Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-owl] Do all reasoners pass class properties to the corresponding individuals upon ontology classification?

Nick Drummond nick.drummond at cs.manchester.ac.uk
Tue Oct 14 05:06:14 PDT 2008


Hi,
We've now fully implemented the interfaces to FaCT++ and apparently these
queries are being implemented as we speak.
So, currently you will see a difference because FaCT++ returns nothing.
Hopefully in the next release this will be consistent across the reasoners.

Nick

2008/10/8 Timothy Redmond <tredmond at stanford.edu>

>
> You should post this on the Protege 4 mailing list [1] because Matthew
> and Nick will give you the right answer instantly.  Possibly you could
> include an example to avoid some extra iterations. My recollection is
> that there is some difference between how pellet and FaCT++ interpret
> the owl api interface but I might be confusing this with a different
> issue.
>
> -Timothy
>
> [1] https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/p4-feedback
>
> On Oct 8, 2008, at 8:41 AM, Patrick McCrae wrote:
>
> > Hi, Timothy -
> >
> > From your response I understand that the asserted properties of an
> > individual's superclass should be passed on to the individual via
> > inheritance after completing the classification process.
> >
> > I am, however, obtaining diverging results with the different
> > reasoners FaCT++ and Pellet 1.5 integrated in Protege 4. When using
> > Pellet the superclass properties are indeed inherited by the
> > instance. When using FaCT++, however, only the asserted properties
> > show up in the corresponding view.
> >
> > Is this a bug or a genuine difference in the behaviour of the two
> > reasoners?
> >
> > Thanks for your help again and best regards  -
> >
> > Pat
> >
> > _______________________
> >
> > Patrick McCrae
> >
> > CINACS Graduate Research Group
> > Department of Informatics
> > Hamburg University
> > Vogt-Kölln-Straße 30
> > 22527 Hamburg, Germany
> >
> >
> > Timothy Redmond wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I was now hoping that when I create an instance of the above
> >>> class, that instance would have the very same property. This,
> >>> however, turned out not to be the case. It seems that such class
> >>> properties are not propagated by inheritance.
> >>
> >> How did you conclude this?  I may have misunderstood but this is
> >> something that a reasoner can deduce.
> >>
> >> To make sure that I am understanding, let me give an example.  I
> >> can do this example in Protege 4.  Let's say that I have a class A,
> >> an object property p and an individual, x.  I make a definition
> >>
> >>     A = (p has x).
> >>
> >> (This is not generally a very good definition but that is another
> >> story).  Now I add an individual y in the class A.  I select a
> >> reasoner (pellet, say) and select classify.  In the individuals
> >> tab, I select the individual y and then under Object Property
> >> Assertions, I will see a highlighted item " p x ".  This
> >> highlighted item says that x is a p-value of y.  The fact that it
> >> is highlighted means that this was one of the things that the
> >> reasoner inferred.
> >>
> >> -Timothy
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Oct 1, 2008, at 1:54 PM, Patrick McCrae wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Protege List -
> >>>
> >>> Can anyone please help me with the following modelling question
> >>> today:
> >>>
> >>> In Protege 4 I have created a class which is defined by the property
> >>> has_Lexicalisation value Lex_word.
> >>> This is analogous to
> >>> has_Lexicalisation has Lex_word
> >>> in the Protege 3.x world.
> >>>
> >>> I was now hoping that when I create an instance of the above
> >>> class, that instance would have the very same property. This,
> >>> however, turned out not to be the case. It seems that such class
> >>> properties are not propagated by inheritance.
> >>>
> >>> I am hence wondering how I can inherit properties of the above
> >>> kind from the class to its individuals.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks in advance for your help!
> >>>
> >>> Best regards -
> >>>
> >>> Pat
> >>> _______________________
> >>>
> >>> Patrick McCrae
> >>>
> >>> CINACS Graduate Research Group
> >>> Department of Informatics
> >>> Hamburg University
> >>> Vogt-Kölln-Straße 30
> >>> 22527 Hamburg, Germany
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> protege-owl mailing list
> >>> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
> >>>
> >>> Instructions for unsubscribing:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > protege-owl mailing list
> > protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
> >
> > Instructions for unsubscribing:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20081014/f6998c25/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list