You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
owlcpp: a C++ library for working with OWL ontologies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Biomedical Semantics, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13326-015-0035-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mikhail K. Levin, Lindsay G. Cowell |
| Abstract |
The increasing use of ontologies highlights the need for a library for working with ontologies that is efficient, accessible from various programming languages, and compatible with common computational platforms. We developed owlcpp, a library for storing and searching RDF triples, parsing RDF/XML documents, converting triples into OWL axioms, and reasoning. The library is written in ISO-compliant C++ to facilitate efficiency, portability, and accessibility from other programming languages. Internally, owlcpp uses the Raptor RDF Syntax library for parsing RDF/XML and the FaCT++ library for reasoning. The current version of owlcpp is supported under Linux, OSX, and Windows platforms and provides an API for Python. The results of our evaluation show that, compared to other commonly used libraries, owlcpp is significantly more efficient in terms of memory usage and searching RDF triple stores. owlcpp performs strict parsing and detects errors ignored by other libraries, thus reducing the possibility of incorrect semantic interpretation of ontologies. owlcpp is available at http://owl-cpp.sf.net/ under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 50% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 11 | 61% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Engineering | 2 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2017.
All research outputs
#16,078,918
of 24,666,614 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#225
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,556
of 250,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Semantics
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,666,614 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 250,071 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.