OK, if we are straying into data/information/knowledge/wisdom
territory, I'm going to bow out! ;-)
I've spent too much time in the trenches on this one when sorting out
the Information Management Strategy for Monash University. We ended up
with a completely different definition of information to the standard
one (based on some very elegant theoretical work from our LIS school)
but it took 9 months to get there.
On 16/09/2009, at 22:12 , Matthew Dovey wrote:
> It depends on whether we mean knowledge, information or data! The
> original quote of 180 exabytes spoke of 180 exabytes of information,
> whereas I think it meant 180 exabytes of data!
>
> I think I would argue that the knowledge content of the LHC would
> simply either that the existence of the Higgs Boson is proven, or
> (unfortunately) still uncertain (well, actually I wouldn't argue
> that too strongly since it seems pretty likely that they'll discover
> some other things along the way, and anyway I've a tendency to
> incline towards scientific instrumentalism).
>
> The information content of the LHC would be the data which supports
> the claim that the Higgs Boson exists, which would still be many
> order of magnitudes less than the total data output - the rest of
> the LHC data output would be "noise".
>
> However, there is the problem that future analysis or theory might
> discover some additional information (and hence knowledge) from the
> parts of the data currently regarded as "noise". However, at the
> petabyte scale, you can't keep everything just in case it proved
> useful (a maxim I don't personally observe which is why my house is
> so cluttered).
>
> I'd also argue that duplication of data may increase the amount of
> data stored (and is generally the way most people do backups/
> preservation) but does not itself increase the amount of information
> or knowledge. I expect that 180 exabyte figure includes a lot of
> duplication (especially of audio and video!)
>
> Matthew
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Treloar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: 16 September 2009 13:01
>> To: Matthew Dovey
>> Cc: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: amount of academic data (was re:Digital Preservation -
>> The
>> Planets Way)
>>
>> Only if people believe the bit without going back and re-analysing
>> (and re-re-
>> analysing) the data. I don't think a paper that just says "Yes"
>> will get accepted
>> on its own...
>>
>> On 16/09/2009, at 21:58 , Matthew Dovey wrote:
>>
>>> You could argue that the entire knowledge content of the 100s
>>> Petabytes of output from the LHC will be a single bit (indicating if
>>> the Higgs Boson was found).
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:JISC-
>>>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr
>>>> Sent: 16 September 2009 12:55
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: amount of academic data (was re:Digital Preservation -
>>>> The Planets Way)
>>>>
>>>> On 16 Sep 2009, at 12:33, Andrew Treloar wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> But as others have said, research data swamps the articles.
>>>>>
>>>>> And will increasingly do so. In fact, I can see a day when the
>>>>> size
>>>>> of the entire journal literature will be a rounding error on the
>>>>> total size of all research outputs. In some disciplines we are
>>>>> there
>>>>> already.
>>>>
>>>> Lest we forget - size isn't everything. Journal papers are valuable
>>>> precisely because they summarise scientific observations, turning
>>>> Petabytes of data and information into a fraction of a megabyte of
>>>> knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> Well, a fraction of a megabyte of PDF. Probably only a kilobyte of
>>>> mathML.
>>>> It's just the opposite of a picture being worth a thousand
>>>> words :-)
>>>> --
>>>> Les
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Treloar, PhD, MACS PCP, FRYE (2005) - http://andrew.treloar.net/
>> Deputy Director, Australian National Data Service - http://ands.org.au/
>> Monash University, Room 156, 700 Blackburn Rd, Clayton, 3168,
>> Australia
>> [P: +61 (0)3 990 20572 | M: +61 (0)407 202 501 | F: +61 (0)3 990
>> 20599]
>> *NOTE: Availability for meetings at http://andrew.treloar.net/calendar/
>
--
Andrew Treloar, PhD, MACS PCP, FRYE (2005) - http://andrew.treloar.net/
Deputy Director, Australian National Data Service - http://ands.org.au/
Monash University, Room 156, 700 Blackburn Rd, Clayton, 3168, Australia
[P: +61 (0)3 990 20572 | M: +61 (0)407 202 501 | F: +61 (0)3 990 20599]
*NOTE: Availability for meetings at http://andrew.treloar.net/calendar/
|