So... that type of modeling is more inline with NLP and Noun / Verb Property linkage. Which you can do. Do you need to also then describe semantically the WORKS_AT relationship ? You could give all relationships themselves describing properties, OR perhaps just link them to a SKOS_CONCEPT of _work_
In Freebase, we have Janitor looking more like this: http://www.freebase.com/inspect/en/janitor where we have assigned multiple Types to that Entity (the "Janitor" Topic). You'll also notice that it is an Equivalent Topic to the SKOS_CONCEPT of a "Janitor": http://www.freebase.com/inspect/authority/us/gov/loc/sh/sh85069345 Basically, Freebase uses a Triplestore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triplestore called "graphd" to maintain quad data: {<source>, <property>, <destination>, <value>} more fully described on our wiki here: http://wiki.freebase.com/wiki/Data_dump Basically, <destination> is where a Namespace is held. And you can see the layout of a tuple when looking at any entity with the URI http://www.freebase.com/inspect If your more technically inclined about the underpinnings, Toby gives a brief technical breakdown of graphd here: http://blog.freebase.com/2008/04/09/a-brief-tour-of-graphd/ He also wrote a book, http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596153823.do How Freebase has enoted that a Person has an Employment with a Job Title at an Employer is shown here: http://www.freebase.com/inspect/en/patrick_simmons <-- look at my example school "THAD SCHOOL" that is linked out from Patrick Simmons to this source node with various properties, http://www.freebase.com/inspect/m/0h5mvw6 Making more sense now ? On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 1:57 PM, loldrup <lold...@gmail.com> wrote: > What if: > Joe WORKS_AT the school > Joe WORKS_AS a janitor > The school HAS_A janitor > > How do I denote that Joe works as I janitor at that exact school? > Do you see other problems in the notation above? > > Also, thank you very much for your thought inspiring reply! > > Jon > On Sep 24, 2011 7:55 PM, "Thad Guidry [via Neo4j Community Discussions]" < > ml-node+s438527n3364798...@n3.nabble.com> wrote: > > > > > > Quite wrong. > > > > IS_JANITOR_OF will stick you into a boxed node ordinal. > > What you really want when modeling the world is to only capture the > > "semantic relationships" themselves. IS_A being a core semantic > > relationship. I am a janitor. He IS_A janitor. What is a janitor ? What > > properties does a janitor have ? Does a janitor always have those > > properties, no matter it's state ? Does a janitor that LIVES_AT the > > Seychelles Islands always have a pail and mop ? > > > > When trying to model "the world", you must break down to the lowest of > lows. > > And then use Types to clearly designate Property Reasonings. > > > > For instance, SWRC ontology says that Bioinformatics IS_A subtopic of > > KnowledgeWeb Applications. > > > > <p2:subTopic> > > <p1:ResearchTopic rdf:about=" > > > https://wiki-sop.inria.fr/wiki/bin/view/Acacia/KnowledgeWeb#Bioinformatics > "> > > <p2:isSubTopicOf rdf:resource=" > > https://wiki-sop.inria.fr/wiki/bin/view/Acacia/KnowledgeWeb#Applications > "/> > > <p2:topicNumber rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string > ">2.7.3 > > </p2:topicNumber> > > </p1:ResearchTopic> > > </p2:subTopic> > > > > Great for them. But WHAT is Bioinformatics to the rest of "the world", > > generally ? Is it a FIELD_OF_STUDY as Freebase.com says ? Is it a > > STUDY_SUBJECT as other Vocabularies describe ? Is a FIELD_OF_STUDY the > same > > as a STUDY_SUBJECT ? Or is it more proper and correct to say that a > > FIELD_OF_STUDY can be PART_OF a STUDY_SUBJECT ? Bioinformatics PART_OF > > Biology PART_OF Science ? I would say both and all. And there you would > > need many "semantic relationships", depending again on the domains' > usage. > > > > In Freebase, we decided early on that the lowest of lows would be TOPICS. > > Some TOPICS could be given Types. A Janitor is a Type of Person. Oh > > Really ? No. Not always to some ! But all domains typically agree that a > > Janitor is a Profession. A Job_Type (TypeOfJob) that someone professes or > > agrees to WORK_AS for payment. And some folks might be enslaved to > WORK_AS > > :) > > > > Existing Ontologies and Vocabularies (which are domain based, some wider > > than others) can help anyone trying to model "the world". However, be > aware > > that many longtail domains, like Food Service, or Laser Etching, are > simply > > not modeled, no one has touched those yet in building ontologies or > > vocabularies and henceforth, require community domain experts (the folks > in > > those businesses or scientific or government communities) to help you > think > > correctly within their domains, rather than how "the rest of world" would > > typically organize them. Organizing across *domains* with Types will > > require Namespaces for those domains, and in some cases, you will find > that > > only a FEW Properties really apply to a specific Namespace. They are just > > simply NOT used by the rest of "the world". > > > > The very last part for you in modeling "the world" should be at a CONCEPT > > level. Like SKOS_CONCEPT. Only once you have seen the overlap of a > CONCEPT > > across domains, can you then begin to give the answer, YES, when 2 or 3 > > domains ask, "Is this CONCEPT_OF "Janitor - a profession type where > someone > > cleans" the SAME_AS ours and RELATED_TO the CONCEPT_OF "Maid" ? > > > > Proper "semantic relationships" have to allow flexibility across domains. > > Find some common overlapping Types and Topics across Domains, and then > > begin your experimentation there (and make sure you get a bit of History > or > > Historical Types in there as well to account for Time Space associations > - > > those always screw with my head personally, lol). You will soon begin to > > see that Domains are really like "Photoshop layers". > > > > -- > > -Thad > > http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry > > _______________________________________________ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > > > > http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/Modelling-with-neo4j-tp3363823p3364798.html > > > > To unsubscribe from Modelling with neo4j, visit > > http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=3363823&code=bG9sZHJ1cEBnbWFpbC5jb218MzM2MzgyM3wtODU1NTY5ODYz > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/Modelling-with-neo4j-tp3363823p3364902.html > Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > -- -Thad http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
