Showing changes from revision #10 to #11:
Added | Removed | Changed
At the foundation there is always a conflict. Abstraction is a way of solving it, yet one that does not eliminate it and creates new problems afterwards.
For example, the credit card was a response to the inconvenience and insecurity of cash. However, it did not abolish cash entirely, but proved itself to be easily counterfeited. And today it is being replaced by mobile payments.
Phygitality aims to bridge the divide between the digital and physical sides of our lives. Therefore, its emergence is not arbitrary. Its fact does not result from creativity for the sake of creativity, unfolding only in the own sphere. Nothing in it is self-contained.
Phygitality reflects the objective technical development. The evolution of electronic-computing machines was hitherto their concretisation. At each next stage they integrated functions previously external to them. Human-computer interaction became more and more interactive.
With the advent of the graphical interface, our every action caused an instant machine reaction, and immediately continued as reactions to reactions, no matter whose, over and over again. The Internet, by connecting many people together, made such communication social. Later, social networks scaled it almost to the entire population.
But this process was limited by the hardware. The experience of this interaction remained circumscribed to the screen, keyboard and mouse. An important part of our sensible faculties was excluded from this. And it demanded its resolution.
Phygitality addresses this enquiry. Digital objects manipulated as physical and physical objects as digital is its goal.
In computer science, abstraction is concrete. It combines structure and operation. The code of a programme is the sequence of the action it performs. The previous development here rendered this latter visible (on the screen) and modifiable (with keyboard and mouse), but not tangible.
Thus, to take everything that happens in the computer outside of it, or to actualise virtual entities, there needs to be the next abstraction, qualitatively different from the preceding ones - the phygital one.
Phygital Abstraction Conceptual Framework (PACF) is a formal framework that is used to characterize the meaning of phygital object and the entailment relations among phygital environment containing them, they give a detailed account on how phygital abstractions provide some of the conceptual principles that a grounding of phygital concepts.
The PACF itself is just a formal tool. To develop a
<phygital> for <borderless>, a framework must do three things: (i) explain what exactly the proposed internal structure of phygital object represent, (ii) explain the rules for assigning phygital object values to a person’s</borderless></phygital>The most widely applications of PACF target <> <> rules governing context-dependent application, which pick out different things depending on the context in which the phygital object is used, such applications of PACF are intended to systematize and explain uncontroversial aspects of concept “phygital”.
We defines an Phygital Abstraction as a condensed redescription of phygital and perceptual experience for the purpose of mapping spatial-temporal structures onto conceptual structure represented as a recurring, dynamic pattern of our perceptual interactions that gives coherence and structure to our experience.
In this setting we considers implementation of phygital abstraction as the family structures of object relations in constructed phygital enveronment.
We present a three level hierarchy of phygital abstracion: (1) ‘Spatial primitives’: basic spatial building blocks, (2) ‘Phygital Events’: simple spatial events using the primitives, and (3) ‘conceptual integrations’: phygital abstraction combinded with non-spatial elements such as force or emotions.
The notion of ‘phygital abstraction’ is central to conceptual <> and is increasingly being used in <> approaches and that phygital abstraction can serve as core building blocks for phygital objects in phygital environment. With this in mind, the study investigated different aspects of phygital abstractions in object conceptualisation for the purpose of identifying general patterns in phygital environment and their relationships.
CONTAINMENT: capturing the notion that an object can be within a border (two-dimensional), or inside a container (three-dimensional), It denotes the relationship between an inside and an outside and the border in between. From a dynamic aspect, it also contains image-schematic components such as IN and OUT. The temporal aspect of CONTAINMENT includes the notions of ‘entering’ and ‘exiting’.
CONTACT: Phygital (or sometimes abstract) contact between two phygital objects.
LINK: An enforced connection between objects or physical/digital parts, where transitivity ensures that the linked object reacts to the stimuli of the other object.
SUPPORT: Denotes a relationship between two objects in which one object offers phygital (or abstract) support to the other.
SOURCE_PATH_TARGET: Concerns movement from a source to a target. It contains spatial primitives such as a path and a trajectory.
CYCLE: The returning pattern, such as the daily cycle.
This section propose he idea that combinations of phygital abstractions represent the underlying conceptualisations of complex phygital environment and simple events. Likewise, phygital notion relied on the idea that concepts could be partly defined by their involved object and abstractions. In this section, these ideas are further investigated empirically by presenting an experimental study that define the phygital abstrction behind a series of common objects in phygital environment.
Future work will have to confirm the findings in more refined set-ups, extend the approach to dynamic presentations of phygital abstraction, and address the multimodality of phygital objects beyond the basic
<spatiotemporal> interpretation.</spatiotemporal>