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

Integration with RDF4J #109

Open
kenwenzel opened this issue Jan 12, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Integration with RDF4J #109

kenwenzel opened this issue Jan 12, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@kenwenzel
Copy link

Is it possible - with limited effort - to integrate arachne with RDF4J?
I think it would be useful to have a forward chaining reasoner for RDF4J SAILs.

@balhoff
Copy link
Owner

balhoff commented Jan 13, 2022

I'm not too familiar with what would be involved, but I would be happy to provide any guidance on Arachne. As an alternative, Jena's forward chaining reasoner provides some functors in addition to triple matching. The original motivation for Arachne was that it handles huge numbers of rules better than Jena's reasoner. I know Jena is separate from RDF4J, but both it and Arachne would require translation back and forth to their own triple models.

@kenwenzel
Copy link
Author

Thank you for your quick response. Do you have any figures regarding the performance of Arachne? Is it faster than Jena's implementation.

@balhoff
Copy link
Owner

balhoff commented Jan 18, 2022

Thank you for your quick response. Do you have any figures regarding the performance of Arachne? Is it faster than Jena's implementation.

I don't really have any formal comparisons, but there is a little bit in here: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2397192 In general I think performance is similar, or Jena is slightly faster for common numbers of rules, but as the number of rules grow into the hundreds of thousands, Arachne is much faster.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants