Measuring Knowledge: A Quantitative Approach to Knowledge Theory
International Journal of Data Science and Analysis
Volume 2, Issue 2, December 2016, Pages: 32-36
Received: Oct. 6, 2016; Accepted: Dec. 2, 2016; Published: Dec. 30, 2016
Views 4149      Downloads 162
Fred Y. Ye, School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China; Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Service, Nanjing, China
Article Tools
Follow on us
By transferring the DIKW hierarchy to the concept of chain, namely data – information – knowledge – wisdom, the knowledge measure is set up as the logarithm of information, while the information is the logarithm of data, so that knowledge metrics are naturally introduced and the mechanism of Brookes’ basic equation of information science is revealed. When knowledge is classified as explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge, qualitative SECI model is changed to quantitative triangle functions on explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge, where the former is measured by the logarithm of data and the latter is measured by the negative entropy of language. The author suggests to treat the unit of knowledge as kit, correspondingly, data as bit and information as byte.
Data, Information, Knowledge, Knowledge Metrics, Knowledge Theory
To cite this article
Fred Y. Ye, Measuring Knowledge: A Quantitative Approach to Knowledge Theory, International Journal of Data Science and Analysis. Vol. 2, No. 2, 2016, pp. 32-36. doi: 10.11648/j.ijdsa.20160202.13
Copyright © 2016 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Brookes, B. C. (1980-1981). The Foundations of Information Science. Journal of Information Science, 1980, 2 (3-4), 125-133 (Part I); 1980, 2 (5), 209-221 (Part II); 1980, 2 (6), 269-275 (Part III); 1981, 3 (1), 3-12 (Part IV).
Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (1995). The Triple Helix--University-Industry-Government Relations: A Laboratory for Knowledge-Based Economic Development. EASST Review, 14 (1), 11-19.
Frické, M. (2009). The knowledge pyramid: a critique of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science, 35 (2), 131-142.
Leydesdorff L, Etzkowitz H. (1996). Emergence of a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Science and Public Policy, 23 (3), 279-286.
Leydesdorff L, Etzkowitz H. (1998). The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy, 25 (3), 195-203.
Mattmann, C. A. (2013). A vision for data science. Nature, 493 (7433), 473-475.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba, and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33, 5-34.
Nonaka, I. and von Krogh, G. (2009). Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Conversion: Controversy and Advancement in Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory. Organization Science. 20 (3), 635–652.
Rowley, J. (2007). The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy [J]. Journal of Information Science, 33 (2), 163-180.
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27 (3-4), 379-423, 623-656.
Ye, Y. (1999). An analytical construction on the fundamental theory of information science and technology. Journal of Scientific and Technical Information Society of China, 18 (2), 160-166.
Ye, F. Y. (2011). A Theoretical Approach to the Unification of Informetric Models by Wave-heat Equations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology, 62 (6), 1208-1211.
Ye, Y and Ma, F.-C. (2015). Data science: its emergence and linking with information science. Journal of the China Society for Scientific and Technical Information, 34 (6): 575–580.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186