Closed colleenXu closed 1 year ago
More discussion of the TRAPI MetaEdge / qualifier-set point (the "keep in mind" note above) is being done in the other issue. We'll add the clarifications / answers from the TRAPI team and Translator there.
Also, based on a quick check, none of the TRAPI KPs we ingest so far seem to specify qualifiers
in their MetaEdges right now (automat kps, cohd, chp).
/meta_knowledge_graph
responseAnd This is a "technical implementation" thought: but maybe the logic can be "exclusion":
Restating some info from above: this issue is probably on-hold because it (1) currently don't have TRAPI KP data to work with, (2) is affected by the "qualifier-set merging" discussion, and (3) seems optional (optimizing)
Just a note: above linked PRs are currently on Dev.
Appears to be working.
This same testing process (same query) worked to review automat hetio behavior as well (4 edges in that KP's response -> 4 records in BTE's logs and 4 edges in BTE). Automat hetio's meta_knowledge_graph shows that there's a SmallMolecule - regulates - downregulated
(qualifier) Gene MetaEdge. So BTE likely used that MetaEdge to generate the sub-query; this shows that qualifier-hierarchy expansion is working (since I queried for the parent qualifier decreased
).
Notes:
Closing issue
From bullet 4 of the changelog:
Currently, we don't know what qualifier-constraints a TRAPI KP can handle; when a QEdge has qualifier-constraints (and isn't an "inferred" creative-mode query), we pass along those qualifier-constraints to the TRAPI KPs in our subqueries.
However, with TRAPI 1.4, tools can specify the qualifier-constraints they can handle for each TRAPI-MetaEdge in their
/meta_knowledge_graph
endpoint responses (edges
section).We want to use this info: when a QEdge has qualifier-constraints, we want BTE to only send sub-queries to TRAPI KPs that advertise that they can handle those qualifier-constraints. This should make our sub-querying behavior more efficient. We probably want to change how we create BTE-operations/MetaEdges from parsing the
/meta_knowledge_graph
responses of the TRAPI KPs we use./meta_knowledge_graph
responses to work with (from the TRAPI KPs we use, their TRAPI 1.4 instances or we could ask them for mock /meta_knowledge_graph output?)Notes:
applicable_values
elements are possible....so this isn't an exact-matching scenario.type_id
s, because eachtype_id
can only appear once in a qualifier-set.applicable_values
set