... | ... | @@ -81,9 +81,16 @@ In the **Queries** view we have 3 buttons that control the debugging session: |
|
|
- The **Stop**-button stops a running debugging session. As long there is no running session this button is disabled (greyed out) ![stop](/uploads/9a5f30421341fa4ff1a2f94437f6d52d/stop.PNG)
|
|
|
- The **Submit**-button is used to **answer a query**. This button is greyed out as long as a session has not been started or - once started - as long as the user has not yet classified any axiom in the query as entailed or non-entailed. ![submit](/uploads/06b7a61d7a3d6f8fac58bc4ba7a31730/submit.PNG)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let us use now press the button Start to start a new debugging session!
|
|
|
### Step 5: Starting a new debugging session
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ontology debugger first checks if the ontology is consistent/coherent. Since our Koala ontology is incoherent it will present us the following two statements as part of the first query:
|
|
|
Let's press the button Start to start a new debugging session!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ontology debugger first checks if the ontology is consistent/coherent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, if you debug a consistent / coherent ontology the debugger recognizes the correctness of the ontology and informs the user about the correctness of her ontology. The camera ontology (http://protege.stanford.edu/ontologies/koala.owl) for example would be such a consistent and coherent ontology - no further debugging is then necessary.
|
|
|
![coherent_ontology](/uploads/2068ac4641163ca52b146085b79bc43e/coherent_ontology.PNG) *A information pops up if the ontology meets the requirements (coherency and/or consistency)*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since our Koala ontology is incoherent it will present us the following two statements as part of the first query:
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the Queries view you now will see these two axioms:
|
|
|
![first_two_axioms](/uploads/1e8f5381ed0541131964117598fc6fa9/first_two_axioms.PNG)*Note: if you get other axioms, then you have set different preference values - use the default prefence values (see below) in this tutorial*
|
... | ... | @@ -106,8 +113,17 @@ The minimal conflict sets can be viewed in the Ontology Debugger's __Conflicts__ |
|
|
|
|
|
**Note** that the conflict sets can only be calculated using *HS-Tree* and *HS-DAG* as *Diagnosis Engine Type* (selectable in the debuggers preferences).
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Step 5: Answer the first query
|
|
|
Continuing with the session from above, the queries section shows us the following question to be answered: ```hasDegree Domain Person``` and ```isHardWorking Domain Person```.
|
|
|
### Step 6: Answer the first query
|
|
|
Continuing with the session from above, the Queries view shows us the following question to be answered:
|
|
|
|
|
|
-```hasDegree Domain Person```
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
-```isHardWorking Domain Person```.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![first_two_axioms](/uploads/1e8f5381ed0541131964117598fc6fa9/first_two_axioms.PNG)
|
|
|
|
|
|
These two axioms are to be understood as questions generated from the Ontology Debugger given to us (for this introduction let us assume that we are experts in the domain of Marsupials).
|
|
|
|
... | ... | @@ -136,7 +152,7 @@ Both previously given answers are now listed among the __Entailed Testcases__ in |
|
|
|
|
|
![step2](/uploads/b7aca8279cd4c9869d96384382aa39a7/step2.png)*A new set of Queries is presented to the user*
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Step 6: Answer all queries until the Debugger gives us a solution
|
|
|
### Step 7: Answer all queries until the Debugger gives us a solution
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since the Ontology Debugger has not found a unique solution yet (i.e. there are still multiple Possible Ontology Repairs), the set of faulty axiom sets is updated based on the given query answer after the user presses the Submit-button. This update involves the deletion of faulty axiom sets inconsistent with the given answer and the generation of some new possible faulty axiom sets as a basis for the computation of the next query. If we continue answering the stated questions of the debugger we will finally end up with one Possible Ontology Repair (also known as diagnosis) corresponding to our Acquired Test Cases and Input Ontology.
|
|
|
|
... | ... | @@ -155,7 +171,7 @@ You can reproduce the provided solution either by taking a look at the given ans |
|
|
|
|
|
Note that the axioms ```Quokka SubClassOf Person```as well as ```Koala DisjointWith Person``` among the acquired test cases are axioms **inferred** by the Ontology Debugger that have been presented in queries. That is, these axioms are not listed in the Input Ontology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Step 7: Searching the knowledge base
|
|
|
### Step 8: Searching the knowledge base
|
|
|
We can verify that the axiom ```Quokka SubClassOf Person```is indeed an inferred axiom by searching the knowledge base (possibly faulty axioms) for axioms containing the search expression ```Quokka``` using the search bar in the input ontology view.
|
|
|
![search](/uploads/c9ff4e4a0c61c1ddca456abc399a8c23/search.png)
|
|
|
|
... | ... | |