Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve disjoints file #72

Open
balhoff opened this issue Jan 11, 2023 · 6 comments · Fixed by #75
Open

improve disjoints file #72

balhoff opened this issue Jan 11, 2023 · 6 comments · Fixed by #75
Assignees

Comments

@balhoff
Copy link
Member

balhoff commented Jan 11, 2023

Currently there is a product that covers only the taxslim, containing these disjointness axioms:

  • X DisjointWith Y for all sibling taxa X and Y
  • (in_taxon some X) DisjointWith (in_taxon some Y) for all sibling taxa X and Y

I would like to request two enhancements:

  1. Add another type of axiom to the included disjoints (needed for more complete taxon restriction reasoning):
    (in_taxon some X) DisjointWith (in_taxon some (not X)) for every taxon X
  2. Publish a disjoints file for the complete taxonomy.
@matentzn
Copy link
Contributor

Publish a disjoints file for the complete taxonomy.

Why is this necessary? These files will be enormous, we are talking 2-3 GB, which will severely limit the sort of servers we can use to run a release due to upload restrictions. What ontology you know of is not using the slim file?

@balhoff
Copy link
Member Author

balhoff commented Jan 12, 2023

Ubergraph uses the full ontology. I think it would be good to have it for completeness. We could provide only a zipped version. I don't think it would require much memory to generate.

@balhoff
Copy link
Member Author

balhoff commented Jun 16, 2023

For creating the disjoints axioms over the whole ontology, I think we should use Jena instead of owltools & robot. It should be more memory efficient. Let's do this as a separate task after releasing the update to the taxslim disjoints.

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

cmungall commented Jun 16, 2023 via email

@balhoff
Copy link
Member Author

balhoff commented Jun 16, 2023

I'm going to reopen this just to remember that we want to expand to the whole taxonomy.

@balhoff balhoff reopened this Jun 16, 2023
@anitacaron
Copy link
Contributor

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants