attributes or values. A provider registry maintains sets of conflicting demographic data for what is reported to be the same individual.

GRIC (has generic)

A special link between pharmaceuticals indicating that the target (scoper) is a generic for the source (player). An innovator's medicine formulation is the reference for "generics", i.e., formulations manufactured differently but having been proven to be biologically equivalent to the innovator medicine.

SUBY (subsumed by)

RETIRED

GEN (is generalization)

Relates a specialized material concept (player) to its generalization (scoper). This is the subsumption relationship the "is_a" relationship. Concept A generalizes (or is a superset of) concept B (scoper). This often implies inheritance of properties from A to B. The statement "Concept B "is_a" type of (specialization of) Concept A" is the same semantics, walked 'backwards' The substance entity "beta-blockers" is a generalization of "atenolol". The food entity "biscuit" is a generalization of custard cream". The car entity "Ferrari F450" is a generalization of "sports car".

INST (instance)

An individual piece of material (player) instantiating a class of material (scoper). Might be better termed "instance of"

SUBS (subsumer)

RETIRED