gmane.comp.misc.ontology.protege.owl

Re: Implicit inverse properties

Timothy Redmond — 2012-05-25T16:43:39


In this the word "Returns" is a bit ambiguous.  So I will read it as 
"MyAmygdala is an inferred subclass of /Anatomical_Functional and has 
AnatomicalEntity some Amygdala/".  So far this makes sense.


If I read the return as "inferred subclass of" as before then this does 
not appear to follow from what you have described even if 
isAnatomicalEntityOf is the inverse property of hasAnatomicalEntity.   
If the class MyAmygdala has at least one individual then that individual 
will be related to an individual in the Amygdala class that is in

/'Anatomical entity' that isAnatomicalEntityOf some Anatomical_Functional/.

But there may be other individuals in the Amygdala class that are not 
related to anything by the isAnatomicalEntityOf property.

I have tried to illustrate this with the attached ontology.  If you turn 
on a reasoner you can look at the individuals, i, j, k and l and see how 
they relate to one another.

-Timothy


On 5/24/12 8:49 AM, Santiago Timón wrote:

__________________________________

Re: Implicit inverse properties

Santiago Timón — 2012-05-24T22:12:06

Hello Joshua, thanks for your reply,

You're right. After I post my question I realized that adding new
assertions about imported terms are serialized in MY ontology, it was a
dumb question, sorry.
You have answered another doubt I had, now I know rules won't help me in
terminological definitions.

So there's no need for the SWRL rule, the reasoner already catch the
inverse property, the query:

*isAnatomicalEntityOf some MyAmygdala *
Returns Amygdala (the filler of the property in the restriction)

Next I'd like to obtain this entities by transitivity, but I'm not sure if
it's possible. Let's see If I can explain myself.

A simplified class hierarchy looks like this

Anatomical_Functional_Relation
  MyAmygdala

MyAmygdala is defined as before, but trying to obtain *any
Anatomical_entity that isAnatomicalEntityOf any
Anatomical_Functional_Relation *with the query:

isAnatomicalEntityOf some Anatomical_Functional_Relation
Returns Thing

I'm sure there's something I don't understand, and I like to know if it's

Re: Implicit inverse properties

Joshua TAYLOR — 2012-05-24T20:57:54

I assume that you mean that isAnatomicalEntityOf is *intended* to be
the inverse of hasAnatomicalEntity, but that the inverseProperty axiom
hasn't been asserted anywhere.


SWRL rules aren't logical assertions, they're operations, so to speak,
and only operate on named individuals, so while the logical assertion

"if y is an anatomical entity and x is an anatomical functional
relation [though you didn't say 'relation' above] and x
hasAnatomicalEntity y, then y isAnatomicalEntityOf x"

might give you the behavior you want (though really you'd just want

"if x hasAnatomicalEntity y, then y isAnatomicalEntityOf x" (i.e.,
without the domain and range specified)),

it's not the same as the SWRL rule.


You've already got an ontology where you can add the SWRL rule, and
you're not worried about modifying that one.  Why not just add the
inverseProperty assertion there?  You won't be modifying the imported
ontologies by doing that.  (This is one of the great things about OWL
and semantic web data sources, you can d

Implicit inverse properties

Santiago Timón — 2012-05-24T15:49:42

Hi all,

I am working in an ontology which relates concepts from two other
ontologies defining this relations as restricted classes. What I want is to
make the reasoner infer the implicit inverse object property. For example:

I define my Class MyAmygdala to relate the imported class Amygdala with
other imported class Function with restrictions "*hasAnatomicalEntity some
Amygdala and hasCognitiveFunction Function*"

So the DL Query
*Anatomical_Functional and hasAnatomicalEntity some Amygdala*
Returns MyAmygdala as expected.

The property *hasAnatomicalEntity* has the inverse *isAnatomicalEntityOf*,
but as far as I know there's no way to infer directly this relation so the
query
*'Anatomical entity' that isAnatomicalEntityOf some Anatomical_Functional*
Returns Amygdala

I should not alter the imported ontologies, so I decided to add a SWRL rule
indicating that if a anatomical_functional has an anatomical entity the
this entity is anatomical entity of this anatomical_functional:
*'Anatomical entity'(?y), Anato

Sepublica (ESWC workshop), Robert Stevens, Keynote

Alexander Garcia Castro — 2012-05-24T14:15:38

Sepublica (http://sepublica.mywikipaper.org)
Dear all, Robert Stevens will be our keynote speaker. The tittle of his
talk will be "Semantic publishing: What does it all mean anyway?"
Robert will open our afternoon session. From 2 to 5pm we will be discussing
issues related to semantics in publications and semantic publications. You
are all invited to attend our discussion, we are planning to generate a
communique out of this session.


 SePublica 2012

… the scientific publication as an interface to the web of data…

semantics in scientific publications,  is it just about linking?

what does a scientific publication in the semantic web look like

what should it deliver, how should it change the user experience

what do we want the next generation of scholarly communication to be like?

Re: FILTER in SPARQL (Protege 4.2 beta)

jayadianti herlina — 2012-05-21T14:21:35

Dear Mr Timothy

I solve my problem :-)

Prefix :<http://www.semanticweb.org/CO.owl#>
PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>
PREFIX xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
SELECT ?People  ?House
    WHERE { ?People :HouseCondition ?House
FILTER (?House="BAD") .
}

and *not*
FILTER (str(?House="BAD")) without str and () :-)

Thank you, I am soo sorry
Lina

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:28 PM, jayadianti herlina <
herlinajayadianti< at >gmail.com> wrote:

_______________________________________________
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

Re: Inferred individuals not displaying in Protégé 4.1

Florian Grandel — 2012-05-21T14:19:23

Hi Timothy,


If this is intended behavior (and I understand the difference) then I 
certainly do not have any problem with this. Thanks for the explanation!


In my case it is useful to see all inferred instances but that may be an 
isolated case.

I liked the color code you use to distinguish between inferred and 
asserted instance memberships in the other interface. Maybe a third 
color + a filter option would be a possibility?

In any case I'm very happy with Protégé as it is. It's a great tool.

Florian
_______________________________________________
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

Re: Inferred individuals not displaying in Protégé 4.1

Timothy Redmond — 2012-05-21T14:04:37

This could certainly be a lot clearer in the Protege interface and 
perhaps a level of user control would be useful.

The difference between the two views is that one view is showing the 
direct inferred instances and the other is showing all the inferred 
instances.  The direct inferred instances are those individuals that are 
known to be in a class but not any of the named subclasses.

My feeling was that users would generally want to see the direct 
instances.  After all when Protege displays the inferred superclasses of 
CyclicGroup it does not show Group as a super class.  That is Protege 
only displays the direct superclasses.  But there have been people who 
would prefer to see all the inferred instances.

Given that there is no visual indication that the two cases are 
different, this is something of an inconsistency in the Protege 
interface.  The obvious fix would be to modify the inferred members list 
to include all inferred members.

-Timothy


On 05/20/2012 04:07 PM, Florian Grandel wrote:

_

FILTER in SPARQL (Protege 4.2 beta)

jayadianti herlina — 2012-05-21T13:28:48

Dear Mr Timothy and all
Finally I can solve the problem of "inconsistency" in my ontologies. Thank
you very much for your help.

My next question is about SPARQL in protege 4.2 beta.
I was using DL query, and it is easier to understand than SPARQL syntax and
always supported OWl entailment :-)
but I also want to use SPARQl syntax.

Example 1
I use DL query : People and (hasSalary some int [>=0]) and (hasSalary some
int [<=100])
and I also use Sparql syntax :
Prefix :<http://www.semanticweb.org/CO.owl#>
PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>
PREFIX xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
SELECT ?People ?Salary
WHERE { ?People :hasSalary ?Salary .
FILTER (?Salary >= 0 && ?Salary <= 70)
}
*and the result is equal (Figure 1)* --> no problem in this example

Example 2:
then I try to making a query again
DL : Person and hasConditionOfFloor value "BAD"^^string
SPARQL :
Prefix : <http://www.semanticw

Re: Can somebody know everything?

Daniel Isemann — 2012-05-21T10:46:01

Yeah sorry, I got interrupted half-way through replying and didn't check the
thread later on. It's exactly what Timothy said.

--
View this message in context: http://protege-ontology-editor-knowledge-acquisition-system.136.n4.nabble.com/Can-somebody-know-everything-tp4644375p4647958.html
Sent from the Protege OWL mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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 4.1 Beginner Question (Domain and Range)

Miri, Hossein — 2012-05-21T07:59:46

Hello all,

I am reading through the Manchester Pizza Ontology Tutorial.

After setting the 'domain' and 'range' for the 'hasTopping' property, I look at the 'isToppingOf' property, which is the inverse property of 'hasTopping'.

The tutorial says Protege automatically fills in the 'domain' and 'range' of the 'isToppingOf' property, because the domain and range of its inverse property were specified.

This doesn't happen in mine. How do I update the framework to make this happen?

Thank you,







   
_______________________________________________
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

Inferred individuals not displaying in Protégé 4.1

Florian Grandel — 2012-05-20T23:07:10

Hi Protégé devs,

I'm having trouble in displaying inferred individual memberships in 
Protégé 4.1 with both HermIT 1.3.6 and Fact++ as reasoners. I'm using a 
vanilla configuration (see below).

The attached screenshots show that the inferred class membership of the 
individual "IntegralNumbersUnderAddition" is correctly shown in the 
classes tab but not in the individuals tab (see the empty members list 
of the "AbelianGroup" superclass).

I'm also attaching the ontology that allows me to reproduce the problem.

Can you give me a hint what I'm doing wrong or is this a bug?

Florian


Here's my configuration:
Protege 4 OWL Editor (Version 4.1.0, Build = 239)
Platform:
      Java: JVM 1.6.0_24-b24 Memory: 466M
      Language: en, Country: US
      Framework: Apache Software Foundation (1.5)
      OS: linux (3.2.0-24-generic)
      Processor: x86-64
Installed plugin The Protege 4 OWL Editor
Installed plugin Dlquery
Installed plugin The OWL API
Installed plugin Owlviz Plug-in
Installed plugin OntoGraf Plug

To calculate Total CALORIE value

Meena Unni — 2012-05-19T21:40:38

Hi All,

I was creating an ontology where in for each instance of pizza I have given
a calori value.
I have another class PERSON. What I am interested in doing protege is , if
an instance of this person eats 2 different tyes of pizza, I would like to
get the total calorie value consumed. Is it possible in protege 4.2.

Pls help me.This is for my studies.

Regards,
MU
_______________________________________________
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

Re: Can somebody know everything?

Stephan Opfer — 2012-05-19T06:57:28

Looks quit similar to the one, timothy suggested.

Thx,
  Stephan

On 05/18/2012 08:48 PM, Daniel Isemann wrote:

_______________________________________________
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

Re: Can somebody know everything?

Olivier Dameron — 2012-05-18T22:36:00

Good point, OWL2 specification should definitely have a special 
individual "Chuck_Norris" who knows everything :-)

olivier
_______________________________________________
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

Re: Can somebody know everything?

Daniel Isemann — 2012-05-18T18:48:39

Hi Stephan,

if inverse properties are ok in your ontology it would appear that the
following does the trick:

Declaration(Class(<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#Someclass>))
EquivalentClasses(owl:Thing
ObjectHasValue(<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#isKnownBy>
<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#Peter>))
Declaration(ObjectProperty(<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#isKnownBy>))
InverseObjectProperties(<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#isKnownBy>
<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#knows>)
Declaration(ObjectProperty(<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#knows>))
InverseObjectProperties(<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#isKnownBy>
<http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/2012/4/Ontology1337342410657.owl#knows>)
Declarat

Re: Can somebody know everything?

Stephan Opfer — 2012-05-18T15:17:44

Ah, good point. I always forget about this inverse () operator.

Thank you!
  Stephan

On 05/18/2012 02:43 PM, Timothy Redmond wrote:

_______________________________________________
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

Can somebody know everything?

Stephan Opfer — 2012-05-18T11:31:38

Hi,

I have a question about the expressiveness of OWL2. Is it possible to state
that an individual (e.g. peter) can know everything (the individuals of the
class Thing): Person(peter) and peter knows "all Individuals of Thing"?

In SWRL it would be: Thing(?x) -> knows(peter, ?x) 

But I am not sure, if it is possible to use peter in such a way in an SWRL
rule.

Best Regards,
  Stephan

--
View this message in context: http://protege-ontology-editor-knowledge-acquisition-system.136.n4.nabble.com/Can-somebody-know-everything-tp4644375.html
Sent from the Protege OWL mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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

Re: N-Ary Relations and Relations between theirParameters

Martin Kuba — 2012-05-18T08:55:40

Dne 18.5.2012 10:26, Stephan Opfer napsal(a):

Sorry, you have not included the first post in the second post, and I had not remembered
what you have sent earlier. The W3C Note at http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/
is the best document on n-ary relations in OWL that I know of.


My mistake, please replace "no-tree" with "tree-like" :-)

In OWL without SWRL, you cannot describe non-tree structures, for example
the concept of "child of parents who are married to each other"
or "person who have their brother as their boss", to cite examples which I have seen.
You can only describe "person who has a brother and a boss", but you cannot describe
the relationship between the value of the brother and the value of the boss properties.

In short, you have to use SWRL for your case.

Best regards

Martin

Re: N-Ary Relations and Relations between theirParameters

Stephan Opfer — 2012-05-18T08:26:59

Hi Martin,

funny page (http://lmgtfy.com/), but the first result of your link shows
up the page I already linked in the first post. ;-)

The paper, you posted, has no proof in section 4.1. Only some nice
advice or hints about several restrictions. What do you mean, saying
that "OWL without SWRL can describe only no-tree structures". The cited
paper states that OWL is somehow restricted to tree-like structures,
although there are some exceptions mentioned in the footnotes.

Best Regards,
  Stephan


On 05/18/2012 08:34 AM, Martin Kuba wrote:

_______________________________________________
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

Deadline Extension: GreeNets 2012 - Deadline extendedto June 10, 2012.

Sandra Sendra — 2012-05-18T07:35:22


====================================================================================
 2nd International Conference on Green Communications and Networking - GreeNets 2012 
24th and 26th October 2012 
Gandia, Spain
 http://greenets.org/
 ====================================================================================
 
HIGHLIGHTS
 
- The event is endorsed by the European Alliance for Innovation (www.eai.eu), a leading community-based organisation devoted to the advancement of innovation in the field of ICT
 - All accepted papers will be published by Springer and made available through SpringerLink Digital Library, one of the world's largest scientific libraries
 - Proceedings will be submitted for indexing by Google Scholar, ISI, EI Compendex, Scopus and many more
 - Best papers will be selected to be included in one of the special issues that will be published in: Future Internet, Network Protocols and Algorithms, Recent Patent in Te
 lecommunications
 
CALL FOR PAPERS
 
[Scope]
 
Global warming and cli