I wonder how can we make an ontology using Description logic syntax (A-box, T-box) for a staff of a university? What classes, objects, relations, parents, siblings, constraints and interrelationships among them we can make?
I made the below class diagram but not sure if anything else could be added to it.
UML class diagrams can be translated to TBoxes and object diagrams to ABoxes. See for instance https://henrietteharmse.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/uml-class-diagram-to-owl-and-sroiq-reference.pdf.
Related
Let's say we want to make an ontology model for the Light Switches in the home.Each Light Switch has two properties hasID, and hasLocation.
which way is the most correct way to doing it.
making a class LightSwitch
a data property hasID
an object property hasLocation
some individual Like LightSwitch-01, LightSwitch-02
OR
making a class LightSwitch
subclasses KitchenLightSwitch, LivingroomLightSwitch, and etc.
a data property hasID
an object property hasLocation
some individual Like LightSwitch-01, LightSwitch-02
In ontology design there is no right or wrong in general (of course there are situations where someone makes mistakes in the design process).
There is no such thing like "this is the one and only solution". There are always different solutions, based on your scenario, experience and what you would like to do with the ontology.
In your case you could solve your problem with both approaches (I would prefer the second one, since I'm a fan of classes). The only difference in your example that I see is that in the first one all lightswitch instances are of the type "LightSwitch" and in the second one the instances are of theire location type (e.g. KitchenLightSwitch).
However if you are using the object property "hasLocation" you do not really need subclasses for "LightSwitch".
Create a class "Lightswitch" with the instances "Switch1, Switch2,..." and create a class Room with instances (Kitchen, Livingroom, etc).
In the last step you associate a relationship: Switch1 hasLocation Kitchen.
Another possibility would be to create the class Room and subclasses LivingRoom, KitchenRoom, etc. Each of the subclasses would have an instance "kitchenroom, livingroom, etc."
But really, its up to you. I see nothing wrong with both of your solutions. However, if you would provide more information or your context would be more complex.. maybe then one could prefer either solution A or solution B, but for exactly this example that you are asking for, both solutions are right.
I have a bunch of questions regarding Java 8 and SDN4. I created a model in Neo4j v3.0, played a bit with Cypher queries, and now moved to creating a Spring Boot application. As i started coding classes in Java, I've begun to rethink some of my model as well. Here's some questions in my mind (and I haven't found an example explaining this):
Do you need to use Interfaces in Java, with SDN?For eg. I'd code a Product interface and then have my products implement it, but is that how it's done when working with labels?
This is somewhat tied to my question on inheritance - I'd usually have a ProductFamily that my Product would inherit from. At the database level its modeled as (:Product)-[PartOf]->(:ProductFamily), but in the code these would not be super/sub class.
Any examples of using Generics in a graph context?
Is there a way to define constraints on what relationships a node can have and their direction in Java?
I understand there is probably not one right answer, but there's precious little on the web, so hope to get enlightened here!
If you had a Product interface annotated with #NodeEntity, then the you'll have the Product label in addition to the label on your implementing class, which I assume is what you want. If your interface isn't annotated, then your implementing classes will not inherit a label from it.
Not sure what you mean- if you say you have a ProductFamily that Product inherits from, but in the code it would not be a super/sub class?
Based on your graph model, if you want (:Product)-[PartOf]->(:ProductFamily) then you will have a Product class that maintains a reference to a ProductFamily class, and that reference annotated with #Relationship. If the Product class inherits from ProductFamily then persisting the Product will result in two labels- Product and ProductFamily because a Product IS-A ProductFamily.
How do you see yourself using generics- the answer really depends on that. Some cases are supported, some are not (an example of something not supported right now is equivalent of template.createRelationBetween in SDN4)
Yes, via the #Relationship annotation which accepts a type and direction. Note that this annotation only constrains your domain model, but you could very well flout this by creating relationships in another direction via a custom query.
I'm trying to implement the OpenEHR reference model in Rails (ActiveRecord), but I'm finding some problems, since it works with a lot of different of different classess,
Here is the diagram of a Composition:
As you can see, a lot of classes "inherit" a couple of attributes from Locatable or Pathable* (the whole reference is huge, and almost every class inherit from it).
Also, it establish data_types as other classes, for example in the same composition class, language is class CODE_PHRASE, that have two attributes (link).
Therefore I encounter two problems 1) how can I inherit attributes from abstract classes, and 2) how is that I can "include" the needed "classes".
For the first problem I thought in using Polymorphic Associations.
For the second one, I thought using STI, but I'm quickly finding a lot of almost similar models (they are exactly the same actually): CompositionLanguage, CompositionTerritory, EntrySetting, EntryEncoding that I only use in the type attribute to "link back", for example: The composition class, can have up to three attributes with CODE_PHRASE, since all three references a different attribute (language, territory and category), I thought that I needed to know for the associations (there's no point in knowing that Composition has 3 code_phrases, but I didn't know which one is the corresponding attribute). On the other hand, the Entry class, have the setting and encoding attribute (link).
I realize that there could be different approaches, but I would really like to know if that maybe Rails (or ActiveRecord), wasn't made for this. Or, maybe I'm missing conceptual info.
The openEHR RM specification has deeply nested inheritance and composite patterns with tree hierarchy.
I could not implement this nested inheritance by ActiveRecord. The following implementation is an example to simulate openEHR RM.
I would be very happy if this example could help you.
https://github.com/skoba/openehr_rm_rails
Have you looked at this project ..
https://github.com/skoba/openehr-rails
I think Shinji uses Active Record.
Personally, given the complex structure of the openEHR RM, if I was starting out I might look to use something like MongoDB with an ORM.
I have pointed the openehr technical community to your question via the openehr technical list to see if others can help.
Ian
Is there a way to add more belongs-to relationships to an imported GORM domain class? Specifically, I'm attempting to use table-per-class to extend a shared subclass, but if I do this in two (or more) locations, and the locations do not have knowledge of each-other then things like:
set.addToParents(parentSet)
Start leading to:
org.hibernate.WrongClassException: Object [id=3482] was not of the specified subclass [com.acumenllc.domaincore.DbSet] : Discriminator: com.acumenllc.tickets.domain.TicketSet
happening everywhere.
A little more background, I'm working on a closure table to keep track of related objects. The base class recognizes the parent-child bi-directional relationship, as well as the ancestor-descendant extension of it. Different applications then extend this class with belongsTo relationships on objects to be represented as nodes in the resultant graph. We specifically want to be able to more-or-less ignore some of these other classes in other applications that happen to share the same database.
Ideally, it would be possible to import our base domain class into a new application and, rather than extending into a subclass, re-define the set of relationships that the base class recognizes in the scope of the application.
The only practical way I can see of doing this is with .hbm.xml files. The GORM approach of including hasMany/belongsTo in the code and JPA's approach using annotations are both fairly inflexible to support this sort of mapping. But if you separate the configuration from the code, you can define the relationships for different applications however you like. Creating a hibernate.cfg.xml file and the hbm.xml files is described here in the docs.
I am very new to creating ontologies, and I'm trying to make one for a club and society section of a website only using a few classes.
This is my structure so far (classes then indented for sub classes).
Person
Member
President
Treasurer
Club/Society
TypeOfClub
Community
CourseRelated
FaithAndCulture
HobbiesAndInterests
MediaArtsAndMusic
PoliticalAndActivism
Venue
Booking
Location
I'm not 100% sure if what i'm doing is right. I just got rid of a lot of my sub classes realising that they were data type properties (number of members, joining fee) so now I have very few sub classes and can't think of what to add in their place.
I have venue as separate from location because I was trying to add in an rdf file that dealt with location in protoge (just to see how it would work).
Is there anything I should definitely add/get rid of with my class structure?
I hope this documentation http://protege.stanford.edu/publications/ontology_development/ontology101-noy-mcguinness.html will help you to get a basic idea about Ontologies