Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

* Catherine Lloyd <c.lloyd at auckland.ac.nz> [2010-06-03 20:55] writes:
> Hi Lucian
>
> Adding to that, I'll emphasise again that this list forms the bare
> minimum and we will be happy to expand on the list in the future.
> "validity" and "simulation" could be two areas which we choose to
> expand on first - for example simulation in a specific named tool, etc.

I think 'validity' probably isn't worth spending too much time on. If
it's not valid, there are probably a bajillion ways it can be invalid, and
the actual 'this file is invalid on line 3 because...' message you get
from the API is probably more valuable than trying to classify all the
invalidity error messages into curatable groups. (Though perhaps 'the
model is overspecified' might be a handy particular thing to know? And
maybe it wouldn't be too hard to say 'the model is syntactically invalid'
vs 'the model is semantically invalid'?)

However, 'simulation' probably *is* a more productive area in which to
expand--if you could tell, in general, what kind of math techniques a
model needed to be simulated, you could tell if your simulator
(/translator) could handle those techniques. ODE's, PDE's, algebraic
rules, etc.

-Lucian

---

• [cellml-discussion] Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Curation flags], Catherine Lloyd, 06/04/2010
  • [cellml-discussion] Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Curation flags], Lucian Smith, 06/04/2010
    • [cellml-discussion] Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Curation flags], Catherine Lloyd, 06/04/2010
      • [cellml-discussion] Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Curation flags], Lucian Smith, 06/04/2010
        • [cellml-discussion] Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Curation flags], Alan Garny, 06/04/2010
          • [cellml-discussion] Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: Curation flags], Catherine Lloyd, 06/04/2010

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.