... | @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ |
... | @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ |
|
These steps are necessary in order to run the plug-in:
|
|
These steps are necessary in order to run the plug-in:
|
|
* Download the latest version of Protégé Desktop from [http://protege.stanford.edu/](http://protege.stanford.edu/) and follow the installation instructions.
|
|
* Download the latest version of Protégé Desktop from [http://protege.stanford.edu/](http://protege.stanford.edu/) and follow the installation instructions.
|
|
* Note that **the Debugger Plug-In is not compatible with Protégé version 4 and below**.
|
|
* Note that **the Debugger Plug-In is not compatible with Protégé version 4 and below**.
|
|
* Install the Ontology Debugger Plugin with Protégé's Update Function```File->Check for Plugins...``` and select *Ontology Debugger* ![installation_plugin](/uploads/479c1b78deb462462d492664a9d6ac55/image.png)
|
|
* Install the Ontology Debugger Plugin with Protégé's Update Function```File->Check for Plugins...``` and select *Ontology Debugger* ![installation_plugin](/uploads/40068aab0007255f84da1644fd9e9c7a/image.png)
|
|
* **As an alternative** you can also download the [latest jar-file](http://isbi.aau.at/ontodebug/plugin) of the *Ontology Debugger* and copy the jar-File into the ```plugins``` subfolder of your Protégé 5 desktop client.
|
|
* **As an alternative** you can also download the [latest jar-file](http://isbi.aau.at/ontodebug/plugin) of the *Ontology Debugger* and copy the jar-File into the ```plugins``` subfolder of your Protégé 5 desktop client.
|
|
* If your Protégé client is already running, you will have to restart the client to load the plugin.
|
|
* If your Protégé client is already running, you will have to restart the client to load the plugin.
|
|
* After your Protégé client has restarted you will see the additional menu entry ```Tools->Debug Ontology ...```
|
|
* After your Protégé client has restarted you will see the additional menu entry ```Tools->Debug Ontology ...```
|
... | @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ Please note that reasoners use different techniques to reason over ontologies. T |
... | @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ Please note that reasoners use different techniques to reason over ontologies. T |
|
|
|
|
|
Once you loaded the *Koala ontology*, you can open the *Ontology Debugger Tab* by selecting ```Tools->Debug Ontology...``` in the menu. You can also open the tab by selecting ```Window->Tabs->Debugger```. The initial layout of the *Ontology Debugger* should look similar to this screenshot:
|
|
Once you loaded the *Koala ontology*, you can open the *Ontology Debugger Tab* by selecting ```Tools->Debug Ontology...``` in the menu. You can also open the tab by selecting ```Window->Tabs->Debugger```. The initial layout of the *Ontology Debugger* should look similar to this screenshot:
|
|
|
|
|
|
![step3](/uploads/2cbd91a07df7a852d1afdaecc8f27c99/image.png)
|
|
![step3](/uploads/a95cb389e9994d08c452283bc453891a/image.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
*The Ontology Debugger Tab after the Koala ontology has been opened*
|
|
*The Ontology Debugger Tab after the Koala ontology has been opened*
|
|
|
|
|
... | @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ __Correct Axioms__ are axioms that are assumed to be correct. Such axioms have t |
... | @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ __Correct Axioms__ are axioms that are assumed to be correct. Such axioms have t |
|
**Note**: When loading the *Koala ontology* the debugger assumes all logical axioms as *Possibly Faulty Axioms*. Thus all 42 logical axioms are *Possibly Faulty* axioms. As long as the Debugging Session has not been started, the user can modify the two lists by clicking on the icons ![possibly_Faulty](/uploads/d152029365ddc44a0946c68e3ece74b7/possibly_Faulty.PNG) and ![correct](/uploads/433f214d1523b2ec6c3ba2ef66aa83f9/correct.PNG) to assume axioms to be either _possibly faulty_ or _correct_, respectively.
|
|
**Note**: When loading the *Koala ontology* the debugger assumes all logical axioms as *Possibly Faulty Axioms*. Thus all 42 logical axioms are *Possibly Faulty* axioms. As long as the Debugging Session has not been started, the user can modify the two lists by clicking on the icons ![possibly_Faulty](/uploads/d152029365ddc44a0946c68e3ece74b7/possibly_Faulty.PNG) and ![correct](/uploads/433f214d1523b2ec6c3ba2ef66aa83f9/correct.PNG) to assume axioms to be either _possibly faulty_ or _correct_, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Test Cases View
|
|
#### Test Cases View
|
|
In the mid section the so called **acquired** and **original test cases** of the current debugging session are shown.
|
|
In the mid section the so called **acquired** and **saved test cases** of the current debugging session are shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Acquired Test Cases
|
|
##### Acquired Test Cases
|
|
**Acquired Test Cases** are axioms that have already been answered by the user in previous queries. They are either categorized as _Entailed Test Cases_ when they have been classified by the user as correct statements in the ontology or as _Non Entailed Testcases_ when they must not be entailed in (these statements are not correct) the ontology according to the user's answer.
|
|
**Acquired Test Cases** are axioms that have already been answered by the user in previous queries. They are either categorized as _Entailed Test Cases_ when they have been classified by the user as correct statements in the ontology or as _Non Entailed Testcases_ when they must not be entailed in (these statements are not correct) the ontology according to the user's answer.
|
... | @@ -105,13 +105,17 @@ In the image below we see an example with three Entailed Testcases and one Non E |
... | @@ -105,13 +105,17 @@ In the image below we see an example with three Entailed Testcases and one Non E |
|
|
|
|
|
*The Acquired Test Cases show us the answers - the yellow background color highlights an inferred axiom*
|
|
*The Acquired Test Cases show us the answers - the yellow background color highlights an inferred axiom*
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Original Test Cases
|
|
##### Saved Test Cases
|
|
Next to the set of Acquired Test Cases you have the **Original Test Cases** showing manually added test cases.
|
|
Next to the set of Acquired Test Cases you have the **Saved Test Cases** showing either manually added or previously saved acquired test cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
While the Aquired Test Cases lists the answers the user has given the Original Test Cases list manually added axioms that the user wants to be entailed or not entailed in the intended ontology.
|
|
While the Aquired Test Cases lists the answers the user has given in the current debugging session, the Saved Test Cases list either manually added axioms or list acquired axioms from previous debugging session that the user wants to be reused. In order to store Saved Test Cases permanently they are stored as ontology annotations. These changes to the ontology annotations has the effect that the ontology has changed and the user is asked to store the changes once she closes Protégé.
|
|
![image](/uploads/944a1007a47741af7ebc0c92d1f4de26/image.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that the manual addition of test cases is not possible during a running debugging session.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![image](/uploads/74470db3ea2f456778a2c72b7d0f3929/image.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*This screenshot shows a handcrafted non entaled test case next to two saved entailed test cases from a previous debugging session*
|
|
|
|
|
|
*The Original Test Cases lists handcrafted entailed and non-entailed test cases*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Queries View
|
|
#### Queries View
|
|
|
|
|
... | @@ -195,7 +199,7 @@ If she is not sure about the correct answer she can leave the question unanswere |
... | @@ -195,7 +199,7 @@ If she is not sure about the correct answer she can leave the question unanswere |
|
|
|
|
|
In our example we assume that both axioms are correct since only persons can have a degree, i.e. the domain of ```hasDegree``` is ```Person```, and we assume that only persons can be hard-working, i.e. the domain of ```isHardWorking``` is ```Person``` as well. Please note that as soon as the user answers/classifies one axiom the submit button becomes active - since, as previously stated, the user is not forced to answer all queries.
|
|
In our example we assume that both axioms are correct since only persons can have a degree, i.e. the domain of ```hasDegree``` is ```Person```, and we assume that only persons can be hard-working, i.e. the domain of ```isHardWorking``` is ```Person``` as well. Please note that as soon as the user answers/classifies one axiom the submit button becomes active - since, as previously stated, the user is not forced to answer all queries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
![step1](/uploads/3a4abb8af1214bf5b0f958ed36158839/image.png)
|
|
![step1](/uploads/9fb08b5de41bafb747636515743b0e3b/image.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
*Answer both statements with YES and press the SUBMIT button*
|
|
*Answer both statements with YES and press the SUBMIT button*
|
|
|
|
|
... | @@ -209,7 +213,7 @@ After the calculation has finished, the user is presented a new query and a new |
... | @@ -209,7 +213,7 @@ After the calculation has finished, the user is presented a new query and a new |
|
|
|
|
|
The given answers are listed as __Entailed Testcases__ in the __Acquired Test Cases View__ in the mid section, since the user answered with *YES*. Negatively answered statements are listed as __Non Entailed Testcases__.
|
|
The given answers are listed as __Entailed Testcases__ in the __Acquired Test Cases View__ in the mid section, since the user answered with *YES*. Negatively answered statements are listed as __Non Entailed Testcases__.
|
|
|
|
|
|
![step2](/uploads/8a7b96ac321c100918fbd981230ec07f/image.png)
|
|
![step2](/uploads/243cbc8fe348838a9dfa45454a41ca4d/image.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
*A new query with a set of statements (including an inferred one) is presented to the user*
|
|
*A new query with a set of statements (including an inferred one) is presented to the user*
|
|
|
|
|
... | @@ -354,4 +358,4 @@ These default preferences were used for this tutorial. |
... | @@ -354,4 +358,4 @@ These default preferences were used for this tutorial. |
|
|
|
|
|
[1] Uli Sattler,Robert Stevens,Phillip Lord (2013) (I can’t get no) satisfiability. Ontogenesis. http://ontogenesis.knowledgeblog.org/1329
|
|
[1] Uli Sattler,Robert Stevens,Phillip Lord (2013) (I can’t get no) satisfiability. Ontogenesis. http://ontogenesis.knowledgeblog.org/1329
|
|
|
|
|
|
[2] V. Sazonau "Performance Prediction of OWL Reasoners" Master's thesis, The University of Manchester PDF, http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~sazonauv/SazonauThesis.pdf |
|
[2] V. Sazonau "Performance Prediction of OWL Reasoners" Master's thesis, The University of Manchester PDF, http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~sazonauv/SazonauThesis.pdf |
|
\ No newline at end of file |
|
|