- 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