Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Extend preference concepts #308

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 2, 2023
Merged

Conversation

ayden175
Copy link
Collaborator

Builds upons PR #297 (Soma-Agent) to add the rest of the preference concepts. Some of the changes from Soma-Agent seem to not directly fit with some concepts of the preference model from the paper:

Preference

  • currently has the relation 'is quality of' only Agent
  • however, paper proposed 'is preference of' only Agent
    -> should 'is preference of' be added and used instead? (as a subrelation of 'is quality of'?)

Preference Order

  • Soma-Agent added Predilection, but that seems to be slightly different (orders situations instead of discriptions)
    -> should Predilection be kept as well, or replaced by Preference Order?

Ordered Element

  • Soma-Agent added Order Item, which seems to do the same things as far as I can tell
  • Order Item uses hasMember instead of the in the paper proposed encapsulates
    -> should Order Item be kept, or (partially) replaced by Ordered Element or encapsulates?

@mpomarlan
Copy link
Collaborator

I would say to obey the paper as much as possible. With this rule of thumb, answers:

  1. Yes, use "is preference of" which is a subproperty of "is quality of"
  2. At the moment I do not care much one way or the other. We can keep Predilection for now.
  3. Who else is using OrderedItem? If only the preference model, then let us stick to the paper names and only keep OrderedElement and its encapsulates property.

@mpomarlan
Copy link
Collaborator

Hello there, what else needs doing here? We should close this and release soon.

@ayden175
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ayden175 commented Nov 1, 2023

I somehow missed the first comment, sorry! I've adjusted the changes accordingly. OrderItem was not used by anything else, so I renamed it and let it use encapsulates instead of hasMember. If the new changes look ok, the PR would be ready to be merged now.

@ayden175 ayden175 marked this pull request as ready for review November 1, 2023 23:16
@ayden175 ayden175 changed the title [Draft] Extend preference concepts Extend preference concepts Nov 1, 2023
@ayden175 ayden175 self-assigned this Nov 1, 2023
@mpomarlan mpomarlan merged commit 90800c8 into ease-crc:master Nov 2, 2023
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants