inverse object properties

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

inverse object properties

Oya deniz Beyan
Hi All,
I have a question related to inverse object properties.
if we have inverse object properties such as has_part and  is_part_of is it necessary to assign both to classes or can the reasoned infer the inverse if we only assign one of these e.g.
If we define only arm is_part_of body can protégé infer body has_part arm? An if so how do we get this information?
many thanks
Oya



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

Re: inverse object properties

David Osumi-Sutherland
Hi Oya,

On 24 Mar 2014, at 13:36, Oya deniz Beyan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi All,
I have a question related to inverse object properties.
if we have inverse object properties such as has_part and  is_part_of is it necessary to assign both to classes or can the reasoned infer the inverse if we only assign one of these e.g.
If we define only arm is_part_of body can protégé infer body has_part arm?

This inference is only safe on the individual level. If 'individual A' has_part 'arm B', then if part_of InverseOf has_part,  it follows that 'arm B' part_of 'individual A'.  But this is not the case on the class level where you need to use quantifiers (some/only) to relate classes

For example, it does not follow from "(all) head has_part some hair" that "(all) hair part_of some head".

- David

An if so how do we get this information?
many thanks
Oya


_______________________________________________
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