W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Reasoner accuracy

From: adasal <adam.saltiel@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:40:35 +0100
Message-ID: <CANJ1O4r=H-B2Ro+nq3Sq9uwh2n9SZvLjyg+z89-Qfd4O7wyJhw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "gouadjed@eoweo.com" <gouadjed@eoweo.com>
Cc: "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Well it's a very complex subject isn't it.
I have never done reasoner optimization but e.g. Allegro claim their
reasoner is faster over a certain data set than some other X. And I think
theirs and others have reasoners which are plug in. So the first step is
understanding the significance of the underlying data store.
Then there is the logic the reasoner supports. Some are opptimised for
different branches. But may do less well than X with some other logic set.
I think choice of logic comes before choice of reasoner though?
So now we have the store, the logic, the reasoner and add in the
implementation language and the query language.
If it is a complex store (Open RDF?) we may also be looking at its
component modules and their implementation.
Don't forget versions.
Now what do you want to know?
(not just to be clear that I would be able to answer. But then think about
it very few people would given above. )

Adam

On Friday, 22 June 2012, Ghalem Ouadjed (EOWEO) wrote:

> Hello Jakub,
>
> thank you for your answer.
>
> What means too vague when you ask a question to a group of individuals :)
>
> the questions you ask are already some kinds of answers and build the
> beginning of a discussion.
>
> Actually you re right as my question was more about to know if, well, "is
> there a lot of users who meet difficulties with reasoners in général or
> not" and if yes what kind of difficulties.
>
> Thank you for the link, i m already exploring it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Le 22/06/2012 13:52, Jakub Kotowski a écrit :
>
>> Hello Ghalem,
>>
>> I think you did not receive any answer because your question is too
>> vague. There can be many reasons why a reasoner may be slow. It's
>> difficult to give you a general advice that would be useful.
>>
>> You should make your question more specific by saying what are the
>> problematic reasoners, what kind of data they are being used on,
>> examples of problematic queries, etc.
>>
>> The most appropriate list to ask on would probably be a list dedicated
>> to the specific reasoner. You could also try a site like
>> http://answers.semanticweb.**com/ <http://answers.semanticweb.com/>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jakub
>>
>>
>> On 06/22/2012 10:27 AM, Ghalem Ouadjed (EOWEO) wrote:
>>
>>> Hello
>>> i resend my initial question for which i didn t get no answer.
>>> I then presume this list is not the right one regarding the subscribers
>>> knowledge and interests.
>>> I would like to know if someone could guide me to a list which concerns
>>> reasoners and also one which concerns frameworks pls.
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance for your time
>>> Cheers
>>> Ghalem
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> i really have more and more of clients and partners here who talk to me
>>> and ask me about the efficiency of the reasoners they use.
>>> Actually the conclusions they collect and display are not always false
>>> but it seems that they systematically meet complications with the
>>> performance optimisation.
>>> For example one request could take an hour to be answered.
>>>
>>> Has someone a kind of recommandation or advice regarding reasoners
>>> problematics pls?
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance for your time.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Ghalem
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> --
> Ghalem Ouadjed Formateur France en Technologies Sémantiques Certification
> et Conseil en Web Sémantique Membre Associé du STI International :
> http://www.sti2.org/associate-**members<http://www.sti2.org/associate-members>Mob : 0616674816
> gouadjed@eoweo.com | http://blog.eoweo.com | http://www.viadeo.com/fr/**
> profile/ghalem.ouadjed <http://www.viadeo.com/fr/profile/ghalem.ouadjed>| twitter : @ghalem_ouadjed
>
>
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 15:41:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:49 GMT