蛋白质的反身性

问题描述

这是我用protege 5创建的本体.

This is my ontology created with protege 5 .

如果我使cl1和cl2不相交，则本体是不一致的，但是如果我取消选中is_friend_of自反，则本体不再是不一致的.我的本体论怎么了?

If i make cl1 and cl2 disjoint, then the ontology is being inconsistent , but if i uncheck is_friend_of reflexive , the ontology is not inconsistent any more . whats wrong with my ontology ?

我只希望cl1类个人具有is_friend_of属性.

I want only cl1 class individuals have is_friend_of property.

推荐答案

:is_friend_of的反射性对于不一致至关重要.

Reflexivity of :is_friend_of is essential for inconsistency.

看看原因>本体解释不一致:

我将尝试将此解释翻译成英语(差):

I'll try to translate this explanation into (poor) English:

1. 由于:is_friend_of是自反的，所以:c2_inst :is_friend_of :c2_inst.
2. 由于:is_friend_of的域是:cl1，因此c2_inst rdf:type :cl1.
3. 也是，c2_inst rdf:type :cl2.
4. 但是:cl1和:cl2是不相交的—矛盾.

1. Since :is_friend_of is reflexive, then :c2_inst :is_friend_of :c2_inst.
2. Since the domain of :is_friend_of is :cl1, then c2_inst rdf:type :cl1.
3. Also, c2_inst rdf:type :cl2.
4. But :cl1 and :cl2 are disjoint — contradiction.

---

实际上，每个反射性属性的域都是owl:Thing.

作为一种解决方法，您可以取消选中is_friend_of的自反性并以此方式定义:cl1:

As a workaround, you could uncheck reflexivity of is_friend_of and define :cl1 in this way:

Class: cl1
    EquivalentTo:
        is_friend_of some owl:Thing,
        is_friend_of some  Self

这篇关于蛋白质的反身性的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持！