- From: James Anderson <anderson.james.1955@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 18:37:19 +0200
- To: RDF-star Working Group <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAB1oED3g94Mv1zwksc3+ubo8ZPbX4=UjsCLQa22ey8fZfcVYnw@mail.gmail.com>
as a furter excursion in this direction, i applied a revised version of the extraction process to the archived wikidata queries. these, as described by the ICCL Wikidata query archive https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/Wikidata_SPARQL_Logs/en there were a total of 1,310,678,852 SPARQL queries, of which 626,080 included exists operators. the attached graph depicts the operator count distribution On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 at 10:02, James Anderson <anderson.james.1955@gmail.com> wrote: > good morning; > > one of the topics last week was the possible variations evident in how > authors use the exists operator. > > in order to provide some information, i looked at the queries recorded for > several sites to which i have access. > the variants and the nodejs script to extract the data are present in a > fork of the SPARQL-exists github repository. > > https://github.com/datagraph/SPARQL-exists/tree/main/test-tools. > > the top directory contains the .mjs script. > the query-statistics directory includes the results from individual hosts > and an aggregate csv file. > > the queries have been anonymized to hide restricted information and to > make the resemblances stand out. > the analysis is context-free. > > best regards, from berlin, > --- > james anderson | james@dydra.com | https://dydra.com > > >
Attachments
- image/svg+xml attachment: query-statistics-node.svg
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2025 16:37:36 UTC