- From: Yuzhong Qu <yzqu@seu.edu.cn>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:16:35 +0800
- To: "Jeremy Wong" <50263336@student.cityu.edu.hk>
- Cc: "SWIG" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <005b01c534f8$68d7bcf0$fd0b77ca@xobjects>
I agree with you that there can be different statistics for different purposes. So some statistical models should be established before a large amount of ontologies are collected and analysed. As to the merging issue, there are at least two ways to manage it. One is to record the "owl:imports" linkage between ontologies (BTW, there may exist many versions for one ontology), another way is to sum up the statistics. Please note: If the infered axioms (by RDFS or OWL inference rules) are included in statistics, then the computing will become too complex. OK, I can see that the indexing issue is related to the statistics. Yuzhong Qu ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeremy Wong To: Yuzhong Qu Cc: SWIG Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 12:48 PM Subject: Re: Frequency List of resources and properties Your intuition applies on RDF schema without entailments. It seems that there can be different statistics for different purpose. For examples, a statistics for RDF in general, a statistics for RDFS, for OWL, and statistics for various ontologies, RDF closures. It is likely that there can be a statistics for each ontology. When ontologies are merged together, a merge of the statistics of the ontologies may be useful. However, how to merge statistics? BTW, my objective to use the statistics is for indexing triggers, providing that there is a pool of rules for real-time inference. Jeremy ----- Original Message ----- From: Yuzhong Qu To: Jeremy Wong Cc: SWIG Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 10:24 AM Subject: Re: Frequency List of resources and properties This is one of the works planned in our Group. Hopefully, the statistics will be given around Oct. this year. Frankly, your list is not fit with my intuition. Intuitively, the following classes and properties have high frequency of use rdfs:Class rdf:Property rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:domain rdfs:range rdfs:subPropertyOf BTW, the statistics model ( and objectives) is not easy to established, and the ontoloy capturing is also a hard stuff. Any comment is welcome! Yuzhong Qu ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeremy Wong To: semantic-web@w3.org Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 2:50 AM Subject: Frequency List of resources and properties I want to make a list of resources and a list of properties, order by frequency of use. It would be grateful if you can help on improving the lists and even add new item to the lists. A list of resource (exclude properties): -- higher frequency rdfs:Resource rdf:Property rdfs:Class rdfs:Literal rdf:List -- lower frequency rdf:Alt rdf:Bag rdf:Statement rdf:Seq rdf:XMLLiteral rdfs:Container rdfs:ContainerMembershipProperty rdfs:Datatype owl:AllDifferent owl:AnnotationProperty owl:Class owl:DataRange owl:DatatypeProperty owl:DeprecatedClass owl:DeprecatedProperty owl:FunctionalProperty owl:InverseFunctionalProperty owl:Nothing owl:ObjectProperty owl:Ontology owl:OntologyProperty owl:Restriction owl:SymmetricProperty owl:Thing owl:TransitiveProperty A list of properties: -- higher frequency rdf:type owl:sameAs rdf:first rdf:rest rdf:nil rdfs:domain rdfs:range rdfs:member rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subClassOf -- lower frequency rdf:object rdf:predicate rdf:subject rdf:value rdfs:comment rdfs:isDefinedBy rdfs:label rdfs:seeAlso owl:allValuesFrom owl:backwardCompatibleWith owl:cardinality owl:complementOf owl:differentFrom owl:disjointWith owl:distinctMembers owl:equivalentClass owl:equivalentProperty owl:hasValue owl:imports owl:incompatibleWith owl:intersectionOf owl:inverseOf owl:maxCardinality owl:minCardinality owl:oneOf owl:onProperty owl:priorVersion owl:someValuesFrom owl:unionOf owl:versionInfo Frankly speaking, I don't have much statistics data and I am even lazy to produce one (my time is too tight.. my priority may not allow so.. work->study->work->study->... -_- and I am not too smart -_-...). The above 2 lists are my prediction only, modification with ground is totally welcome. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2005 07:13:59 UTC