Using Difference Between CAD/CAM and BIM to Understand How to Create Financial Reporting Expert Systems

The expert systems that I have helped to create thus far have been more similar to CAD/CAM type systems than BIM system.  But, the future of financial reporting will be more like BIM than CAD/CAM.

Now, most people will not understand the above statement.  I don't really expect them to.  That statement is not for you.  That statement is for those trying to understand and figure out how to build those tools.  But if you want to understand, you can.  You just need to do the work.

CAD/CAM is older technology, developed in the 1960s but took off in the 1980s and 1990s. See this History - and Future - of CAD/CAM Technology.  See this information about CAD/CAM on Wikipedia.

BIM, or Building Information Modeling, was developed beginning in about 1992.  See this History of BIM. Also see this information about BIM on Wikipedia.

This video, CAD vs BIM - The Fundamental Difference, explains the fundamental difference between CAD/CAM and BIM.  As I understand it, CAD/CAM is more about working with lines and perspectives whereas BIM is about working with objects of a building and information about a building.

This video, BIM is the Future of Engineering, explains that...well...BIM is the future of engineering.  This video, What is BIM, Understanding Building Information Modeling, helps you get a sense of what BIM is and why it is useful. For a little more detail see this video, Introduction to BIM.

Now, you probably have a question: "What the heck does all this have to do with financial reporting?" The answer is...a lot.  Those implementing digital financial reporting can use the difference between CAD/CAM and BIM to understand what they might want to build and what such coordinated digital systems are an improvement over existing approaches to financial accounting, reporting, auditing, and analysis.

XBRL is a technical syntax, it is not a system. Using the current evolution of software for representing financial information using XBRL, you work with very low level objects.  In the next evolution of such software you will use higher level objects in the ways the objects were intended to be used.  Current software tends to be a stand alone silo; future software will be coordinated systems.  Current evolution software has rather low quality; the next evolution of software will have an exponential increase in quality.  The current evolution of software is not really model based; the next evolution of financial reporting software will  be model based.

The future will be more of a coordinated system that the currently uncoordinated silos of effort.  How will we get there? Read The Great Transmutation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS)

Image
Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS) is an interesting idea that combines the relational paradigm and the knowledge graph paradigm.  This documentation, Why RKGS , explains the idea. This gets even more interesting with the notion of "relational AI".  RelationalAI is described as follows by the company of the same name, Relational.ai : “RelationalAI is a cloud-based relational knowledge graph management system, with state of the art probabilistic processing and declarative reasoning at scale to make developing Data Applications a superpower for your business.” This notion of knowledge graphs represented in relational databases fits into my belief that knowledge graphs have two aspects: the expression SYNTAX and the logic of what is expressed or SEMANTICS. While the LOGIC of a knowledge graph is always the same regardless of technical syntax used to express that logic; there are many, many different technical syntaxes that can be used to represent a knowledge graph. There
Read more

Graph Hairball

Image
Knowledge graph system logic, the "things" and "relations between things" that  graph theory calls "vertices" (a.k.a. nodes, points, entities, things) and "edges" (a.k.a.  links, lines, relations, associations), looks like a big graph hairball as some people call it an example of which you can see here: Why?  This common view of a graph is because there has to be some "general view" of the information provided by the graph.  This is just like a general view of the information within a relational database is a table ; a set of ROWS and COLUMNS for exactly one table at a time. So what is interesting is that with a graph database the default view is everything in the graph of knowledge.  Whereas the default view of everything in a relational database is one table at a time. Further, it does not really matter whether the information that populates your knowledge graph comes from, say, CSV files, Excel, JSON, XBRL, RDF, PROLOG or whateve
Read more

PLATINUM Business Use Cases, Test Cases, Conformance Suite

Image
A brick wall is made of exactly two things: bricks, mortar. But a brick wall created by a master craftsman, or mason, and a brick wall created by a “weekend warrior” with no knowledge of masonry will be very different. Master craftsmen are created and that process takes time and effort. This blog post is a first prototype that brings several things together into one useful resource for business professionals.  It pulls together the human readable information of the Showcase of Reports   and the machine readable information of the Conformance Suite of XBRL-based Financial Reports Prepared using the Seattle Method .  Then, I want to incorporate the information found in these PLATINUM XBRL-based Financial Report Examples . The three resources can be useful and used independently; but they are even more useful when used together.  Business professionals really could not care a less about the technical details of getting some result that they want.  But technical professionals need to under
Read more