Update project4 madness by dmcnulty27 · Pull Request #6 · dmcnulty27/PHI-696

dmcnulty27 · 2023-03-27T20:12:36Z

No description provided.

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T13:49:33Z

+FILTER (REGEX(STR(?id), “Batman_films_casts”, “I”))
+} 
+
+Kata Level 6 – 6 points


This seems to work but if we already know that Bell invented the telephone when we look for him in the regex query, why write a query in the first place? I think the query should work in any case without using the regex function in any case

Thank you for your note! I will remove the regex function

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T13:50:28Z

 It is your responsibility and the responsibility of your peers reviewing your submission in PR to determine whether your submission is ranked appropriately. In the event that consensus is reached that your kata is ranked inappropriately, you must work with your peers to revise the submission so that it is either more or less challenging, accordingly. You are not permitted to submit new problems with different strengths after PRs are open, but must instead revise your PRs. So, think hard about how challenging your submission is. 

 There is one other option for those desiring a different sort of challenge. If you provide alongside your SPARQL submission a translation of the same problem into SQL, complete with documentations, solution, etc. then you may receive half points extra at that kata level (rounded up). For example, if you submit a SPARQL problem that is kata rank 1 and also submit a SQL version of that same problem, you  will receive 35+18=53 points. 
+


I apologize for sending my review just now, I completely missed the notification from github. If this happens again, please feel free to notify me in any other way.

No worries :)

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T13:56:13Z

+?film dbo:starring ?act .
+?film dbo:wikiPageRedircts dbr:Batman_(film_series) . 
+?actor dbo:wikiPageID ?id . 
+FILTER (REGEX(STR(?id), “Batman_films_casts”, “I”))


I am not entirely sure about this line. As I read it, you are asking the id to contain the term "Batman_films_casts", but this doesn't seem to be something that is stored in an id.
I also believe there might be a typo on line 55, where you have "starring ?act" (I was guessing it was ?actor, but of course I may be wrong).

I chose starring ?act because there could be multiple actors in a given project but the starring act would be the star of the film. I could change it to lead ?act. Additionally, I am hesitant to use actor as there is a big push in hollywood to call all actors actors -- not discriminate between male/non-binary/female etc.. so the starring act can account for this shift.... I hope lol

Oh yeah you can definitely use the term you believe fits best in this situation (sorry for not recognising what was going on), my issue was that you probably want it to be the same term you then use in line 57, where you wrote ?actor, since it seems you want to refer to the same entity

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T13:57:14Z

+SELECT DISTINCT ?class
+WHERE {
+	?s a ?class .
+FILTER (strstarts(str(?class), http://dbpedia.org/ontology/))


You probably don't even need the FILTER clause, and this will be a perfect easy level 8

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T13:57:36Z

+
+CONSTRUCT {
+ ?book rdf:type dc:Book ;
+dc:title >?title ;


Good catch ! Thank you!!

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T14:01:58Z

+?otherBook rdf:type dc:Book ;
+	dc:creator ?author ; 
+genre:ScienceFicton ?genre . 
+Filter (?otherBook !=?book)


Let's say that an author has written only one book, of genre science fiction. I wonder whether it would fall outside of the scope of this query, because it doesn't have an ?otherbook.
It is probably easier to rewrite the question than to rewrite the query. As I see it now, it seems to ask for all the authors that have at least two books, at least one of which is a sci fi book.

Second this. Maybe you should use a OPTIONAL keyword to deal with ?otherbook, Delaney.

I had not considered this. Thank you for pointing this out I will rewrite the question

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T14:03:22Z

+^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#date>)
+ }
+
+Kata level 6? -- 19 points


I think it is a level 6, yes

WAHOOOOOOOOOO

giacomodecolle · 2023-04-02T14:04:48Z

+ORDER BY DESC(?publicationDate)
+LIMIT 10
+
+Level 5? -- 21 points


This is ok but I would say it is a level 6, not a level 5. For a level 5 I am thinking of a bit more complex queries with multiple "tricks" (filter, regex, comparison of values, etc.)

hmmm thank you. Maybe I can further complicate it...

peihongx

@dmcnulty27 Hi Delaney, I've finished my review of your kata changllenges. BTW, ZOMBIE movie (e.g. Shaun of the Dead) are my favorite type of horror films!

peihongx · 2023-04-02T20:56:39Z

+
+Select Distinct ?actor WHERE {
+
+?film dbo:starring ?act .


Second Giacomo's comment: I tend to think here "?act" should be "?actor".

peihongx · 2023-04-02T20:58:56Z

+
+?actor dbo:wikiPageID ?id . 
+
+FILTER (REGEX(STR(?id), “Batman_films_casts”, “I”))


I find you use "I" in regex() function. Do you care whether an ID string is in uppercase or lowercase? If not, maybe it is better to use "i". Also, I suspect whether this challenge is kata 7 because although you use a complex function in FILTER, but a reader may not notice it without reading your sample solution. After all, intuitively, it seems that a solution only need 2 substantive lines:

WHERE{?film :label "Batman".
?film dbo:starring ?actor
}

Maybe you can make it more complex, for example, by requesting women actors starrring Batman before 2000?

peihongx · 2023-04-02T21:23:07Z

+Filter (regex(?name, “Bell”, “I”))
+
+}
+


Hi Delaney, it seems that you need to add a triple to emphasize that ?telephone is a telephone (as rdf:type). Otherwise, readers cannot know what type of device ?telephone is. (After all, technically speaking, ?telephone is not different from ?s.) Also, I suspect that this is a kata 8 because it is somewhat similar to Jaron's Buffalo Wing example in Goog Doc. Maybe you can make it more difficult by querying more info about telephone's inventor (e.g. his company, or his patents in telephone).

peihongx · 2023-04-02T21:26:58Z

+PREFIX foaf: http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
+
+Select ?name
+


Oh, you miss WHERE after "SELECT ..." BTW, I suggest to capitalize keywords like "filter", "select", "where" and so on in their all letters.

peihongx · 2023-04-02T21:29:39Z

+
+Kata level 8 – 0 points
+
+Return all classes  -- (A is shorthand for rdfs; type)


"rdf:type" instead of "rdf;type"

peihongx · 2023-04-02T22:54:03Z

+}
+
+
+using dbpedia generate a sparql query using constructs query to create a graph about films featuring Sacha Baron Cohen


typo: "constructs" → “CONSTRUCT”

peihongx · 2023-04-02T22:55:38Z

+
+using dbpedia generate a sparql query using constructs query to create a graph about films featuring Sacha Baron Cohen
+Kata level 5 -- 87 points
+


Maybe you can construct data about the actors who cast together with Sacha Baron Cohen for at least 2 films, so this challenge can reach level 5 or higher.

peihongx · 2023-04-02T22:56:56Z

+
+
+
+CONSTRUCT {


Consider making this challenge harder by constructing some new data different from those in WHERE.

peihongx · 2023-04-02T22:58:17Z

+
+# Get Tim Curry's information
+
+dbr:Tim_Curry dbo:occupation dbo:Actor ;


This triple has no variable. Do you really need it?

peihongx · 2023-04-02T22:59:16Z

+}
+
+ORDER BY DESC(?year)
+


Maybe you can add LIMIT 20 or something like this.

Update README.md

d0e58d8

dmcnulty27 requested review from giacomodecolle and peihongx March 27, 2023 20:12

dmcnulty27 changed the title ~~Update README.md~~ Update project4 madness Mar 27, 2023

dmcnulty27 added 2 commits March 28, 2023 08:32

Update README.md

de1d90d

Update README.md

350d12b

giacomodecolle reviewed Apr 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

Update README.md

ba19755

peihongx reviewed Apr 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

		It is your responsibility and the responsibility of your peers reviewing your submission in PR to determine whether your submission is ranked appropriately. In the event that consensus is reached that your kata is ranked inappropriately, you must work with your peers to revise the submission so that it is either more or less challenging, accordingly. You are not permitted to submit new problems with different strengths after PRs are open, but must instead revise your PRs. So, think hard about how challenging your submission is.

		There is one other option for those desiring a different sort of challenge. If you provide alongside your SPARQL submission a translation of the same problem into SQL, complete with documentations, solution, etc. then you may receive half points extra at that kata level (rounded up). For example, if you submit a SPARQL problem that is kata rank 1 and also submit a SQL version of that same problem, you will receive 35+18=53 points.


		?actor dbo:wikiPageID ?id .

		FILTER (REGEX(STR(?id), “Batman_films_casts”, “I”))


		Kata level 8 – 0 points

		Return all classes -- (A is shorthand for rdfs; type)

		}


		using dbpedia generate a sparql query using constructs query to create a graph about films featuring Sacha Baron Cohen


		using dbpedia generate a sparql query using constructs query to create a graph about films featuring Sacha Baron Cohen
		Kata level 5 -- 87 points


		# Get Tim Curry's information

		dbr:Tim_Curry dbo:occupation dbo:Actor ;




		CONSTRUCT {

		}

		ORDER BY DESC(?year)

Conversation

dmcnulty27 commented Mar 27, 2023

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

peihongx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants