Types

It was the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) that first came up with the idea of classifying plants and animals by type, essentially creating typology.

Typology is the study of types and their traits, or the systematic classification of the types of something according to their common characteristics.  (Important note; this is different than mereology which relates to parts and wholes which is a completely separate topic, "has-a" or "has-part" or "part-of" or "composition".)

When it comes to describing type relations, there are many terms used to describe what amounts to the same or similar things.  XBRL uses the terms "general-special" relations.  UML uses the terms "generalization-specialization".  SKOS uses "broader-narrower".  The ESEF/ESMA created "wider-narrower". The SEC tends to use the terms "wider-narrower".  Others use "is-a".  Others use "type-subtype".  Others use "class-subclass-superclass".  RDF uses "type".  RDFS uses "subclassOf". OWL uses "class" to define an RDF "type".

Confusing?

Yes, confusing terminology but the idea is important capability.  If you understand the power of classification then you will understand why the effort is important.  Type information can be used to explain, verify, and describe.  For example, what are the different types of current assets for US GAAP?

Having a formal mechanism for representing types of things in a machine-readable form that can also be converted into a format that is readable by humans will provided unprecedented clarity. People will come up with clever and useful approaches to represent complex knowledge, approaches that were impossible without computers, the internet, formal logic, mathematics, and other tools.  The ideas of informatics and cybernetics will be applied. The quality control techniques of Lean Six Sigma will be incorporated.

Current Assets:

Of course, other financial reporting types would have subtypes like: Noncurrent Assets, Current Liabilities, Noncurrent Liabilities, Equity Attributable to Controlling Interest, Equity Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests, Revenues, Costs of Revenues, Operating Expenses, Nonoperating Expenses, Cash Flows from Operating Activities, Cash Flows from Investing Activities, Cash Flows from Financing Activities; to name a few.  

Different reporting schemes have different sets of types and those types have different associations.  Here is a prototype of types for IFRS.  Here is a similar prototype of types for US GAAP.  What should the relationship between IFRS and US GAAP types be?

Different reporting economic entities use different groupings and relations between types and subtypes.  Is all this random and with no discernible patterns? Of course not. There are absolutely patterns.  Here are prototypes of the fundamental types and organizations of those types by reporting economic entities for US GAAP and IFRS.

I mentioned that there is a difference between "types" and "parts".  Is current assets a type of asset or a part of assets?  I can make an argument for either case.  Should both types and parts be documented? It is clearer when you look at something like gross profit.  Are revenues and costs of revenues types or parts?  It seems pretty obvious to me that revenues and costs of revenues are parts of gross profit.  Then you have the the traits themselves which also need to be documented.

Additional Information:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Getting Started with Auditchain Luca (now called Luca Suite)

Image
(Note that a newer, production version as opposed to only the development version , of Luca Suite is available) The Innovator's Dilemma points out that disruptive innovations often look like toys that are doing everything wrong. Auditchain Luca , which is part of the Auditchain Suite , is a unique approach to creating a knowledge graph .  To experience using Auditchain Luca, have a look at the Getting Started with Auditchain Luca instructions. Be sure to grab the Excel and JSON import files used for this getting started exercise.   This getting started exercise uses one of several different approaches to getting information into a tool for constructing and viewing professional quality knowledge graphs .  Additional getting started guides will be made available over time. Auditchain Luca might not make sense to you if you don't understand the paradigm shift that is occurring and if you have not shifted your mental map. For the next step in your journey, consider t...
Read more

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

Professional System for Creating Financial Reports Leveraging Knowledge Graphs

Image
The document Professional System for Creating Financial Reports Leveraging Knowledge Graphs explains a new approach, a new paradigm, for creating financial reports.  The document provides a practical, nontechnical description of a professional system for creating provably high-quality financial reports where the report creator is using financial reporting schemes (such as US GAAP and IFRS) where report creator is permitted to modify the report model which leverages global standard knowledge graphs represented using XBRL. This new approach is useful, it is highly novel, and the details were highly complicated to pull together.  This is certainly not an incremental innovation.  It is definitely a disruptive innovation and it could very well be a foundational innovation. You can decide which for yourself. Foundational technologies have two dimensions that need to be considered: novelty and complexity. The more novel the technology is, the more effort needed to ensure users ...
Read more