I am trying to write a query
Hospitals and hasNameWithWords value "center"^^string
This query returns me the instances that has the hospitals that has "center" in its name in Protege 4.2 with FACT++ reasoner as well as Hermit reasoner
but when i input the same query in the OWL-API's DL Query Example thats available in the website
http://sourceforge.net/p/owlapi/code/ci/aef6981535f07a2d0d44c394b9f4d5415f36025a/tree/contract/src/test/java/org/coode/owlapi/examples/DLQueryExample.java
I don't get any result.
But it gives me result when i write simple queries such as
Hospitals
Is it because the reasoner in the code is not able to make the inference?
What other reasoner would be better?
The class you use as example (DLQueryExample.java) relies on an OWL-API built-in structural reasoner (OWLReasonerFactory reasonerFactory = new StructuralReasonerFactory();).
This type of reasoner is fairly simple and is not suited for complex queries as yours. It can however provide answers on the class hierarchy: This is why you get some results with the straightforward query Hospitals.
What you need to do is to set your code to either use Hermit or FACT++. I give the example with Hermit:
Download HermiT jar file and add it to the class path of your project.
In your class, replace the line OWLReasonerFactory reasonerFactory = new StructuralReasonerFactory(); by: OWLReasonerFactory reasonerFactory = new Reasoner.ReasonerFactory();. You should have to import org.semanticweb.HermiT.Reasoner in order to make it work.
We just replaced the default reasoner by HermiT. The rest of the code should stay the same and your query should now work.
You could try FaCT++ and Pellet and compare speed, etc...
Related
I have an ontology that contains two classes (course,lesson) the course has a data properties called code of type string
How to get all individuals from specific class with specific data properties value
here is a screenshot
The general pattern is something like this:
SELECT ?individual
WHERE { ?individual a <uri-of-specific-class> ;
<uri-of-property> ?propertyValue .
FILTER(STR(?propertyValue) = "expected value")
}
You will need to adapt this with the details of your specific ontology (the URIs of your class names and properties), but it shows the general approach. I would also suggest that you try out a SPARQL tutorial, there's several good ones online for you to find.
I have an ontology with different type of events.
Therefore I have three classes: A, B, C and a helper class Temp.
I want the reasoner to create a new individual as a subclass of C for every pair of individuals a (rdf:typeOf A) and b (rdf:typeOf B) found. This new Individuals should contain informations about a and b.
In the past I used a jena reasoner with an own rule file to get this result, but now I want to switch over to a standard OWL DL reasoner.
My initial idea is to link a und b such as:
a onto:hasB b
And ad give a the Type Temp with the following restriction for Temp:
hasbB some B
Now I want to create a new individual of type C with a restriction for Temp:
hasC some C
And over this new indivual I can access the informations of a and b.
My Problems are:
How can I get the reasoner to connect a and b?
I don't think the creation of C will work, since its a restriction for Temp, which will never be assigned as a type because of this restriction.
Or am I completly wrong with my approach?
Edit:
To clarify my goal with a better exmple:
I have an ontology with different type of events.
My goal is to connect certain individuals (events) which belong together by forming a new individual (event) describing this relation with the help of a reasoner.
E.g.:
I read an event (individual) which describes an "Alarm" (type) into the ontology.
I read an event (individual) which discribes a "PowerOutage" (type) into the ontology.
These Individuals aren't related at all at this moment.
Now I want a reasoner to create a new event (individual) with the type "PowerManipulation". In fact I want an individual with the type "PowerManipulation" created for every pair (which isn't connected, yet) of individuals with the type "PowerOutage" and "Alarm" found. These new individuals should have references (properties) to the individual which caused their creation (an "Alarm" and a "PowerOutage").
Ontology before the reasoning:
(alarm1 rdf:type "Alarm")
(out1 rdf:type "PowerOutage")
What I want the ontology to look like after the reasoning
(alarm1 rdf:type "Alarm")
(out1 rdf:type "PowerOutage")
(man1 rdf:type "PowerManipulation")
(man1 ont:hasRealtadInd alarm1)
(man1 ont:hasRealtedInd out1)
Priviously I used Jena rules and the Jena reasoner to accomplish this task.
But I want to switch over to a standard OWL DL reasoner.
Is it possible to accomplish this task with basic restrictions?
Or do I need SWRL rules, or SPIN (see Williams answer below)?
You can do this with SPIN constructors quite easily and SPIN inserts.
http://www.w3.org/Submission/2011/SUBM-spin-modeling-20110222/#spin-rules-construct
http://www.w3.org/Submission/2011/SUBM-spin-modeling-20110222/#spin-rules-update
SPIN and OWL can live happily together. Take a look at the groovy library that has extensions for both:
https://github.com/williamgreenly/lescot
Example below:
def model = new GroovyRdfModel()
model.add(""" some turtle data """)
model.add(""" some OWL rules """)
model.add(""" some SPIN rules """)
def inferredModelByOWLReasoning = model.owl()
def inferredModelBySPINRules = model.spin()
For my current project I need to load a dataset and different ontologies and expose everything as linked data using Fuseki with TDB and Pubby. Pubby will take a data set from a single location and create URIs based on that location, therefore if we need multiple different locations (as in the case with 2–3 separate ontologies), that would be easy to do with Pubby by adding another data set.
The concept of dataset seems to also apply to Fuseki.
Essentially I will need to expose three types of URIs:
www.mywebsite.com/project/data
www.mywebsite.com/project/data/structure
www.mywebsite.com/project/ontology
In order to create such URIs with Pubby 0.3.3. you will have to specify lines like these:
conf:dataset [
conf:sparqlEndpoint <sparql_endpoint_url_ONE>;
conf:sparqlDefaultGraph <sparql_default_graph_name_ONE>;
conf:datasetBase <http://mywebsite.com/project/>;
conf:datasetURIPattern "(data)/.*";
(...)
]
Each data set specified in Pubby will take its data from a certain URL (typically a SPARQL endpoint).
For ontologies you will have a dataset that uses the second a datasetURIPattern like this one:
conf:dataset [
conf:sparqlEndpoint <sparql_endpoint_url_TWO>;
conf:sparqlDefaultGraph <sparql_default_graph_name_TWO>;
conf:datasetBase <http://mywebsite.com/project/>;
conf:datasetURIPattern "(ontology)/.*";
(...)
]
As you can see the differences would be at the following: conf:sparqlEndpoint (the SPARQL endpoint), conf:sparqlDefaultGraph (the default Graph), conf:datasetURIPattern (needed for creating the actual URIs with Pubby).
It is not however clear to me how can I have separate URIs for the data sets when using Fuseki. When using Sesame, for example, I just create two different repositories and this trick works like charm when publishing data with Pubby. Not immediately clear with
The examples from the official Fuseki documentation present a single dataset (read-only or not, etc), but none of them seem to present such a scenario. There is no immediate example where there is a clear separation between the TBox and the ABox, even though this is a fundamental principle of Linked Data (see Keeping ABox and TBox Split).
As far as I understand this should be possible, but how? Also is it correct that the TBox and ABox can be reunited under a single SPARQL endpoint later by using (tdb:unionDefaultGraph true ;).
The dataset concept is not unique to Jena Fuseki; it's quite central in SPARQL. A dataset is a collection of named graphs and a default graph. The prefix of a URI has nothing to do with where triples about it are stored (whether in a named graph or in the default graph).
It sounds like you want to keep your ABox triples in one named graph and your TBox triples in another. Then, if the default graph is the union of the named graphs, you'll see the contents of both in the default graph. You can do that in Fuseki.
I have created an ontology using protege. Now I want to write a code to traverse ontology using dotNetRDF. By mean of traverse is displaying all classes, sub-classes etc.
I am using following code but it is giving exception **
The Namespace URI for the given Prefix 'owl' is not known by the
in-scope NamespaceMapper
OntologyGraph g = new OntologyGraph();
FileLoader.Load(g, "humanontordf.owl");
OntologyClass classOfClasses = g.CreateOntologyClass(g.CreateUriNode("owl:Class"));
//This iterates over the things that are a class
foreach (OntologyResource r in classOfClasses.Instances)
{
//Do what you want with the class
Console.WriteLine(r.ToString());
}
This code is base on answer given here (http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/19984/dotnetrdf-list-all-ontology-classes)
Can anyone let me know what am I missing in above code? any good URL for tutorial on dotNetRDF?
The error message refers to the following part of your code:
g.CreateUriNode("owl:Class")
This uses a prefixed name as a shortcut for the full URI which requires the owl prefix to be defined in your graph.
If you are getting this then your RDF file does not include this, you can define this like so:
g.NamespaceMap.AddNamespace("prefix", new Uri("http://some/namespace/"));
I guess an OntologyGraph should really define the OWL namespace automatically, I'll add this in the next release.
In Orchard, how is a module developer able to learn how "joins" work, particularly when joining to core parts and records? One of the better helps I've seen was in Orchard documentation, but none of those examples show how to form relations with existing or core parts. As an example of something I'm looking for, here is a snippet of module service code taken from a working example:
_contentManager
.Query<TaxonomyPart>()
.Join<RoutePartRecord>()
.Where(r => r.Title == name)
.List()
In this case, a custom TaxonomyPart is joining with a core RoutePartRecord. I've investigated the code, and I can't see how that a TaxononmyPart is "joinable" to a RoutePartRecord. Likewise, from working code, here is another snippet driver code which relates a custom TagsPart with a core CommonPartRecord:
List<string> tags = new List<string> { "hello", "there" };
IContentQuery<TagsPart, TagsPartRecord> query = _cms.Query<TagsPart, TagsPartRecord>();
query.Where(tpr => tpr.Tags.Any(t => tags.Contains(t.TagRecord.TagName)));
IEnumerable<TagsPart> parts =
query.Join<CommonPartRecord>()
.Where(cpr => cpr.Id != currentItemId)
.OrderByDescending(cpr => cpr.PublishedUtc)
.Slice(part.MaxItems);
I thought I could learn from either of the prior examples of how to form my own query. I did this:
List<string> tags = new List<string> { "hello", "there" };
IContentQuery<TagsPart, TagsPartRecord> query = _cms.Query<TagsPart, TagsPartRecord>();
query.Where(tpr => tpr.Tags.Any(t => tags.Contains(t.TagRecord.TagName)));
var stuff =
query.Join<ContainerPartRecord>()
.Where(ctrPartRecord => ctrPartRecord.ContentItemRecord.ContentType.Name == "Primary")
.List();
The intent of my code is to limit the content items found to only those of a particular container (or blog). When the code ran, it threw an exception on my join query saying {"could not resolve property: ContentType of: Orchard.Core.Containers.Models.ContainerPartRecord"}. This leads to a variety of questions:
Why in the driver's Display() method of the second example is the CommonPartRecord populated, but not the ContainerPartRecord? In general how would I know what part records are populated, and when?
In the working code snippets, how exactly is the join working since no join key/condition is specified (and no implicit join keys are apparent)? For example, I checked the data migration file and models classes, and found no inherent relation between a TagsPart and a CommonPartRecord. Thus, besides looking at that sample code, how would anyone have known in the first place that such a join was legal or possible?
Is the join I tried with TagsPart and ContainerPartRecord legal in any context? Which?
Is the query syntax of these examples primarily a reflection of Orchard, of NHibernate, or LINQ to NHibernate? If it is primarily a reflection of NHibernate, then which NHibernate book or article is recommended reading so that I can dig deeper into Orchard?
It seems there is a hole in the documentation regarding these kinds of thoughts and questions, which makes it hard to write a module. Whatever answers can be found for this topic, I'd be glad to compile into an article or community Orchard documentation.
The join is only there to enable the where that follows it. It doesn't mean that the part being joined will be actually brought down from the DB. That will happen no matter what with the latest 1.x source, and will happen lazily with 1.3.
You don't need a condition as you can only join parts this way. The join condition is implicit: parts are joined by the item id.
Yes. What is not legal is that the condition in the where is using data that is not available from the joined part records.
Those examples are all Orchard Content Manager queries, so they are fairly constrained, but also fairly easy to build as long as you don't step outside of their boundaries because so much can be assumed and will happen implicitly. If you need more control, you could use the new HQL capabilities that were added in the latest 1.x drops.
As for holes in the documentation, well, but of course. The documentation that we have today is only covering a very small part of the platform. Your best reference today is the source code. Any contribution you could make to this is highly appreciated by us and by the rest of the community. Let me know if you need help with this.