inferred type exclusions

Question

inferred type exclusions

Closed this issue 8 years ago · 8 comments

OntoPilot should be able to exclude one or more user-specified types from the final set of inferred class assertions (type assertions) that are generated when reasoning on an ontology/data set. This could save a lot of space for large data files.

Answer 1 · 2017-04-24T20:57:02.000Z

@jdeck88, I'm working on the this issue now. Do you have some current test data somewhere I could work on (i.e., some data that are typical of what the ingest pipeline is generating)? I need the triplified data before they are run through the reasoner.

Answer 2 · 2017-04-24T20:57:55.000Z

@jdeck88 -- To explain a bit more, I could use the test data in the ppo_pre_reasoner repository, but I don't think they were updated since we made all of the changes in Boulder.

Answer 3 · 2017-04-24T21:43:33.000Z

Here you go... this one only has two records.. let me know if you need a test dataset w/ more rows.

…

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:57 PM, stuckyb ***@***.***> wrote: @jdeck88 <https://github.com/jdeck88> -- To explain a bit more, I could use the test data in the ppo_pre_reasoner repository, but I don't think they were updated since we made all of the changes in Boulder. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#69 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGdxRtR96lG448mNfnN2_fsVh-jU4E_ks5rzQzTgaJpZM4NGPQX> .

-- John Deck (541) 914-4739

Answer 4 · 2017-04-25T00:40:50.000Z

Thanks John. And yes, a test dataset with more rows would be awesome. Something big so I can test size reduction across a bunch of data points. I can't remember if you said you're breaking things up into 5,000 or 50,000 record chunks, but if you could add one of those, that would be great.

…

On 04/24/2017 05:43 PM, John Deck wrote: Here you go... this one only has two records.. let me know if you need a test dataset w/ more rows. On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:57 PM, stuckyb ***@***.***> wrote: > @jdeck88 <https://github.com/jdeck88> -- To explain a bit more, I could > use the test data in the ppo_pre_reasoner repository, but I don't think > they were updated since we made all of the changes in Boulder. > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#69 (comment)>, > or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGdxRtR96lG448mNfnN2_fsVh-jU4E_ks5rzQzTgaJpZM4NGPQX> > . > -- John Deck (541) 914-4739 — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#69 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADKD73VY0Jscfk27FlaoDUmImH2AN8bHks5rzReGgaJpZM4NGPQX>.

Answer 5 · 2017-04-25T00:41:52.000Z

Wait -- where did you put the test data? In the ppo_pre_reasoner repository?

Answer 6 · 2017-04-25T02:12:08.000Z

OK-- i attached the previous to the email thread... not sure the email/github functions supports attachment. Here is a response w/ file actually attached (and 50,000 incoming records)
test_50000.csv.ttl.gz

Answer 7 · 2017-04-25T02:18:20.000Z

Excellent. Thanks!

Answer 8 · 2017-04-28T20:23:28.000Z

This is now working in the phenology data ingest pipeline, so this feature is done.