ontology

问题 Recently, I'm trying to approach semantic web using Jena to create RDF and make query. Now, I have successfully made a owl based RDF file in Jena. However, when I trying to use different ontologies (such as: cidoc-crm), I do not know how to import those ontologies to Jena. Does anyone know how to import them to Jena? Do I need to create a new ontology model? 回答1: Jena's OntModel interface provides a convenient way of working with ontologies (including RDFS ontologies). The following code

问题 What is the difference between rdf:seeAlso and rdfs:seeAlso ? When I can use rdf:seeAlso and when I can use rdfs:seeAlso ? Can you do any examples? 回答1: First, note that rdf and rdfs are prefixes commonly used to reference the RDF syntax and RDF schema vocabularies respectively. The rdf is typically used for http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#, so that rdf:seeAlso would expand to http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#seeAlso. However, if you follow the vocabulary reference, you

问题 I need to generate an enormous fact model using an ontology external to drools. Now, I could certainly write a script/program to pull this off. My approach would be to generate a java bean for each ontology class which contains the appropriate fields, methods, and references to other java objects based on ontological relationships (probably in a map). My question is whether drools has a more elegant way to approach this problem. I figure it must be a common problem that the fact model is

问题 I need to generate an enormous fact model using an ontology external to drools. Now, I could certainly write a script/program to pull this off. My approach would be to generate a java bean for each ontology class which contains the appropriate fields, methods, and references to other java objects based on ontological relationships (probably in a map). My question is whether drools has a more elegant way to approach this problem. I figure it must be a common problem that the fact model is

问题 Suppose I have the following RDF data: @prefix : <urn:ex:> :m :A "a" :m :A "b" :m :A "c" :m :B "a" :m :B "b" What SPARQL query could I use to check whether the RDF model satisfies the following logical formula? ∀x A(X) → B(x) 回答1: SPARQL doesn't have conditionals or universal quantification, but does have existentials (does anything match this?), (implicit) conjunction and negation (in the 'absence' sense). So rewrite the question: ∀x A(x) → B(x) ⇒ ∀x ¬ ( A(x) ∧ ¬ B(x) ) ⇒ ¬ ∃x A(x) ∧ ¬ B(x)

问题 I want to programmatically generate an ontology using OWL by supplying a vector. My goal is to be able to open the produced OWL file in Protégé and make use of Jena. Input Vector The vector which i want to pass: [[layer, network layer, data link layer, physical layer], [network, computer network], [data link], [ontology, ontology extraction]]. Expected Output The output should have the following tree-like hierarchy structure: layer -network layer -data link layer -physical layer network

问题 I'm having trouble expressing the following situation in my Ontology: Suppose I have four people voting and four votes (so there is a one-to-one mapping between vote and voter). People can either vote yes or no. If I know the outcome of three people's votes, I ought to be able to deduce the fourth person's vote. So to reiterate: John, Bob, Mary, and Carol each vote. Since there are four people there are four votes. The outcome of the vote is a tie (2 yes, and 2 no). Later on the reasoner

问题 I am stuck in the middle of ontology creation. I want to create an OWL file using Java which is my objective. I have created the hierarchical clusters but now I have to use those clusters in ontology creation. Thanks in advance. I have tried this so far. I got Dickinson's point. Now this is my code and I am getting an Exception as Exception in thread "main" com.hp.hpl.jena.shared.BadURIException: Only well-formed absolute URIrefs can be included in RDF/XML output: Code: 57/REQUIRED_COMPONENT

问题 I have recently started working with semantic web and linked data technologies, I have been always confused about one thing though. What is the difference between an Ontology and a vocabulary? Which is preferable? 回答1: In the driest sense, a "vocabulary" is a context-less list of terms, with no defined interrelationships. "Ontology" is meatier, implying the presence of interrelationships, axioms, classes, etc. Nevertheless, the term "vocabulary" is almost never used to mean ONLY "list of

问题 Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow. Closed 11 months ago . Are there libraries or certain "techniques" that you can use to create an ontology of elements? Or "design patterns"? I am talking about just a "graph" of things. Suppose I have a bunch of words. Certain words are "under" other words or "related" to other words. I need a good way to group them and know their