Re: State of OWL reasoners

Hi,

HermiT has a bug giving more false positives that true positives for 
entailment: https://github.com/owlcs/hermit-reasoner/issues/9

Pellet and if i remember correctly openllet give java error when trying 
to compile package: https://github.com/stardog-union/pellet/issues/48

FaCT++: actually just managed to solve issue with missing libs, but 
can't find any documentation on how to make config file for reasoning

eye: missing some dependencies and didn't manage to install right ones 
without documentation.


May I ask which one are you running successfully? Btw I'm using Ubuntu.

Br


On 25.6.2020 18:39, William Van Woensel wrote:
> Hi Mikael,
>
> Just wondering, what errors are you getting in particular for each reasoner? I've successfully used several of the listed ones. (Also note that EYE is not an OWL reasoner, although it could be used with an OWL2 RL ruleset to fulfill that role to an extent.)
>
>
> W
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikael Pesonen <mikael.pesonen@lingsoft.fi>
> Sent: June-25-20 6:59 AM
> To: semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: State of OWL reasoners
>
> CAUTION: The Sender of this email is not from within Dalhousie.
>
> I thought to do some entailment checking in OWL in way that no programming or install scripting is not be required.
> So far have tested so far HermiT, Pellet, Openllet, Fact++, EYE and Robot. None of them work.
> Robot doesn't have the entailment function, others are broken. Either knowledge how to tweak Linux installation scripts to solve conflicts is required or they just crash or function erroneously.
> Some of the projects are alive, that is, forum and GitHub posts got first answered, but eventually got silence before problems got solved.
>
> I thing W3C is doing awesome job making the specifications, but they are useless without the tools that implement them.
>

Received on Friday, 26 June 2020 10:10:31 UTC