0

I have two individuals: x and y. They are in the following relationships:

x hasProp a.
x hasProp b.
y hasProp a.
y hasProp c.

In general, the set of objects in the realtion of hasProp identifies the individual (here: x or y). In this case, can I say that hasProp is inverse functional, if they have also both one relation which is the same (hasProp a), but the set of hasProp relations uniquely identifies the subject x or y.

Is a Property inverse functional if the set of objects in this relation uniquely identifies the subject in OWL?

Gilles-Antoine Nys
  • 1,481
  • 16
  • 21
user3352632
  • 617
  • 6
  • 18
  • That is literally the definition of inverse functional. Check out the OWL specs on W3C – Ignazio Jun 26 '18 at 18:33
  • That is literally the definition of inverse functional. Check out the OWL specs on W3C – Ignazio Jun 26 '18 at 18:33
  • OWL W3C spec says: "i.e. there cannot be two distinct instances x1 and x2 such that both pairs (x1,y) and (x2,y) are instances of P." However, if x1=x and x2=y and y=a then hasProp would not be inverse functional because of: (x,a) and (y,a)?! – user3352632 Jun 27 '18 at 11:46
  • If the property is inverse functional, then x is inferred to be sameAs y. The pairs in the relationship are represented replacing sameAs individuals so that 'duplicates' are removed. – Ignazio Jun 27 '18 at 11:49
  • @Ignazio thanks for reply. No, x and y are different individuals. So, it makes no sense to say that hasProp is inverse functional, right? – user3352632 Jun 28 '18 at 15:38
  • If they are distinct individuals, then asserting that the property is inverse functional will cause reasoners to find an inconsistency. – Ignazio Jun 28 '18 at 16:05

0 Answers0