You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@jena.apache.org by "Emmons, Ian D " <ie...@rtx.com.INVALID> on 2025/08/05 17:49:31 UTC
Configuring Fuseki for inference
Fuseki Users,
I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
Thanks,
Ian
==================
Ian Emmons
RTX BBN Technologies
Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
Hi Ian,
On 03/09/2025 18:21, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
> I’ve returned to this task, and I have two questions:
>
> First, DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker builds a graph, but inference is configured at the model level. Can I use a DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker to create an inference-enabled graph?
Yes - create the model, and use Model.getGraph()
The inference engines work on graphs - Model/InfModel doesn't add any
inference machinery.
Model.getGraph() returns the graph (an InfGraph, a subclass of Graph).
Or InfModel.getInfGraph() which is the same object as getGraph()
> Second, assuming I have a DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker working, what do I do with it? I don’t see any methods on Dataset, DatasetGraph, DataService, FusekiService, or any of the associated builders or factories that allows me to register a GraphMaker for use by the system.
The constructor to DatasetGraphMapLink isn't visible (that can be done
in the next release).
It is possible to (mis)use DatasetGraphMapLink.cloneStructure
---
DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker graphMaker = (name) -> {
System.out.println("Name:"+name);
return GraphFactory.createTxnGraph();
};
// Create a dataset with the default graph.
DatasetGraph dsg0 = DatasetGraphFactory.wrap(graphMaker.create(null));
// Cause a DatasetGraphMapLink to setup with the GraphMaker.
DatasetGraph dsg = DatasetGraphMapLink.cloneStructure(dsg0, graphMaker);
Node x = NodeFactory.createURI("http://example/");
dsg.add(x,x,x,x);
dsg.add(x,x,x,NodeConst.emptyString);
---
and the first quad added cause a graphMake call.
Andy
>
> Thanks, in advance,
>
> Ian
>
>
> From: Emmons, Ian D <ie...@rtx.com.INVALID>
> Date: Monday, August 11, 2025 at 6:15 PM
> To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
> Andy, Thanks for the clear answer — I’ll give the DatasetGraphFactory. GraphMaker a try. Assuming that works (I’m sure it will), having a configuration option becomes lower priority for me, but for ease of use it would be good to raise an issue.
>
>
> Andy,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the clear answer — I’ll give the DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker a try. Assuming that works (I’m sure it will), having a configuration option becomes lower priority for me, but for ease of use it would be good to raise an issue.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ian
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
>
> Date: Monday, August 11, 2025 at 10:33 AM
>
> To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
>
> Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
>
> Hi Ian, Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before. There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a datasets (DatasetGraphFactory. GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to configure that from a Fuseki configuration
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Ian,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before.
>
>
>
> There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a
>
>
>
> datasets (DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to
>
>
>
> configure that from a Fuseki configuration file unfortunately.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sorry about that - do you want to raise an issue?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 07/08/2025 19:07, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
>
>
>
>> Andy,
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Thanks for your reply.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> We use named graphs to store behavior models (pattern-of-life together with other related information) that lie at the heart of a large system of systems. Each model is stored in its own named graph, with the default graph used as a catalogue of the models with pointers to the named graphs.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Each graph contains the ontology separately, though it is the same ontology across all of them.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> An inference graph containing all the named graphs is not an option, because the models have a lifecycle like this:
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> * Initial development
>
>
>
>> * A series of approvals
>
>
>
>> * Insertion into operations
>
>
>
>> * Branching of the operational model to produce a new development-phase model
>
>
>
>> * Editing the branched model to make necessary changes
>
>
>
>> * A new approval cycle
>
>
>
>> * Retirement of the original operational model and promotion of the branch into operations
>
>
>
>> * Rinse, lather, repeat as necessary
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Because two branches of the same model differ, they may contradict each other, so a combined inference graph would produce nonsense. In essence, the named graphs are serving as inference isolation boundaries.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> The inference level we use is Micro-OWL.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Thanks,
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Ian
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
>
>
>
>> Date: Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 11:39 AM
>
>
>
>> To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
>
>
>
>> Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
>
>
>
>> Hi Ian, There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph combining all the named graphs? How do you use named graphs? Are they for data management reasons? Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology? What inference
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Hi Ian,
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> combining all the named graphs?
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> How do you use named graphs?
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Are they for data management reasons?
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology?
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> What inference level are you using?
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> Andy
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>> On 05/08/2025 18:49, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> Fuseki Users,
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> Thanks,
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> Ian
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> ==================
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> Ian Emmons
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>> RTX BBN Technologies
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Posted by "Emmons, Ian D " <ie...@rtx.com.INVALID>.
I’ve returned to this task, and I have two questions:
First, DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker builds a graph, but inference is configured at the model level. Can I use a DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker to create an inference-enabled graph?
Second, assuming I have a DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker working, what do I do with it? I don’t see any methods on Dataset, DatasetGraph, DataService, FusekiService, or any of the associated builders or factories that allows me to register a GraphMaker for use by the system.
Thanks, in advance,
Ian
From: Emmons, Ian D <ie...@rtx.com.INVALID>
Date: Monday, August 11, 2025 at 6:15 PM
To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Andy, Thanks for the clear answer — I’ll give the DatasetGraphFactory. GraphMaker a try. Assuming that works (I’m sure it will), having a configuration option becomes lower priority for me, but for ease of use it would be good to raise an issue.
Andy,
Thanks for the clear answer — I’ll give the DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker a try. Assuming that works (I’m sure it will), having a configuration option becomes lower priority for me, but for ease of use it would be good to raise an issue.
Thanks,
Ian
From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
Date: Monday, August 11, 2025 at 10:33 AM
To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Hi Ian, Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before. There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a datasets (DatasetGraphFactory. GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to configure that from a Fuseki configuration
Hi Ian,
Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before.
There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a
datasets (DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to
configure that from a Fuseki configuration file unfortunately.
Sorry about that - do you want to raise an issue?
Andy
On 07/08/2025 19:07, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> We use named graphs to store behavior models (pattern-of-life together with other related information) that lie at the heart of a large system of systems. Each model is stored in its own named graph, with the default graph used as a catalogue of the models with pointers to the named graphs.
>
> Each graph contains the ontology separately, though it is the same ontology across all of them.
>
> An inference graph containing all the named graphs is not an option, because the models have a lifecycle like this:
>
>
> * Initial development
> * A series of approvals
> * Insertion into operations
> * Branching of the operational model to produce a new development-phase model
> * Editing the branched model to make necessary changes
> * A new approval cycle
> * Retirement of the original operational model and promotion of the branch into operations
> * Rinse, lather, repeat as necessary
>
> Because two branches of the same model differ, they may contradict each other, so a combined inference graph would produce nonsense. In essence, the named graphs are serving as inference isolation boundaries.
>
> The inference level we use is Micro-OWL.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ian
>
>
> From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
> Date: Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 11:39 AM
> To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
> Hi Ian, There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph combining all the named graphs? How do you use named graphs? Are they for data management reasons? Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology? What inference
>
>
> Hi Ian,
>
>
>
> There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph
>
> combining all the named graphs?
>
>
>
> How do you use named graphs?
>
> Are they for data management reasons?
>
> Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology?
>
>
>
> What inference level are you using?
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> On 05/08/2025 18:49, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
>
>> Fuseki Users,
>
>>
>
>> I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
>
>>
>
>> I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
>
>>
>
>> Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
>
>>
>
>> Thanks,
>
>>
>
>> Ian
>
>>
>
>> ==================
>
>> Ian Emmons
>
>> RTX BBN Technologies
>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Posted by "Emmons, Ian D " <ie...@rtx.com.INVALID>.
Andy,
Thanks for the clear answer — I’ll give the DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker a try. Assuming that works (I’m sure it will), having a configuration option becomes lower priority for me, but for ease of use it would be good to raise an issue.
Thanks,
Ian
From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
Date: Monday, August 11, 2025 at 10:33 AM
To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Hi Ian, Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before. There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a datasets (DatasetGraphFactory. GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to configure that from a Fuseki configuration
Hi Ian,
Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before.
There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a
datasets (DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to
configure that from a Fuseki configuration file unfortunately.
Sorry about that - do you want to raise an issue?
Andy
On 07/08/2025 19:07, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> We use named graphs to store behavior models (pattern-of-life together with other related information) that lie at the heart of a large system of systems. Each model is stored in its own named graph, with the default graph used as a catalogue of the models with pointers to the named graphs.
>
> Each graph contains the ontology separately, though it is the same ontology across all of them.
>
> An inference graph containing all the named graphs is not an option, because the models have a lifecycle like this:
>
>
> * Initial development
> * A series of approvals
> * Insertion into operations
> * Branching of the operational model to produce a new development-phase model
> * Editing the branched model to make necessary changes
> * A new approval cycle
> * Retirement of the original operational model and promotion of the branch into operations
> * Rinse, lather, repeat as necessary
>
> Because two branches of the same model differ, they may contradict each other, so a combined inference graph would produce nonsense. In essence, the named graphs are serving as inference isolation boundaries.
>
> The inference level we use is Micro-OWL.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ian
>
>
> From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
> Date: Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 11:39 AM
> To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
> Hi Ian, There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph combining all the named graphs? How do you use named graphs? Are they for data management reasons? Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology? What inference
>
>
> Hi Ian,
>
>
>
> There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph
>
> combining all the named graphs?
>
>
>
> How do you use named graphs?
>
> Are they for data management reasons?
>
> Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology?
>
>
>
> What inference level are you using?
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> On 05/08/2025 18:49, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
>
>> Fuseki Users,
>
>>
>
>> I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
>
>>
>
>> I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
>
>>
>
>> Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
>
>>
>
>> Thanks,
>
>>
>
>> Ian
>
>>
>
>> ==================
>
>> Ian Emmons
>
>> RTX BBN Technologies
>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
Hi Ian,
Interesting usage and I think I've heard about a similar one before.
There is also a code-way to customize the creation of graph in a
datasets (DatasetGraphFactory.GraphMaker) but there isn't a way to
configure that from a Fuseki configuration file unfortunately.
Sorry about that - do you want to raise an issue?
Andy
On 07/08/2025 19:07, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
> Andy,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> We use named graphs to store behavior models (pattern-of-life together with other related information) that lie at the heart of a large system of systems. Each model is stored in its own named graph, with the default graph used as a catalogue of the models with pointers to the named graphs.
>
> Each graph contains the ontology separately, though it is the same ontology across all of them.
>
> An inference graph containing all the named graphs is not an option, because the models have a lifecycle like this:
>
>
> * Initial development
> * A series of approvals
> * Insertion into operations
> * Branching of the operational model to produce a new development-phase model
> * Editing the branched model to make necessary changes
> * A new approval cycle
> * Retirement of the original operational model and promotion of the branch into operations
> * Rinse, lather, repeat as necessary
>
> Because two branches of the same model differ, they may contradict each other, so a combined inference graph would produce nonsense. In essence, the named graphs are serving as inference isolation boundaries.
>
> The inference level we use is Micro-OWL.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ian
>
>
> From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
> Date: Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 11:39 AM
> To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
> Hi Ian, There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph combining all the named graphs? How do you use named graphs? Are they for data management reasons? Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology? What inference
>
>
> Hi Ian,
>
>
>
> There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph
>
> combining all the named graphs?
>
>
>
> How do you use named graphs?
>
> Are they for data management reasons?
>
> Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology?
>
>
>
> What inference level are you using?
>
>
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> On 05/08/2025 18:49, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
>
>> Fuseki Users,
>
>>
>
>> I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
>
>>
>
>> I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
>
>>
>
>> Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
>
>>
>
>> Thanks,
>
>>
>
>> Ian
>
>>
>
>> ==================
>
>> Ian Emmons
>
>> RTX BBN Technologies
>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Posted by "Emmons, Ian D " <ie...@rtx.com.INVALID>.
Andy,
Thanks for your reply.
We use named graphs to store behavior models (pattern-of-life together with other related information) that lie at the heart of a large system of systems. Each model is stored in its own named graph, with the default graph used as a catalogue of the models with pointers to the named graphs.
Each graph contains the ontology separately, though it is the same ontology across all of them.
An inference graph containing all the named graphs is not an option, because the models have a lifecycle like this:
* Initial development
* A series of approvals
* Insertion into operations
* Branching of the operational model to produce a new development-phase model
* Editing the branched model to make necessary changes
* A new approval cycle
* Retirement of the original operational model and promotion of the branch into operations
* Rinse, lather, repeat as necessary
Because two branches of the same model differ, they may contradict each other, so a combined inference graph would produce nonsense. In essence, the named graphs are serving as inference isolation boundaries.
The inference level we use is Micro-OWL.
Thanks,
Ian
From: Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>
Date: Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 11:39 AM
To: users@jena.apache.org <us...@jena.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Hi Ian, There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph combining all the named graphs? How do you use named graphs? Are they for data management reasons? Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology? What inference
Hi Ian,
There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph
combining all the named graphs?
How do you use named graphs?
Are they for data management reasons?
Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology?
What inference level are you using?
Andy
On 05/08/2025 18:49, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
> Fuseki Users,
>
> I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
>
> I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
>
> Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ian
>
> ==================
> Ian Emmons
> RTX BBN Technologies
>
Re: Configuring Fuseki for inference
Posted by Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>.
Hi Ian,
There may be ways of doing some cases such as one inference graph
combining all the named graphs?
How do you use named graphs?
Are they for data management reasons?
Does one of them have the schema/vocabulary/ontology?
What inference level are you using?
Andy
On 05/08/2025 18:49, Emmons, Ian D wrote:
> Fuseki Users,
>
> I have been working to convert a project to use Fuseki as its semantic graph store, and for the most part it works well. However, I have hit a roadblock.
>
> I have followed the instructions to configure my default graph for inference, and this does work. However, it appears that I must configure each graph for inference separately, and, in particular, that there is no way to configure Fuseki so that all graphs do inference, including graphs created in the future.
>
> Is there a way to do this? I regard this as an important capability because that’s the key feature of a semantic graph that makes it unique — if it weren’t for inference, there are so many other databases I could be using.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ian
>
> ==================
> Ian Emmons
> RTX BBN Technologies
>