- 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