Method for identification and communication of technical languages

Discussion about a systematic approach to create domain specific tables of terms.

Version 1.1

Editor Hans N. Beck

Project coordination Robert Bosch GmbH und BMW AG

Due date 01.02.2020

Creation date 08.10.2019

Public relase 17.02.2020

Version 1.1

ii

t li h

INFORMATION ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT

Authors

Hans Nikolaus Beck (Bosch)

Reviewers

TP3-participants

Contact

Hans Nikolaus Beck (TP3 Lead)

CC-AD/EYR1

Robert Bosch GmbH

Robert-Bosch-Allee 1

74232 Abstatt

Tel.: +49 (0) 7062 911-7593

Fax: +49 (0) 173 3011768

Email: HansNikolaus.Beck@de.bosch.com

This document was written, reviewed and released in German and translated to English

Version 1.1

iii

t li h

Versions

Version Date Comment Author Partner

v0.1 04.02.2020 Translation of German document v1.0

Hans N. Beck Bosch

v1.0 28.02.2020 Finish Hans N. Beck Bosch

V1.1 02.06.2021 Adaption to new VVM layout and spelling check

Nikos Papamichail

EICT

Version 1.1

iv

t li h

Table of contents

1. Motivation 6

1.1 Task of TP3 and associated TPs 6

1.2 Objective of a term methodology 6

1.2.1 Objectives of communication 6

1.2.2 Objectives of methodology 7

1.3 Credits 10

2. Elementes of the term methodolgy 11

2.1 Intentionality 11

2.1.1 Motivation 11

2.1.2 Intention as quality of terms 11

2.2 Relations 14

3. Check 16

3.1 Motivation 16

3.2 Checklist 16

3.3 Formalization of problem, method, solution, causal chain 17

4. Summary 20

5. Example of register structure 21

6. Literature 22

Version 1.1

v

t li h

Figures

Figure 1: Example scenario 8

Figure 2: Circle of social reality 8

Figure 3: Quality of terms 15

Tables

Table 1: Example: Functional Intention 13

Table 2 Checklist Quality of terms 16

Table 3 Elements of scenarios 17

Table 4 Informational causal chain 18

Table 5 Formale Begriffsbewertung 19

Table 6: Example register structure 21

Abbreviations

Symbol Explanation Reference

VVM VDA Leitinitiative Projekt Verifikation und Validierungsmethoden für autonomes Fahren im urbanen Umfeld.

TP Subproject of VVM. Every subproject works on a specific topic.

UC Use Case

A Action Chapter 3.3

P Process or Chapter 3.3

E Expectation Chapter 3.3

W Information („Knowledge”) Chapter 3.3

π Signal Chapter 3.3

ξ Event Chapter 3.3

α Actor Chapter 3.3

Ω Environment Chapter 3.3

f(S,S‘) Informational cause-effect chain Chapter 3.3

Version 1.1

6

1. Motivation

1.1 Task of TP3 and associated TPs

New products such as autonomously driving vehicles must operate in the social reality. Society and its institutions will monitor such products and judge whether they address a targeted nuisance and are conform to existing laws and expectations.

Recording and understanding the needs or problems this product is intended to meet or solve are therefore of central importance. Accordingly, it is essential for the objective of the VVM project to examine traffic occurrences and their boundary conditions. The VVM focuses on the urban environment, using the example of the intersection scenario. The product targeted by the industry - the automated car - will act there and is going to be judged according to its behaviour. Legal requirements and social expectations are the gauge for this. Documenting and communicating all this, the problem, different interests, standards and approaches to solutions is therefore an essential part of the overall task of the VVM project.

As simplified description of the approach of the VVM, TP2 implements the recording and understanding of traffic occurrences. The focus here is on the critical ones. The intention of the term "critical" is to express that safety or other objectives of everyday traffic may be affected although these have to be met or maintained all the time. TP3, which follows TP2, takes up these insights and develops ways to achieve the desired behaviour of the autonomous vehicle, safety objectives and a proposal for a technically oriented implementation. TP4 and TP7 follow for the methodical and technical realization as well as for the verification and test aspects.

It becomes clear that the task of the TPs is characterized by the activity of recording, judging and documenting. Evaluation criteria (what is "critical", what is a "goal") must be comprehensible and transparent for all those who process or evaluate relevant information - TPs among themselves as well as the public. A uniform technical language for communication and documentation appears to be mandatory. As a methodology project, it also makes sense for VVM to develop the necessary technical language systematically and according to comprehensible criteria.

1.2 Objective of a term methodology

The aim of the term methodology is to provide systematic and comprehensible methodological guidance for the identification of terms with the purpose of establishing a register of for a technical language, which supports the objectives presented here. In addition, some thoughts shall be presented on how the assessment of a given term register can be systematized in relation to these goals.

1.2.1 Objectives of communication

Communication with the public and among specialist groups requires common understanding. A technical language that is supposed to support the following goals will have to meet these requirements:

Version 1.1

7

1. Descriptiveness of the methodological basis of the project and approach of the VVM project. The basis for a successful work is the presentation and the common understanding of problems, cause-effect relationships as well as the solution ideas.

2. Comparability of terms from different working groups and perspectives. Each TP deals with different questions. These could be of technical, legal or social nature. The question of "causation", for example, may have different answers from a physical point of view than from a legal point of view. Therefore, it must always be transparent which meaning is behind a term and related to which question this term was constituted.

3. Delimitation or clarification of the different contexts of identical terms. Today's complexity and diversity of natural science and technology induces overlapping meanings. A delimitation is therefore often of great benefit.

4. Networkability and hierarchization of terms. Language is also used to put terms into relation: to make statements about something or to evaluate something. Our thinking in today's natural sciences is strongly influenced by model thinking and thus by categorical thinking. The conceptual world of terms to be developed must reflect both.

5. Promoting the development of a formal ontology. In the age of digitization, it is of course a desire to be able to look up desired concepts electronically. It will also be useful to pave the way for automatic processing by machine learning algorithms. Ontologies are a proven and applied means here.

1.2.2 Objectives of methodology

1.2.2.1 Example scenario

In order to be able to start the different activities of the VVM project in parallel, an example scenario was agreed during the kick-off event. The intention of this scenario is to illustrate typical questions and tasks to be expected in the context of VVM. As an example, it should also evoke the experiences many road users have probably lived through and for which there are also extensive collections from accident research.

It should be emphazised that this example scenario is not intended for defining what a "scenario" is. It is intended as an illustration and is constructed in this way. Stars or the warning triangle indicates accident possibilities known from experience.

Version 1.1

8

Figure 1: Example scenario

A technical language will be measured if it provides good support for the communication and documentation of such scenarios as well as for the intended methodological elements such as objects of investigation, parameters and questions, etc. How this can be checked is the subject of chapter 3.

1.2.2.2 Objective of methodology.

For the creation of a technical language, it is helpful to shed light on the function of a language in the construction of social reality. The following figure 2 illustrates a simple model.

Figure 2: Circle of social reality

Society law

Phenomenons facts

Compare

Norms, Expectations

Denominate Describe

Static Proces

Measure

Version 1.1

9

Let the consideration start with the social reality at a given time. Valid laws, expectations, intentions and the experiences of the people living in this society determine the subjectively specific perception of occurrences. The word "phenomena" should indicate this subjective quality.

Comparison of such phenomena with existing norms and expectations may lead to changes when undesirable phenomena are perceived at the social level. Something that many members of society recognize as a phenomenon becomes a matter of fact in itself. As an "intersubjective phenomenon", this can serve as a basis for this comparison and later written down in new laws and rules. Laws, products, expectations that reconstitute the social reality of the future thus take these facts as their means for realizing social or political goals.

VVM as a method project is required to consider this social reality and its facts, because the automaton shall move in this reality and its behaviour will also be judged according to social perception and the legal situation.

The right-hand pitch circle in Figure 2 shows a path that generally leads to new products. The basis for the design is the understanding of the problem: denominating and categorizing phenomena, describing their content according to static and dynamic aspects. On this basis, the new product to be developed can be defined.

However, every new product has to be assessed if it can be brought into the cycle according to applicable standards and requirements or expectations. This assessment will be done both before and after the market launch. The red arrows indicate this. In today's social reality, metrics and figures are the basis for comparison with standards and expectations and thus form the basis of evaluations. Accordingly, provide numbers to the product and its properties for measurability is required.

This also poses a special challenge for technical terminology or the proof of its derivation. The technical complexity and novelty of the automatic machine as a product class makes the continuous evaluation over the entire life cycle of the product advisable. The technical language must also remain clear and comprehensible over this period.

For detailed description about construction of social reality please refer to [4].

1.2.2.3 Basic requirements

From the previous section, the first basic requirements for term documentation can be derived. Since technical language plays a role in communicating social reality, but also in shaping it, the following functions can be designated according to the above model, functions the terms of a technical language have to support.

1. Denominate

2. Descripe

3. Measure

4. Compare

5. Judge

Of course, other functions are also conceivable. However, according to the derivation outlined here, they are understand as category to systematize the multitude of terms to be expected.

Version 1.1

10

1.3 Credits

This document has been created in the course of the work in TP3. Started as a PowerPoint presentation, the discussion contributions of participants of TP1, TP2 have given valuable impulses.

The author would like to thank especially his colleagues Thomas Göppel and Stefan Specht as well as Roland Galbas. Their willing examination and discussion of the topic provided important ideas discussed in chapter 1.2.2.2

Version 1.1

11

2. Elementes of the term methodolgy

2.1 Intentionality

2.1.1 Motivation

The consideration of the task from a methodological point of view described in section 1.2.2.2 has revealed functions that a technical language may have in the constitution of social reality and for the construction of new products. Function induces intentionality: an author could use these functions to achieve a desired goal or to pursue an intention. This is what the teaching of rhetoric is about, the purposeful formulation of language.

Therefore, language is related with intentionality. According to the works of the philosopher Edmund Husserl [1], this intentionality is not optional, but always present. It shapes the perception, as well as the formation of expressions used to communicate meaning. To put it more simply, intentionality forms communication per se.

For all further consideration, the following assumption seems to make sense and is committed:

Assumption: communication has at least the intention to transport meaning.

A sender expresses something in a language with the aim that the receiver of the expression may grasp this meaning from the expression - the words. This can only succeed if the chosen words are rooted in common or at least comparable experiences for both sender and receiver.

Example: A data analyst has a diagram on his screen with many closely spaced data points. He speaks of a data cloud. Someone who has experience with clouds will understand that the data analyst means an extended collection of many particles with fuzzy boundaries. The experience with clouds leads to the background that is necessary to understand the meaning of the word "data cloud".

A term thus refers to a sense or what the sender whant to say. On the other hand, it also refers to a view that is essential for grasping the meaning. Refering to all these explanations it can be stated that intention is an essential quality of a term.

Remarks:

Sense and meaning are not congruent concepts. For the purposes of this document, however, this difference has no negative or misleading effect, so that "meaning" and "significance" will be used in the following in identical manner.

Of course, also non-verbal communication exists. This text will deal specifically with verbal communication, non-verbal communication will be discussed in a separate paper.

2.1.2 Intention as quality of terms

2.1.2.1 Transport of meaning

If the intention of a term is to transfer meaning the question arises how this transfer can be realized. Husserl [1] makes extensive studies on this. According to him, the first part of

Version 1.1

12

communication is the expression: Heard or read words are at first an expression, formed in sounds or signs. This expression must now get meaning, the sounds or signs must be given a meaning. This is the second part of communication.

Two different associations are possible: One is that the sender of the expression has chosen his words based on his experience and sensations. The words he has chosen mean something to him, and because this is so, he chooses these words to fulfill his intention to be understood. Husserl [1] calls this intention of meaning (“Bedeutungsintention”).

On the other hand, however, the recipient can only perceive the expression as such, namely the signs or sounds or images. As the recipient, he himself must again associate meaning with the expression, this on the background of his experiences, experiences, etc. Husserl [1] calls this process the act of fulfilling meaning (“Bedeutungserfüllung”).

An example: The sender speaks of "big as an elephant". By associating the received expression - e.g. the word "elephant" - with his last visit to the zoo when he was close to an elephant, the receiver can understand what the sender wanted to say. The elephant and thus certain characteristics of the elephant are vivid to him.

A view develops from all the experiences one has had. The more immediate the experience, the more powerful the view. Facing an elephant is something different than watching a video documentary about this animal. If you want to use the word elephant to refer to the meaning of size, a photo of man and elephant may be sufficient. The fact that an elephant can be dangerous is probably different for someone who has been on safari than for a one just read a book.

2.1.2.2 Functional Intention

If language has a function in the cycle of social reality, the question arises how this function becomes an intention. In other words, how does an author choose a term to use such a function intentionally?

First of all, it can be observed that, in addition to the direct representative function of a term for an experienced thing, the experience of a situation and the problems associated with it be a source of view, too (for a deeper consideration, please refer to the work of H. Blumberg [5]). Anyone who has experienced a flat tyre on a remote piece of road knows the problem and the value of spare tyres and good tools - or a mobile phone.

Understanding the problem shall be the intention of any technical work. Likewise, in the cycle mentioned above, it is important for the adequacy of a new product to grasp and communicate unwanted phenomena and, as a consequence, facts, grievances, etc. Only then, a new product can improve this social reality (or its perception of it). Naming, describing, and comparing are necessary functions for this.

Consequently, to draw and communicate a problem of social reality, the functions of describing, naming and comparing are essential.

As far as standards are concerned, limit values or ranges of values are an important part of the requirements on a technical product or a technical. Minimum braking force or maximum design speed are typical examples. The purpose is to prescribe certain product characteristics by specifying parameters and numerical ranges for these parameters. If one wants to judge whether a product complies with a standard, these parameters have to be described and

Version 1.1

13

dimensioned. To put it more generally: if the intention is to make the product assessable against a standard, the using the functions measure and judge is necessary.

This should illustrate the functional intentionality - the connection between the function of a term and the intention of the transmitter.

For an illustration, the example scenario shown in Figure 1 is used. The following table indicates

useful questions as a consequence of the communicative objectives according to section 1.2.1,

intention of meaning of what is being asked for,

the functional intention related to the transport of the answer

the elements of the facts

in relationship with each other.

After what has been said so far, it must be named what a "toddler" or a "middle class car" is, but this must be done with terms that are clear to the recipient and do not create false associations. The term "infant", for example, has a wide range of interpretations by different people. The facts that are to be transported (= the intention of meaning) and the view intended by the sender are in a fixed relationship. In the next section this aspect will be taken up again.

Table 1: Example: Functional Intention

Problem Intention of meaning Functional Intention

Elements

What is there?

1 mid-size car 1 and SUV car 2

1 adult, 1 infant

street crossing with traffic light right

Denominating, categorizing

Objcets, subjects,

What happens

t1: Clearance pedestrian

t2: Clearance car driver

t3: Suddenly infant start walking

t4: Car 1 starting, close turn right

t5: Perception of child by car driver

t6. Full break of car 1

t7: Collision car 2 with car 1

Describing Sequences and events

Which values are relvant?

Example of norm: traffic law

Distance between car 1 and car 2,

Friction value at crossing area,

v(car1), velocity over ground

v(car2), velocity over ground

Regulation: max. 30km/h permitted

Measuring Parameters, ranges of values

Version 1.1

14

Problem Intention of meaning Functional Intention

Elements

How can I compare?

Accident report of similar crossings Comparing Norms, statistics, accident reports

Could car 1 avoid the accident?

Child was visible for car 1

Pedestrian traffic light was visible

Car 1 could know the behavior of a child in such situation

Car 2 has not met the required safety distance

Judging Laws, metrics

A word of warning: the example given here seems trivial, in our everyday life we use this functional intention without thinking about it. In specific domains, however, artificial words often arise whose intended meaning is not immediately obvious.

In order to disclose both the domain and the functional intention to third parties and to support the communicative goals according to section 1.2.1Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden., it is part of the conceptual methodology discussed here to unwrap this functional intention.

2.2 Relations

Intentionality also means to relate things. Relationships to experience and view have been described earlier. By establishing a relation to what has been experienced or to previous knowledge, the recipient acquires an understanding of the term. Metaphors or pictorial comparisons, which we often like to use to make ourselves understood, ultimately establish the relationship to other concepts in the hope that the recipient has a view of them.

The discussion of the functional intention in section 2.1.2.2 showed that it is necessary to make statements about subjects and objects. Terms are related to these very elements - and thus have a connection to other terms, too.

Thus, if one wants to disclose the framework of meaning and the intentionality of a term, one will have to disclose the aspects shown in Figure 3.

Version 1.1

15

Figure 3: Quality of terms

This picture should be read as follows: a term is related to an intention of meaning. The transport of this meaning and its fulfillment happens with the help of functional intentions and relationships to views. The objects and subjects and other concepts to which the term refers, in turn, feed these views.

Thus, the meaning of the columns in Table 1 can be expanded further: the column "Intention of meaning" shows the facts to be transported. In addition to the terms related to this intention of meaning, the column "Elements" contains terms that are intended to support the view (especially in the case of the functional intention "naming").

Because of the ambiguity of our languages, it is helpful to relate terms to generic terms or categories and to describe the delimitation to other terms. This is necessary for the communicative goals according to section 1.2.1Fehler! Verweisquelle konnte nicht gefunden werden., too. Especially the delimitation is helpful in technical languages of different domains, which often use the same wording.

Term

What will I do with it?

(Intention of meaning)

What is the related object

(Object relation)

How is involved (Subject relation)

Describe (explain,

enummerate)

Denominate (Define,

categrize)

Judge (rating)

by

Other therms, generic terms

Delimitation to

Measure (make

measureable)

Compare (Analogons, Metaphers)

Version 1.1

16

3. Check

3.1 Motivation

The requirements and conditions for the identification of terms going into a term register to form a technical language are now described. It remains to look at how to assess the quality of the selected terms.

3.2 Checklist

The basic benchmark is the preservation of intentions while fulfilling communicative and functional goals. For example, if a term is to describe a method for the VVM project, and this comprises of using a measure, the term should also be suitable for dimensioning, i.e. it has to correspond to the functional intentionality of "measure".

Example: A method for criticality of a manoeuvre is the probability of a collision. This probability is expressed with a measure that describes the time until collision, assuming the vehicle in question does not change its parameters. The term "time-to-collision" is such a measure and, as a term, it fulfils the function "measure". On the other hand, the term "jostling" would represent an assessment, which is not helpful for the description of the method "probability of collision".

This results in the following evaluation criteria for terms:

Table 2: Checklist Quality of terms

Objective of communication

Check

Description of problem, method or solution of VVM

(refer to 3.3 )

Does the term support the functional intention required to meet the objective?

Is the explanation or definition of the term correspond to the given functional intention and the intention of meaning?

Comparision of terms Are the functional intentions equal?

Are subject and object relations equal?

Delimination of context

If the term has several functional intentions: are they identified?

Are the subject relations of the term appropriate to the context? What about the addressees?

If the term is used in several contexts: are the delimitations identified?

Networkability Can the term be used to describe or define another term?

If the negation of the term results in another term (in its intention or in its meaning)

Version 1.1

17

3.3 Formalization of problem, method, solution, causal chain

The checklist in the previous section includes checking whether a term supports functional and semantic intention. In general, this assessment can be a difficult task. With the aim of making this assessment more comprehensible and repeatable, an abstraction of elements of scenarios is proposed here. The claim is that the adequacy of the functional and semantic intention of a term can be systematically assessed in relation to these elements.

These abstraction is done with respect to the following ideas and assumptions:

Perception by persons (subjects), their experience and expectations essentially determine their actions in traffic.

Information is the basis of every expectation and action. Therefore the following observations are based on an information theory perspective. The model of the world that a subject may build up is subsumed under expectation in this model.

Simultaneousness of perception or sequences of perception determine the recording of the reality of road users.

Technical equipment or all non-subjective recording is understood in the sense of measurement.

Whether something is given or not is therefore decided by the question whether it can be measured or perceived as a thing. In consequence, the method described here follows a phenomenological perspective, not an ontological one. The question is thus, is something perceived, instead of is something being (colloquially "is something there"). In this picture, the information the environment provides (notation: ΩW) determine this environment.

The following table document this:

Table 3: Elements of scenarios

Result Action Occurance Information Expectation A P W E Element Actor α αA αE Environment Ω PΩ ΩW

Signal π Pπ πW

Event ξ Pξ

The columns designate things that enter the occurrence or change as the result of actions etc. In detail these are:

(A) Action: something that is carried out by an acting subject. A movement of a car itself (by law of physics) is not an action (in relation to the autonomous car, see below).

Version 1.1

18

(P) Process: Occurrence: The occurrence is embedded in the environment, and it contains signals and events. If an event cannot be separated by event or signal, this is represented by unspecific totality PΩ (set of all occurrences in environment)

(I) Information: Humans need information from which they can build up a knowledge of the world and expectations. Based on this information, humans learn causalities (what happens when I drop a stone) and how to assess future developments. Signals transport information.

(E) Expectation: All experience of a subject, the information it collects, leads to a view or modell of the world and thus to expectations. Husserl [1] showed that personal goals and needs are also constitutive for expectation. Which action the actor chooses is determined by its expectation.

The rows contain elements of the situation or scenario S. They are given things, that is, things that constitute the scenario. In this model, a scenario therefore contains

Actors: persons, children, animals, i.e. road users and living beings, subjects who are capable of independent (but not necessarily responsible) action. Actions emanate from the actors (relation α has A, short αA)

Environment: this contains everything inanimate, roads, traffic signs, buildings, cars. An environment contains information (Ω has W, short ΩW). The environment is also considered as a totality.

Signals: these can be traffic signs or traffic lights, or a cyclist's outstretched hand or a flasher. Signals are only signals if a subject perceives them otherwise they are only events. In any case, they have meaning for the perceiver (Event P has signal π, in short Pπ).

Events: this is everything in a traffic that happens. Events can be perceived. If they have meaning to the receiver they are signals. However, they must at least be measurable by a technical device (incident P has signal ξ, in short Pξ).

Note: when we speak of acting and perceiving, these are human categories. The human being as acting subject is in the foreground. However, these aspects can and have to be transferred to an automaton. Perception becomes measurement and expectation becomes prediction. This text cannot describe these things in more detail, will be the subject of a separate paper. For the purpose of this text, it is sufficient to restrict ourselves to the human perspective.

Examples: All elements have a principal temporal sequence. Table 4 shows some interpretations of temporal sequences on the background of the model proposed here.

Table 4: Informational causal chain

t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7 t8 t9 t10

k1 Pξ πW Pπ αE αA ΩW

k2 Pξ πW Pπ αE αA ΩW

k3 Pξ

k4

Version 1.1

19

k5 Pπ αE αA ΩW

k6

k1 would read as follows: An event in the environment transports information. If this is perceived, it becomes a signal for the perceiver, which influences his expectations. This is followed by an action that affects the environment (the environment thus has new information ΩW). As a short notation such chains of effects are called f(S,S'). Example: an event yellow light becomes a signal for a trained car driver (who knows traffic lights) the traffic light signals it will be red soon. Consequently, the expectation of the driver will be traffic light becomes red and I have to stop then.

The original task of checking a term for its suitability can now be formulated more precisely:

Table 5: Formale Begriffsbewertung

Objective of communication

Check

Description of problem, method or solution of VVM

(refer to 3.3 )

Does the term support the intention of meaning for…

A, P, W, E or. Ω, α, ξ, π, respectively

Does the term support the functional intention

describe f(S,S‘)

measure for A, P, W, E

compare for A, P, W, E

denominate for Ω, α, ξ, π

judge for A, P, W, E or. Ω, α, ξ, π und f(S,S‘), respectively

Note: of course the method of abstraction chosen here is only one possibility. Other elements and models for scenarios and their chains of effects may be helpful. But then, in the same way as illustrated in Table 5, the effectiveness for the description of the problem, method, chains of effects etc. can be made more precise in this way and thus more comprehensible and repeatable.

Version 1.1

20

4. Summary

In this document, requirements were formulated for a technical language that allows social, legal and even technical worlds to be conceptualized and formulated. A technical language or its terms should reveal its intentionality and its references to subjects and objects in order to support the following goals:

Transmission of a meaning: the communication about participants, processes etc. of a traffic event.

Support the clarity and thus the understanding of what the sender wants to communicate.

Disclosure of the intention of the sender - what are its references and perspectives

In order to achieve this a term register shall have the following aspects:

Intention of meaning (“Bedeutungsintention”): which facts shall be transported?

Functional intention: which function in context of the construction of social reality is intended by the selection of terms?

For the assessment of the quality of terms with regard to their suitability for conveying meaning, a checklist or a procedure for the specification of a checklist by abstraction was presented.

This work is of course not finished yet. Experiences from the application of this term methodology will be incorporated in later versions, and the method of assessing the quality of terms will not be at the end of its development either. Therefore, feedback from practical experience is very welcome. In particular, much of the further work will consist of carrying out an assessment of terms on the basis of the proposed formalism.

.

Version 1.1

21

5. Example of register structure

The table below shows a structure of a table based term register as in implementation of the aspects explained in this document.

Table 6: Example register structure

Term Intention For what is the term used (Intention explained) Definition Related objects Related subjects Adressed subjects Relation to other

terms Delimitation Source

<identifier> <denomination> <describe> <compare> or <judge>

<why is this term needed, why is it introduced>

<textual definition, including reference to other terms>

<objects> for example traffic lights, track, cars, ...

<humans> <animals> <dirvers> <pedestriancs> etc

<layer> <engineers> <public> <decider> <safety responsible>

<terms which are defined with this term, explain other terms or defining this term here>

<what is it NOT> TP3

Version 1.1

22

6. Literature

1. Edmund Husserl: „Logische Untersuchungen“, Felix Meiner Verlag GmbH, Hamburg, 2009

2. Ludwig Wittgenstein: Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

3. Catrin Misselhorn: „Grundfragen der Maschinenethik“, Philip Reclam jun. GmbH & Co KG, Ditzingen, 2. Auflage 2018

4. Peter L. Berger, Thomas Luckmann: „Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit“, Fischer Taschenbuchverlag GmbH, 24.-25. Tausend, Frankfurt am Main 1989

5. Hans Blumenberg: „Theorie der Unbegrifflichkeit“, Suhrkamp Verlag AG, Berlin, 3. Auflage 2007

End of document