{"title":"思考事件:从信号到事件","authors":"","doi":"10.1145/3462257.3462260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With more challenging problems arising in recent times, it became essential for data management research to start considering dynamic situations, in particular data streams [Babcock et al. 2002] and the events happening within them. Luckham and Frasca [1998] championed the concept of complex event processing in data streams, an idea that was adopted by many researchers and remains popular in traditional applications that process a few well-structured data streams for making real-time decisions. More challenging problems have pushed the concept of events to something that resembles more of what we see in foundational sciences such as in philosophy and linguistics. The concept of events and applications that consider events as important entities is now an emerging trend. Westermann and Jain [2007] proposed a six-facet model to represent event structure, attributes, and causality. Xie et al. [2008] proposed a 5W1H (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How) repre sentation to capture event attributes. In databases, Gatziu and Dittrich [1994] and Gehani et al. [1992] proposed models based on different event attributes. In most of these models (save for Westermann and Jain [2007]), causality and structure were not captured. The term event has been used in two distinct contexts in the computing litera ture: physical world occurrences and the representations of those occurrences in a computer system. In different computer science domains, event-based analysis is about capturing, processing, and managing low-level events such as publish/sub scribe systems and middleware solutions [Oberle 2006], complex event processing [Ericsson and Berndtsson 2007], event stream processing [Cetintemel 2003], and Think Events: From Signals to Events","PeriodicalId":208013,"journal":{"name":"Event Mining for Explanatory Modeling","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Think Events: From Signals to Events\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3462257.3462260\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With more challenging problems arising in recent times, it became essential for data management research to start considering dynamic situations, in particular data streams [Babcock et al. 2002] and the events happening within them. Luckham and Frasca [1998] championed the concept of complex event processing in data streams, an idea that was adopted by many researchers and remains popular in traditional applications that process a few well-structured data streams for making real-time decisions. More challenging problems have pushed the concept of events to something that resembles more of what we see in foundational sciences such as in philosophy and linguistics. The concept of events and applications that consider events as important entities is now an emerging trend. Westermann and Jain [2007] proposed a six-facet model to represent event structure, attributes, and causality. Xie et al. [2008] proposed a 5W1H (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How) repre sentation to capture event attributes. In databases, Gatziu and Dittrich [1994] and Gehani et al. [1992] proposed models based on different event attributes. In most of these models (save for Westermann and Jain [2007]), causality and structure were not captured. The term event has been used in two distinct contexts in the computing litera ture: physical world occurrences and the representations of those occurrences in a computer system. In different computer science domains, event-based analysis is about capturing, processing, and managing low-level events such as publish/sub scribe systems and middleware solutions [Oberle 2006], complex event processing [Ericsson and Berndtsson 2007], event stream processing [Cetintemel 2003], and Think Events: From Signals to Events\",\"PeriodicalId\":208013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Event Mining for Explanatory Modeling\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Event Mining for Explanatory Modeling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3462257.3462260\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Event Mining for Explanatory Modeling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3462257.3462260","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
随着近年来出现的更具挑战性的问题,数据管理研究开始考虑动态情况,特别是数据流[Babcock et al. 2002]和其中发生的事件变得至关重要。lucham和Frasca[1998]倡导了数据流中复杂事件处理的概念,这一概念被许多研究人员采用,并且在处理一些结构良好的数据流以做出实时决策的传统应用程序中仍然流行。更具挑战性的问题将事件的概念推向了更类似于我们在哲学和语言学等基础科学中看到的东西。事件和将事件视为重要实体的应用程序的概念现在是一种新兴趋势。Westermann和Jain[2007]提出了一个六面模型来表示事件结构、属性和因果关系。Xie等人[2008]提出了5W1H (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How)表示来捕获事件属性。在数据库中,Gatziu和Dittrich[1994]和Gehani等人[1992]提出了基于不同事件属性的模型。在大多数这些模型中(除了Westermann和Jain[2007]),因果关系和结构没有被捕获。事件一词在计算文献中有两种不同的用法:物理世界中的事件和计算机系统中这些事件的表示。在不同的计算机科学领域,基于事件的分析是关于捕获、处理和管理低级事件的,比如发布/订阅系统和中间件解决方案[Oberle 2006]、复杂事件处理[Ericsson and Berndtsson 2007]、事件流处理[Cetintemel 2003]和思考事件:从信号到事件
With more challenging problems arising in recent times, it became essential for data management research to start considering dynamic situations, in particular data streams [Babcock et al. 2002] and the events happening within them. Luckham and Frasca [1998] championed the concept of complex event processing in data streams, an idea that was adopted by many researchers and remains popular in traditional applications that process a few well-structured data streams for making real-time decisions. More challenging problems have pushed the concept of events to something that resembles more of what we see in foundational sciences such as in philosophy and linguistics. The concept of events and applications that consider events as important entities is now an emerging trend. Westermann and Jain [2007] proposed a six-facet model to represent event structure, attributes, and causality. Xie et al. [2008] proposed a 5W1H (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How) repre sentation to capture event attributes. In databases, Gatziu and Dittrich [1994] and Gehani et al. [1992] proposed models based on different event attributes. In most of these models (save for Westermann and Jain [2007]), causality and structure were not captured. The term event has been used in two distinct contexts in the computing litera ture: physical world occurrences and the representations of those occurrences in a computer system. In different computer science domains, event-based analysis is about capturing, processing, and managing low-level events such as publish/sub scribe systems and middleware solutions [Oberle 2006], complex event processing [Ericsson and Berndtsson 2007], event stream processing [Cetintemel 2003], and Think Events: From Signals to Events