statistical analysis for ontology structure

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

statistical analysis for ontology structure

Joanna.zyy
may I ask if there is any plugin that can statistically analysis the classes, property in an ontology, such as calculating the number of classes, properties? Thank you for your attention.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Tania Tudorache

The Ontology Metrics View (by default in the Active Ontology tab) shows you several metrics about the ontology. You can see also the class and properties counts.


Tania




From: protege-user <[hidden email]> on behalf of Joanna.zyy <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 7:04:19 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [protege-user] statistical analysis for ontology structure
 
may I ask if there is any plugin that can statistically analysis the classes,
property in an ontology, such as calculating the number of classes,
properties? Thank you for your attention.



--
View this message in context: http://protege-project.136.n4.nabble.com/statistical-analysis-for-ontology-structure-tp4666494.html
Sent from the Protege User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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

pastedImage.png (67K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Csongor Nyulas
Administrator
In reply to this post by Joanna.zyy
You can get statistics on your ontology in the "Ontology Metrics" view,
which is part of the "Active Ontology" tab by deafult.
The "Ontology Metrics" view is also available through the Window ->
Views -> Ontology views menu.

Csongor

On 09/22/2016 07:04 AM, Joanna.zyy wrote:

> may I ask if there is any plugin that can statistically analysis the classes,
> property in an ontology, such as calculating the number of classes,
> properties? Thank you for your attention.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://protege-project.136.n4.nabble.com/statistical-analysis-for-ontology-structure-tp4666494.html
> Sent from the Protege User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

rana
In reply to this post by Tania Tudorache
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Tania Tudorache

It is already part of the default Protege distribution, and it shows up as the first tab when you start Protege. See the attached screenshot.


Tania


From: protege-user <[hidden email]> on behalf of rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11:12:17 AM
To: User support for WebProtege and Protege Desktop
Subject: Re: [protege-user] statistical analysis for ontology structure
 
Hi
How I can get this tap in Protege 5
Thanks 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 22, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Tania Tudorache <[hidden email]> wrote:

The Ontology Metrics View (by default in the Active Ontology tab) shows you several metrics about the ontology. You can see also the class and properties counts.


Tania




From: protege-user <[hidden email]> on behalf of Joanna.zyy <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 7:04:19 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [protege-user] statistical analysis for ontology structure
 
may I ask if there is any plugin that can statistically analysis the classes,
property in an ontology, such as calculating the number of classes,
properties? Thank you for your attention.



--
View this message in context: http://protege-project.136.n4.nabble.com/statistical-analysis-for-ontology-structure-tp4666494.html
Sent from the Protege User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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

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

Screen Shot 2016-09-22 at 1.15.40 PM.png (198K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Joanna.zyy
In reply to this post by Tania Tudorache
Thank you very much!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Joanna.zyy
In reply to this post by Csongor Nyulas
Thanks a lot!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Joanna.zyy
In reply to this post by Joanna.zyy
may i continue to ask if there is any approach that can capture the classes and properties that are used the most in ontology? I notice that the usage tab can show the usage times of every classes and properties, but for the complex ontology, it is still not easy to find the most used classes and properties. Thank you for your attention.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Tania Tudorache

I don't know of any plugins that do that now. We had a plugin for earlier version of Protege, but I am not aware of anything that works with the current Protege version.


There are some approaches for ontology summarization, but that may be too much.


Tania



From: protege-user <[hidden email]> on behalf of Joanna.zyy <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 7:19:39 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] statistical analysis for ontology structure
 
may i continue to ask if there is any approach that can capture the classes
and properties that are used the most in ontology? I notice that the usage
tab can show the usage times of every classes and properties, but for the
complex ontology, it is still not easy to find the most used classes and
properties. Thank you for your attention.




--
View this message in context: http://protege-project.136.n4.nabble.com/statistical-analysis-for-ontology-structure-tp4666494p4666502.html
Sent from the Protege User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Joanna.zyy
I just notice there are some articles about that. Anyway, thank you very much for your reply.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: statistical analysis for ontology structure

Lorenz Buehmann
OWL API is the way to go for more complex things that are not already available as Protege plugin.

I just notice there are some articles about that. Anyway, thank you very much
for your reply.



--
View this message in context: http://protege-project.136.n4.nabble.com/statistical-analysis-for-ontology-structure-tp4666494p4666527.html
Sent from the Protege User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

-- 
Lorenz Bühmann
AKSW group, University of Leipzig
Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center

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

Pellet Reasoner

rana
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Michael DeBellis-2
Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.

Hope that is helpful.

Michael

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks


Rana

  


   




_______________________________________________
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
|

Re: Pellet Reasoner

rana
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Csongor Nyulas
Administrator
Are you using the Protege desktop application or you are trying to do something with the ontology programmatically?

In either case, you should not add the inferred knowledge to the ontology, as it can be queried just like the asserted knowledge (for example using the DL Query tab), and it is always available to you when you run the reasoner next time.

Csongor


On 09/28/2016 12:59 PM, rana abaalkhail wrote:
Thanks for your email. I meant when the reasoner give me the result what I should do with the result? Add them manually to the ontology ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Michael DeBellis <[hidden email]> wrote:

Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.

Hope that is helpful.

Michael

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks


Rana

  


   




_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
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
|

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Ramona Walls
That said, it is common practice make a release that asserts the inferred axioms so that novice users don't need to have a reasoner at their disposal to see all the axioms.

Ramona

------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Csongor Nyulas <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are you using the Protege desktop application or you are trying to do something with the ontology programmatically?

In either case, you should not add the inferred knowledge to the ontology, as it can be queried just like the asserted knowledge (for example using the DL Query tab), and it is always available to you when you run the reasoner next time.

Csongor


On 09/28/2016 12:59 PM, rana abaalkhail wrote:
Thanks for your email. I meant when the reasoner give me the result what I should do with the result? Add them manually to the ontology ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Michael DeBellis <[hidden email]> wrote:

Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.

Hope that is helpful.

Michael

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks


Rana

  


   




_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
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



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

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Csongor Nyulas
Administrator
That's right. It really depends on your use case.

Csongor

On 09/28/2016 02:13 PM, Ramona Walls wrote:
That said, it is common practice make a release that asserts the inferred axioms so that novice users don't need to have a reasoner at their disposal to see all the axioms.

Ramona

------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Csongor Nyulas <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are you using the Protege desktop application or you are trying to do something with the ontology programmatically?

In either case, you should not add the inferred knowledge to the ontology, as it can be queried just like the asserted knowledge (for example using the DL Query tab), and it is always available to you when you run the reasoner next time.

Csongor


On 09/28/2016 12:59 PM, rana abaalkhail wrote:
Thanks for your email. I meant when the reasoner give me the result what I should do with the result? Add them manually to the ontology ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Michael DeBellis <[hidden email]> wrote:

Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.

Hope that is helpful.

Michael

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks


Rana

  


   




_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
|

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Igor Toujilov-2

I disagree. The OWL reasoning is a cornerstone of the Semantic Web. All users should have access to a reasoner. If you assert the inferred, then you lose the reason: why was it inferred or asserted?

 
Igor
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 10:19 PM
From: "Csongor Nyulas" <[hidden email]>
To: "User support for WebProtege and Protege Desktop" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [protege-user] Pellet Reasoner
That's right. It really depends on your use case.

Csongor
 
On 09/28/2016 02:13 PM, Ramona Walls wrote:
That said, it is common practice make a release that asserts the inferred axioms so that novice users don't need to have a reasoner at their disposal to see all the axioms.
 
Ramona
 
------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona
 
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Csongor Nyulas <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are you using the Protege desktop application or you are trying to do something with the ontology programmatically?

In either case, you should not add the inferred knowledge to the ontology, as it can be queried just like the asserted knowledge (for example using the DL Query tab), and it is always available to you when you run the reasoner next time.

Csongor

 
On 09/28/2016 12:59 PM, rana abaalkhail wrote:
Thanks for your email. I meant when the reasoner give me the result what I should do with the result? Add them manually to the ontology ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Michael DeBellis <[hidden email]> wrote:
 
Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.
 
Hope that is helpful.
 
Michael
 
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks

 

Rana

  

 

   
 
 

_______________________________________________
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
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
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
 
_______________________________________________
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

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

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Ramona Walls
Igor,

Everyone has access to reasoners and the axioms, but there are use cases (e.g., data annotation, search, discovery) where people users don't want to search through every logical entailment to find the term they need. The semantic web is not the only use for ontologies.

Ramona

------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Igor Toujilov <[hidden email]> wrote:

I disagree. The OWL reasoning is a cornerstone of the Semantic Web. All users should have access to a reasoner. If you assert the inferred, then you lose the reason: why was it inferred or asserted?

 
Igor
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 10:19 PM
From: "Csongor Nyulas" <[hidden email]>
To: "User support for WebProtege and Protege Desktop" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [protege-user] Pellet Reasoner
That's right. It really depends on your use case.

Csongor
 
On 09/28/2016 02:13 PM, Ramona Walls wrote:
That said, it is common practice make a release that asserts the inferred axioms so that novice users don't need to have a reasoner at their disposal to see all the axioms.
 
Ramona
 
------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona
 
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Csongor Nyulas <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are you using the Protege desktop application or you are trying to do something with the ontology programmatically?

In either case, you should not add the inferred knowledge to the ontology, as it can be queried just like the asserted knowledge (for example using the DL Query tab), and it is always available to you when you run the reasoner next time.

Csongor

 
On 09/28/2016 12:59 PM, rana abaalkhail wrote:
Thanks for your email. I meant when the reasoner give me the result what I should do with the result? Add them manually to the ontology ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Michael DeBellis <[hidden email]> wrote:
 
Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.
 
Hope that is helpful.
 
Michael
 
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks

 

Rana

  

 

   
 
 

_______________________________________________
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
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
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
 
_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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
|

Re: Pellet Reasoner

Chris Mungall-2
Yes. the majority of ontology users in bioinformatics are operating entirely outside the semweb stack
On 28 Sep 2016, at 16:42, Ramona Walls wrote:
Igor,

Everyone has access to reasoners and the axioms, but there are use cases (e.g., data annotation, search, discovery) where people users don't want to search through every logical entailment to find the term they need. The semantic web is not the only use for ontologies.

Ramona

------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Igor Toujilov <[hidden email]> wrote:

I disagree. The OWL reasoning is a cornerstone of the Semantic Web. All users should have access to a reasoner. If you assert the inferred, then you lose the reason: why was it inferred or asserted?

 
Igor
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 10:19 PM
From: "Csongor Nyulas" <[hidden email]>
To: "User support for WebProtege and Protege Desktop" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [protege-user] Pellet Reasoner
That's right. It really depends on your use case.

Csongor
 
On 09/28/2016 02:13 PM, Ramona Walls wrote:
That said, it is common practice make a release that asserts the inferred axioms so that novice users don't need to have a reasoner at their disposal to see all the axioms.
 
Ramona
 
------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Analyst, CyVerse, University of Arizona
Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona
 
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Csongor Nyulas <[hidden email]> wrote:
Are you using the Protege desktop application or you are trying to do something with the ontology programmatically?

In either case, you should not add the inferred knowledge to the ontology, as it can be queried just like the asserted knowledge (for example using the DL Query tab), and it is always available to you when you run the reasoner next time.

Csongor

 
On 09/28/2016 12:59 PM, rana abaalkhail wrote:
Thanks for your email. I meant when the reasoner give me the result what I should do with the result? Add them manually to the ontology ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Michael DeBellis <[hidden email]> wrote:
 
Rana, not sure what question you are asking. The classifier is essentially a kind of theorem prover. It will tell you things about the ontology that are implicit in the definitions you gave it. The first thing it tells you is if your ontology has any contradictions. If it does big parts of the ontology will turn red and there will be error messages that help you debug the ontology and resolve the contradictions.

Once your ontology is valid, the classifier can do a lot of additional reasoning. So for example if you have a property called mother with domain Person and range Woman and you declare motherOf as the inverse of mother the classifier will infer the domain of motherOf is Woman and the range is Person. Also, any individuals who have values for the mother or motherOf properties will have the appropriate values asserted in the inverse property. So if I declare that Mary is the motherOf John the classifier will infer that John's mother value is Mary.

The inferred axioms are probably information of this type, its hard to know without knowing what your ontology looks like and what the inferred axioms are. In case you don't know an axiom is essentially a term for a logical assertion. So when you tell Protege that Human is a subclass of Animal it creates an axiom to represent that information. The inferred axioms are just additional information that are necessary deductions from the axioms you have given to Protege.

Have you done the Pizza tutorial? That has some good examples. Or if you have already done the Pizza tutorial I also recommend the Manchester FHKB tutorial. FHKB especially has some great examples of how powerful the classifier can be, you give it some basic definitions for kin relations (mother, father, ancestor, child, etc.) and it can infer a lot of additional info.
 
Hope that is helpful.
 
Michael
 
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 AM, rana abaalkhail <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi

After run Pellet on an ontology. What the uses of the classification result ( inferred axiom)

Thanks

 

Rana

  

 

   
 
 

_______________________________________________
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
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
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
 
_______________________________________________
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

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


_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
12