. . . "Nicholas Car"^^ . "1.0"^^ . "Decision Provenance ontology (DecPROV)"^^ . "1.1"^^ . "2017-09-01"@en . "This ontology is for modelling decisions and thus the causes for actions or the use or generation of things. It allows for a better understanding of *why* something might have taken place, have been used or produced than the more generic [PROV ontology](https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/), on which it is mainly based, does. \n\n The specialised decision modelling elements of this ontology have been derived from the [W3C Decisions and Decision-Making Incubator Group](https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/decision/)'s Decision Ontology (DO) which can be found at . Many DO classes have been aligned with the PROV-O since it is widely recognised that analysing the elements of decisions *post hoc* is an exercise in provenance.\n\n Unlike the original DO, this ontology cannot be used for *normative* scenarios: it is only capable of recording decisions that have already been made (so-called *data-driven* use in the DO). This is because PROV does not have a templating system which can indicate what *should* occur in future scenarios.\n\n This ontology introduces only one new element for decision modelling over that which was present in the DO: an Agent which allows agency in decision making to be recorded."@en . "2017-06-28"^^ . . "The GitHub repository containing addition documentation: http://github.com/nicholascar/decprov-ont/"@en . "This ontology is a reduced-in-scope version of the [W3C Decisions and Decision-Making Incubator Group](https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/decision/)'s Decision Ontology (DO) which can be found at . It has been re-worked to align entirely with the W3C's [PROV ontology](https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/) since it is widely recognised that analysing the elements of decisions *post hoc* is an exercise in provenance.\n\nUnlike the original DO, this ontology cannot be used for *normative* scenarios: it is only capable of recording decisions that have already been made (so-called *data-driven* use in the DO). This is because PROV, to which this ontology is completely mapped, does not have a templating system which can indicate what *should* occur in future scenarios.\n\nThis ontology introduces only one new element for decision modelling over that which was present in the DO: an Agent which allows agency in decision making to be recorded."@en . _:genid1 . _:genid1 . _:genid1 . _:genid2 . _:genid2 . _:genid2 . . . _:genid1 . _:genid2 . . "A recorded answer to a Question"@en . "Answer"@en . . . . "A temporal event in which decision processes are undertaken, such as initiating sub-questions for the question to be answered, consideration of options etc."@en . "Decision Making"@en . _:genid3 . _:genid3 . _:genid3 . . . _:genid3 . "Option Selection is a process (prov:Activity) through which a decision-making Agent selects something.\n\nAt least two Option Selection Activities, possibly more, must be run in parrallel by an Agent and at least one must yield an outcome in order for a Question to be answered."@en . "OptionSelection"@en . "Wyb\u00F3r opcji"@pl . . . . "A recorded question"@en . "Question"@en . . . "Requirements require something from an OptionSelection Activity. They indicate their requirement with a set (a class) of objects. They are then satisified by the presense of an onject within that class. Multiple Requirements can be intersected to require very specific OptionSelection outcomes."@en . "Requirement"@en . . .