[Pellet-users] Problems with Pellet and DIG

[James A Miller]

Evren,

If the USE_UNIQUE_NAME_ASSUMPTION option is turned on, will individual 
owl:sameAs triples still work?  I assume yes, but I learned long ago not 
to assume...

BTW, thanks for the informative talk on Pellet at SemTech.

Jim




Evren Sirin <evren at clarkparsia.com> 
Sent by: pellet-users-bounces at lists.owldl.com
05/19/2008 06:19 PM

To
michele.baggi at dimi.uniud.it
cc
pellet-users at lists.owldl.com
Subject
Re: [Pellet-users] Problems with Pellet and DIG







This is a common misconception about OWL not having Unique Name 
Assumption (UNA) and having Open World Assumption (OWA). With no other 
information, there is no reason to infer individuals B, C, D, and E are 
different from each other. for this reason,  all we can infer is A has 
at least one PhD but for all we know B, C, D, and E could all be 
different names for the same individual. THat is why A will not be 
inferred to be an instance of the min cardinality restriction.

In OWL, you would use owl:differentFrom or owl:AllDisjoint statements to 
declare the distinctness of those individuals. I don't know for sure but 
I believe there is no corresponding statement in DIG (one of many 
insufficiencies of DIG).

Pellet provides a configuration option to turn on UNA so every named 
individual is treated distinct and you would get your expected result. 
See [1] for details about this option.

Cheers,
Evren

[1] http://pellet.owldl.com/faq/una/




On 5/17/08 8:23 AM, michele.baggi at dimi.uniud.it wrote:
> Hallo,
> I'm a PhD student at the University of Siena - Italy and I'm using the
> Pellet reasoner for a projet of semantic filtering of XML documents. To
> interface Pellet I use the DIG Interface 1.0, but I noticed a problem 
with
> the number restriction construct, when querying a loaded ontology.
>
> I loaded the following ontology:
> Concepts: Prof, PhD
> Individuals: A, B, C, D, E
> Instances: A -> Prof,   B, C, D, E -> PhD
> Role: hasPhd
> Associations: hasPhD(A, B), hasPhD(A, C), hasPhD(A, D), hasPhD(A, E).
>
> In attachment there is a file containing the DIG Tell statement for the
> ontology I just here briefly described.
>
> I tried to query this ontology using the following DIG ask statement:
>
> <asks xmlns= ... >
>   <instance id="example1">
>     <individual name="A"/>
>     <and>
>      <catom name="Prof"/>
>      <atleast num="3">
>        <ratom name="hasPhD"/>
>        <catom name="PhD"/>
>      </atleast>
>     </and>
>   </instance>
> </asks>
>
> which asks for individual instances of concept "Prof" which are related 
to
> at least 3 individual instances of concept "PhD",
> and I get an empty list as answer, while I think it will return the
> individual "A".
>
> Any suggestion will be appreciated,
> I wish everybody a good weekend.
> Michele
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pellet-users mailing list
> Pellet-users at lists.owldl.com
> http://lists.owldl.com/mailman/listinfo/pellet-users
> _______________________________________________
>
> Sponsored by Clark & Parsia, LLC http://clarkparsia.com/

_______________________________________________
Pellet-users mailing list
Pellet-users at lists.owldl.com
http://lists.owldl.com/mailman/listinfo/pellet-users
_______________________________________________

Sponsored by Clark & Parsia, LLC http://clarkparsia.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.owldl.com/pipermail/pellet-users/attachments/20080530/4557d7f7/attachment.htm