Quantcast

Force a Contradiction by Data Property Maximum?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Force a Contradiction by Data Property Maximum?

Jos Lehmann-2

Hi there

 

1.       In ontology O1 I have defined a class Short with DataProperty qu:numericalValue exactly 1 xsd:double[< "38.0"^^xsd:double]

2.       I have then asserted an individual of Short (MyShortLength) with DataProperty assertion qu:numericalValue "39.0"^^xsd:double

3.       I have run both Hermit 1.3.8.413 and Pellet O1

 

After 3., shouldn’t I get an inconsistent O1?!

 

I would expect so, but I did not. Is my expectation wrong (f.i. because reasoners cannot compare data values)?

 

Or is 1. + 2. above consistent?

 

Thanks, Jos

 

 

 

 


_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Force a Contradiction by Data Property Maximum?

Jim Balhoff-2
It is consistent: you’ve said that every individual of Short has exactly one numericalValue which is less than 38.0. But, on the other hand, it could have any number of values greater than or equal to 38.0. 

You could add another restriction such as ‘qu:numericalValue exactly 1’, but there is a bug in Protege’s OWL API which will prevent you from entering unqualified data property restrictions. So you can enter it like this: ‘qu:numericalValue exactly 1 rdfs:Literal’. This may be fixed in the new release of Protege, since I think it was recently fixed in OWL API.

Best regards,
Jim

On Mar 17, 2017, at 10:26 AM, Jos Lehmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi there
 
1.       In ontology O1 I have defined a class Short with DataProperty qu:numericalValue exactly 1 xsd:double[< "38.0"^^xsd:double]
2.       I have then asserted an individual of Short (MyShortLength) with DataProperty assertion qu:numericalValue "39.0"^^xsd:double
3.       I have run both Hermit 1.3.8.413 and Pellet O1
 
After 3., shouldn’t I get an inconsistent O1?!
 
I would expect so, but I did not. Is my expectation wrong (f.i. because reasoners cannot compare data values)?
 
Or is 1. + 2. above consistent?
 
Thanks, Jos
 
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user


_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Force a Contradiction by Data Property Maximum?

Jos Lehmann-2

Hi Jim

 

Thanks for the tip. I have actually added to the supeclass of Short:

 

qu:numericalValue exactly 1 xsd:double

 

and then added to Short the restriction

 

qu:numericalValue exactly 1 xsd:double[< "38.0"^^xsd:double]

 

 

Jos

 

Von: protege-user [mailto:[hidden email]] Im Auftrag von Jim Balhoff
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. März 2017 15:43
An: User support for WebProtege and Protege Desktop
Betreff: Re: [protege-user] Force a Contradiction by Data Property Maximum?

 

It is consistent: you’ve said that every individual of Short has exactly one numericalValue which is less than 38.0. But, on the other hand, it could have any number of values greater than or equal to 38.0. 

 

You could add another restriction such as ‘qu:numericalValue exactly 1’, but there is a bug in Protege’s OWL API which will prevent you from entering unqualified data property restrictions. So you can enter it like this: ‘qu:numericalValue exactly 1 rdfs:Literal’. This may be fixed in the new release of Protege, since I think it was recently fixed in OWL API.

 

Best regards,

Jim

 

On Mar 17, 2017, at 10:26 AM, Jos Lehmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

 

Hi there

 

1.       In ontology O1 I have defined a class Short with DataProperty qu:numericalValue exactly 1 xsd:double[< "38.0"^^xsd:double]

2.       I have then asserted an individual of Short (MyShortLength) with DataProperty assertion qu:numericalValue "39.0"^^xsd:double

3.       I have run both Hermit 1.3.8.413 and Pellet O1

 

After 3., shouldn’t I get an inconsistent O1?!

 

I would expect so, but I did not. Is my expectation wrong (f.i. because reasoners cannot compare data values)?

 

Or is 1. + 2. above consistent?

 

Thanks, Jos

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

 


_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Loading...