I have an ontology in Protege.
When I add an object property like X worksFor Y, and then load the rdf to graphdb, it generates 3 triples with subject = blank node, property = owl:someValuesFrom, owl:onProperty, owl:rdfType, and then it adds a triple that states X rdf:subClassOf Y.
Is this correct?
What is the logic behind this?
Here is an example of what I'm doing:
This is the ontology in Protege. I made a small version that addresses this specific issue. I save it as rdf and then load it in GraphDb
And here is what I get in GraphDb after loading the rdf from the ontology.
I hope this helps to better understand the question.
The query output that you obtain is perfectly meaningful.
By stating that personaCliente (subject) is a SubClass Of (predicate) worksFor some empresaCliente (object), you're saying that if p is a client person then it must work for some client company.
Note that the object is not a simple super-class, but a complex class expressed by a property restriction.
In other words, you're stating that every client person p works for some blank node _, such that _ is a client company. If you know description logics, read this as persona ⊑ ∃worksFor.empresaCliente.
Now, by querying ?s ?p ?o, you're searching for all the possible triples of your ontology.
Let's focus on the following subset of results:
row s p o
1 _:node31 owl:someValuesFrom :empresaCliente
2 _:node31 owl:onProperty :worksFor
3 _:node31 rdf:type owl:Restriction
9 :personaCliente rdfs:subClassOf _:node31
This bunch of triples means the same as above: every personaCliente is a subClassOf a certain blank node [9], such that this blank node is a subclassOf owl:Restriction (which is a particular OWL class) [3]. This restriction involves property worksFor [2] and states that its range, in this particular case, must be empresaCliente [1].
Further reading:
https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Object_Property_Restrictions
https://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/public/owl-restrictions/
Related
I'm attempting to add a Graph node to a Model (N3 formula)
The output should be roughly like the below:
<http://localhost:8080/patches/#cf0ba48fa8b0421c8b025c3ea6b41a4f>
a <http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms#Patch> ;
<http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms#patches>
<http://example.com/#me> ;
<http://www.w3.org/ns/solid/terms#inserts> { http://example.com/#me http://example.com/#property http://example.com/#resource } .
Note that the #inserts property here is a "GraphNode" or N3 formula, I'm modelling a graph of the triples to write when a Task is complete
I tried the code below:
Model out = ModelFactory.createDefaultModel();
out.add(endState, SolidTerms.inserts, out.asRDFNode(NodeFactory.createGraphNode(inserts.getGraph())));
but this throws [org.apache.jena.sparql.ARQInternalErrorException: Unknown node type: {http://example.com/#me #http://example.com/#property http://example.com/#resource}]
I've tried many other ways of putting the Graph in the model with no success, posting this one because it was my first and I think the most rational. Maybe it's a bug or Jena just doesn't support the GraphNode type in RDFNode ?
The # in the output puzzled me a bit, but I checked that it's not included in my property definition, it's maybe added in by the createGraphNode or the error serialization
Recently, I am experimenting Neo4j. I like the idea but I am facing a problem that I have never faced with relational databases.
I want to perform these inserts and then return them exactly in the insertion order.
Insert elements:
create(p1:Person {name:"Marc"})
create(p2:Person {name:"John"})
create(p3:Person {name:"Paul"})
create(p4:Person {name:"Steve"})
create(p5:Person {name:"Andrew"})
create(p6:Person {name:"Alice"})
create(p7:Person {name:"Bob"})
While to return them:
match(p:Person) return p order by id(p)
I receive the elements in the following order:
Paul
Andrew
Marc
John
Steve
Alice
Bob
I note that these elements are not returned respecting the query insertion order (through the id function).
In fact the id of my elements are the following:
Marc: 18221
John: 18222
Paul: 18208
Steve: 18223
Andrew: 18209
Alice: 18224
Bob: 18225
How does the Neo4j id function work? I read that it generates an auto incremental id but it seems a little strange his mechanism. How do I return items respecting the query insertion order? I thought about creating a timestamp attribute for each node but I don't think it's the best choice
If you're looking to generate sequence numbers in Neo4j then you need to manage this yourself using a strategy that works best in your application.
In ours we maintain sequence numbers in key/value pair nodes where Scope is the application name given to the sequence number range, and Value is the last sequence number used. When we generate a node of a given type, such as Product, then we increment the sequence number and assign it to our new node.
MERGE (n:Sequence {Scope: 'Product'})
SET n.Value = COALESCE(n.Value, 0) + 1
WITH n.Value AS seq
CREATE (product:Product)
SET product.UniqueId = seq
With this you can create as many sequence numbers you need just by creating sequence nodes with unique scope names.
For more examples and tests see the AutoInc.Neo4j project https://github.com/neildobson-au/AutoInc/blob/master/src/AutoInc.Neo4j/Neo4jUniqueIdGenerator.cs
The id of Neo4j is maintained internally, which your business code should not depend on.
Generally it's auto incrementally, but if there is delete operation, you may reuse the deleted id according to the Reuse Policy of Neo4j Server.
I want to get how many individuals of a class. For example, for the Person class, there is A, B, C. I tried to count it using the following rule:
[r3: (?p rdf:type hv:Person),(?classx1 hv:hasvalue ?n),addOne(?n,?new)
-> drop(1),(?class1 hv:hasvalue ?new)
]
However, it was fired in a closed loop since the (?class1 hv:hasvalue ?new) will change each time. I dont like to introduce SPARQL.
What I do to count individuals is :
OntModel model;
Resource individual = model.getResource("http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#NamedIndividual"));
Property property = model.getProperty("http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type");
ResIterator iterator = infModel.listResourcesWithProperty(property, individual) ;
int count = Iterators.size(iterator);
Last line is possible because of Guava Library.
It can be improved but still a solution.
More information and corrections in the comments. Thanks to #ssz.
I can query using Cypher in Neo4j from the Panama database the countries of three types of identity holders (I define that term) namely Entities (companies), officers (shareholders) and Intermediaries (middle companies) as three attributes/columns. Each column has single or double entries separated by colon (eg: British Virgin Islands;Russia). We want to concatenate the countries in these columns into a unique set of countries and hence obtain the count of the number of countries as new attribute.
For this, I tried the following code from my understanding of Cypher:
MATCH (BEZ2:Officer)-[:SHAREHOLDER_OF]->(BEZ1:Entity),(BEZ3:Intermediary)-[:INTERMEDIARY_OF]->(BEZ1:Entity)
WHERE BEZ1.address CONTAINS "Belize" AND
NOT ((BEZ1.countries="Belize" AND BEZ2.countries="Belize" AND BEZ3.countries="Belize") OR
(BEZ1.status IN ["Inactivated", "Dissolved shelf company", "Dissolved", "Discontinued", "Struck / Defunct / Deregistered", "Dead"]))
SET BEZ4.countries= (BEZ1.countries+","+BEZ2.countries+","+BEZ3.countries)
RETURN BEZ3.countries AS IntermediaryCountries, BEZ3.name AS
Intermediaryname, BEZ2.countries AS OfficerCountries , BEZ2.name AS
Officername, BEZ1.countries as EntityCountries, BEZ1.name AS Companyname,
BEZ1.address AS CompanyAddress,DISTINCT count(BEZ4.countries) AS NoofConnections
The relevant part is the SET statement in the 7th line and the DISTINCT count in the last line. The code shows error which makes no sense to me: Invalid input 'u': expected 'n/N'. I guess it means to use COLLECT probably but we tried that as well and it shows the error vice-versa'd between 'u' and 'n'. Please help us obtain the output that we want, it makes our job hell lot easy. Thanks in advance!
EDIT: Considering I didn't define variable as suggested by #Cybersam, I tried the command CREATE as following but it shows the error "Invalid input 'R':" for the command RETURN. This is unfathomable for me. Help really needed, thank you.
CODE 2:
MATCH (BEZ2:Officer)-[:SHAREHOLDER_OF]->(BEZ1:Entity),(BEZ3:Intermediary)-
[:INTERMEDIARY_OF]->(BEZ1:Entity)
WHERE BEZ1.address CONTAINS "Belize" AND
NOT ((BEZ1.countries="Belize" AND BEZ2.countries="Belize" AND
BEZ3.countries="Belize") OR
(BEZ1.status IN ["Inactivated", "Dissolved shelf company", "Dissolved",
"Discontinued", "Struck / Defunct / Deregistered", "Dead"]))
CREATE (p:Connections{countries:
split((BEZ1.countries+";"+BEZ2.countries+";"+BEZ3.countries),";")
RETURN BEZ3.countries AS IntermediaryCountries, BEZ3.name AS
Intermediaryname, BEZ2.countries AS OfficerCountries , BEZ2.name AS
Officername, BEZ1.countries as EntityCountries, BEZ1.name AS Companyname,
BEZ1.address AS CompanyAddress, AS TOTAL, collect (DISTINCT
COUNT(p.countries)) AS NumberofConnections
Lines 8 and 9 are the ones new and to be in examination.
First Query
You never defined the identifier BEZ4, so you cannot set a property on it.
Second Query (which should have been posted in a separate question):
You have several typos and a syntax error.
This query should not get an error (but you will have to determine if it does what you want):
MATCH (BEZ2:Officer)-[:SHAREHOLDER_OF]->(BEZ1:Entity),(BEZ3:Intermediary)- [:INTERMEDIARY_OF]->(BEZ1:Entity)
WHERE BEZ1.address CONTAINS "Belize" AND NOT ((BEZ1.countries="Belize" AND BEZ2.countries="Belize" AND BEZ3.countries="Belize") OR (BEZ1.status IN ["Inactivated", "Dissolved shelf company", "Dissolved", "Discontinued", "Struck / Defunct / Deregistered", "Dead"]))
CREATE (p:Connections {countries: split((BEZ1.countries+";"+BEZ2.countries+";"+BEZ3.countries), ";")})
RETURN BEZ3.countries AS IntermediaryCountries,
BEZ3.name AS Intermediaryname,
BEZ2.countries AS OfficerCountries ,
BEZ2.name AS Officername,
BEZ1.countries as EntityCountries,
BEZ1.name AS Companyname,
BEZ1.address AS CompanyAddress,
SIZE(p.countries) AS NumberofConnections;
Problems with the original:
The CREATE clause was missing a closing } and also a closing ).
The RETURN clause had a dangling AS TOTAL term.
collect (DISTINCT COUNT(p.countries)) was attempting to perform nested aggregation, which is not supported. In any case, even if it had worked, it probably would not have returned what you wanted. I suspect that you actually wanted the size of the p.countries collection, so that is what I used in my query.
I got a few - company, location and product details to store in a db.
sample data
company location product
------------------------------
abc hilltop alpha
abc hilltop beta
abc riverside alpha
abc riverside beta
buggy underbridge gama
buggy underbridge theta
buggy underbridge omega
The relationships are multi-valued, as I understand. And the data needs to be normalized as the MVD's are
not derived from a candidate key (company ->> location and company ->> product where company is not a candidate key)
or the union does not make the whole set (company U location < R and so with product).
But my colleague disagrees with me, who insists that for a relation to have multi-valued dependency at least four same values in company column should exist for each company. i.e
t1(company) = t2(company) = t3(company) = t4(company),
for company abc this is true. But for company "buggy", which does only one product in three locations, this is untrue.
For the formal definition and similar examples I refernced:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivalued_dependency
and Fourth_normal_form example also on wiki.
I know my colleague is being pedagogy, but I too started seeing the same question after reading the formal definition. (After all these are derived on mathematical basis.)
update: I am not asking how to normalize this data in to 4NF, I think I know that. (I need to break it in to two tables 1) company - location and 2) company - product.
which I have done already.
Can some one explain how this relation is still a MVD even though it does not satisfy the formal definition?
Detailed explanations are very much welcome.
"There exist" says some values exist, and they don't have to be different. EXISTS followed by some name(s) says that there exist(s) some value(s) referred to by the name(s), for which a condition holds. Multiple names can refer to the same value. (FOR ALL can be expressed in terms of EXISTS.)
The notion of MVD can be applied to both variables and values. In fact the form of the linked definition is that a MVD holds in the variable sense when it holds in the value sense "in any legal relation". To know that a particular value is legal, you need business knowledge. You can then show whether that value satisfies an MVD. But to show whether its variable satisfies the MVD you have to show that the MVD is satisfied "in any legal relation" value that the variable can hold. One valid value can tell you that a MVD doesn't hold in (it and) its variable, but it can't tell you that a MVD does hold in its variable. That requires more business knowledge.
You can show that this value violates 4NF by using that definition of MVD. The definition says that a relation variable satisfies a MVD when a certain condition holds "for any valid relation" value:
for all pairs of tuples t1 & t2 in r such that t1[a] = t2[a] there exist tuples t3 & t4 [...]
For what MVD and values for t1 & t2 does your colleague claim there doesn't exist values for t3 & t4? There is no such combination of MVD and values for t1 & t2. Eg for {company} ↠ {product} and t1 & t2 both (buggy, underbridge, gamma), we can take (company, underbridge, gamma) as a value for both t3 & t4, and so on for all other choices for t1 & t2.
Another definition for F ↠ T holding is that binary JD (join dependency) *{F U T, F U (A - T)} holds, ie that the relation is equal to the join of its projections on F U T & F U (A - T). This definition might be more immediately helpful to you & your colleague in that it avoids the terminology that you & they are misinterpreting. Eg your example data is the join of these two of its projections:
company location
--------------------
abc hilltop
abc riverside
buggy underbridge
company product
----------------
abc alpha
abc beta
buggy gamma
buggy theta
buggy omega
So it satisfies the JD *{{company, location}, {company, product}}, so it satisfies the MVDs {company} ↠ {location} and {company} ↠ {product} (among others). (Maybe you will be able to think of examples of relations with zero, one, two, three etc tuples for which one or more (trivial and/or non-trivial) MVDs hold.)
Of course, the two definitions are two different ways of describing the same condition.
PS 1 Whenever a FD F → T holds, the MVD F ↠ T holds. For a relation in BCNF, the MVDs that violate 4NF & 5NF are those not so associated with FDs.
PS 2 A relation variable is meant to hold a tuple if and only if it makes a true statement in business terms when its values are substituted into a given statement template, or predicate. That plus the JD definition for MVD gives conditions for a relation variable satisfying a MVD in business terms. Here our predicate is of the form ...company...location...product.... (Eg company namedcompanyis located atlocationand makes productproduct.) It happens that this MVD holds for a variable when for all valid business situations, FOR ALL company, location, product,
EXISTS product [...company...location...product...]
AND EXISTS location [...company...location...product...]
IMPLIES ...company...location...product...