Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 0.00010156631469726562s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 0.0006461143493652344s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 0.35065674781799316s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 0.5515649318695068s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 2.0503997802734375e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 0.0007712841033935547s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 0.0005724430084228516s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Korespondencja Emila Szramka z Janem Kuderą took 1.5497207641601562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for 0080-3626 took 7.33661961555481s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for 土地利用图 took 9.584426879882812e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for 土地利用图 took 0.0006837844848632812s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for 土地利用图 took 0.3851313591003418s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for 土地利用图 took 0.021183013916015625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for 土地利用图 took 1.7642974853515625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for 土地利用图 took 0.0007681846618652344s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for 土地利用图 took 4.482269287109375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for 土地利用图 took 1.52587890625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for 10.12041geodata.290864223.ver1.db_ took 3.670745372772217s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for 113322 took 9.608268737792969e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for 113322 took 0.0007541179656982422s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for 113322 took 2.0556905269622803s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for 113322 took 0.02144598960876465s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for 113322 took 2.0503997802734375e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for 113322 took 0.0007038116455078125s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for 113322 took 4.363059997558594e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for 113322 took 2.0265579223632812e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for 11 took 8.455707550048828s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Korepetycje Buki took 4.9114227294921875e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Korepetycje Buki took 0.0006878376007080078s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Korepetycje Buki took 1.1002593040466309s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Korepetycje Buki took 0.020823955535888672s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Korepetycje Buki took 1.5497207641601562e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Korepetycje Buki took 0.0007588863372802734s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Korepetycje Buki took 4.601478576660156e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Korepetycje Buki took 1.4781951904296875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for 12323 took 7.32150673866272s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 0.6523518562316895s
Availability | VoID file availability check for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 0.0006704330444335938s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 0.4841923713684082s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 0.02079463005065918s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 1.8358230590820312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 0.0007777214050292969s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 0.00010752677917480469s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for 2000 U.S. Census in RDF (rdfabout.com) took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for 2000-us-census-rdf took 12.924227714538574s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 1.8337061405181885s
Availability | VoID file availability check for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 0.0005881786346435547s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 0.4821343421936035s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 0.020036697387695312s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 0.0007145404815673828s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 3.814697265625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for 2001 Spanish Census to RDF took 8.344650268554688e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for 2001-spanish-census-to-rdf took 10.189104318618774s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Open Data Web took 5.1145853996276855s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Open Data Web took 0.0005655288696289062s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Open Data Web took 0.8766651153564453s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Open Data Web took 0.020932912826538086s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Open Data Web took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Open Data Web took 0.0007119178771972656s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Open Data Web took 3.170967102050781e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Open Data Web took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for _data.odw.tw took 12.858581066131592s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for 土地利用 took 8.511543273925781e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for 土地利用 took 0.0004787445068359375s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for 土地利用 took 1.3275220394134521s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for 土地利用 took 0.021254777908325195s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for 土地利用 took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for 土地利用 took 0.0007140636444091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for 土地利用 took 2.7418136596679688e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for 土地利用 took 9.5367431640625e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for _data1.odw.tw took 3.9875192642211914s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for 土地利用模型 took 8.654594421386719e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for 土地利用模型 took 0.0006420612335205078s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for 土地利用模型 took 0.5343942642211914s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for 土地利用模型 took 0.019959449768066406s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for 土地利用模型 took 8.821487426757812e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for 土地利用模型 took 0.0006997585296630859s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for 土地利用模型 took 2.7179718017578125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for 土地利用模型 took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for _data2.odw.tw took 4.335788249969482s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Indian Biodiversity took 9.131431579589844e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Indian Biodiversity took 0.0006134510040283203s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Indian Biodiversity took 1.4634854793548584s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Indian Biodiversity took 0.02042841911315918s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Indian Biodiversity took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Indian Biodiversity took 0.0007107257843017578s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Indian Biodiversity took 2.86102294921875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Indian Biodiversity took 8.821487426757812e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for _https:data.bioontology.orgontologiesBOFdownloadapikey=8b5b7825-538d-40e0-9e9e-5ab9274a9aeb&download_format=rdf took 5.834495544433594s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 0.00010848045349121094s
Availability | VoID file availability check for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 0.0003483295440673828s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 0.5879561901092529s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 0.020769119262695312s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 0.0007140636444091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 2.9325485229492188e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for A collection of Papers for LREC2014 and related Workshops took 9.298324584960938e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for a-collection-of-papers-for-lrec2014-and-related-workshops took 5.888290643692017s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for ITS TEST DATASET took 3.8623809814453125e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for ITS TEST DATASET took 0.0006196498870849609s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for ITS TEST DATASET took 0.3486485481262207s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for ITS TEST DATASET took 0.02041459083557129s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for ITS TEST DATASET took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for ITS TEST DATASET took 0.0007579326629638672s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for ITS TEST DATASET took 2.86102294921875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for ITS TEST DATASET took 1.049041748046875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for A1 took 3.548861026763916s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for SummerOlympics took 2.928192377090454s
Availability | VoID file availability check for SummerOlympics took 0.0006182193756103516s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for SummerOlympics took 0.8311727046966553s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for SummerOlympics took 0.01993703842163086s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for SummerOlympics took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for SummerOlympics took 0.0007140636444091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for SummerOlympics took 6.222724914550781e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for SummerOlympics took 1.3589859008789062e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for abc took 10.468459367752075s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Test_m took 4.410743713378906e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Test_m took 0.0005939006805419922s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Test_m took 0.3412191867828369s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Test_m took 0.01996469497680664s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Test_m took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Test_m took 0.0006952285766601562s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Test_m took 2.765655517578125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Test_m took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ABC took 4.448320627212524s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for my intro took 4.315376281738281e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for my intro took 0.0006399154663085938s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for my intro took 0.348102331161499s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for my intro took 0.021550655364990234s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for my intro took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for my intro took 0.0007028579711914062s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for my intro took 2.8133392333984375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for my intro took 1.3828277587890625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for abhay_intro took 2.6903839111328125s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 0.10680890083312988s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 0.00026988983154296875s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 0.3275430202484131s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 0.02022576332092285s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 0.0007135868072509766s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 0.00010418891906738281s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Linked Data took 1.3113021850585938e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for abs-linked-data took 5.99736213684082s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Academic Offer of UNL took 260.53021693229675s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Academic Offer of UNL took 0.0006477832794189453s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Academic Offer of UNL took 0.3814551830291748s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Academic Offer of UNL took 0.02021503448486328s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Academic Offer of UNL took 1.6927719116210938e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Academic Offer of UNL took 0.0007126331329345703s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Academic Offer of UNL took 4.315376281738281e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Academic Offer of UNL took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for academic-offer-of-unl took 394.9991047382355s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AcadOnto took 8.392333984375e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AcadOnto took 0.00028204917907714844s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AcadOnto took 0.8166599273681641s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AcadOnto took 0.0212860107421875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AcadOnto took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AcadOnto took 0.0007011890411376953s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AcadOnto took 3.0040740966796875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AcadOnto took 6.4373016357421875e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for acadonto took 6.323928594589233s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 12.170544147491455s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 2.0946922302246094s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 0.3337290287017822s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 0.021335840225219727s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 0.0007560253143310547s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 4.410743713378906e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Australian Climate Observations Reference Network - Surface Air Temperature Dataset took 9.298324584960938e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for acorn-sat took 45.470977783203125s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Addgene took 4.291534423828125e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Addgene took 0.0006957054138183594s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Addgene took 0.42789292335510254s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Addgene took 0.01987314224243164s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Addgene took 8.821487426757812e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Addgene took 0.0006971359252929688s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Addgene took 3.2901763916015625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Addgene took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for addgene took 15.048880577087402s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 8.463859558105469e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 0.0006535053253173828s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 0.38486790657043457s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 0.02007746696472168s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 9.298324584960938e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 0.0006992816925048828s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 9.918212890625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AEGP, Spanish Textile and Clothing Association took 1.3113021850585938e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aegp-spanish-textile-and-clothing-association took 97.65254974365234s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AEMET metereological dataset took 0.4923076629638672s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AEMET metereological dataset took 0.28274035453796387s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AEMET metereological dataset took 0.7959070205688477s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AEMET metereological dataset took 0.019956588745117188s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AEMET metereological dataset took 9.298324584960938e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AEMET metereological dataset took 0.00070953369140625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AEMET metereological dataset took 3.838539123535156e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for AEMET metereological dataset took 1.9073486328125e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AEMET metereological dataset took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aemet took 7.208897590637207s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Agenda de Zaragoza took 8.344650268554688e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Agenda de Zaragoza took 0.0005626678466796875s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Agenda de Zaragoza took 2.2043471336364746s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Agenda de Zaragoza took 0.0216522216796875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Agenda de Zaragoza took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Agenda de Zaragoza took 0.000701904296875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Agenda de Zaragoza took 3.0279159545898438e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Agenda de Zaragoza took 1.239776611328125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for agenda-de-zaragoza took 8.71267032623291s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AgriNepalData took 0.0392911434173584s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AgriNepalData took 0.00045490264892578125s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AgriNepalData took 2.2915360927581787s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AgriNepalData took 0.020069360733032227s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AgriNepalData took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AgriNepalData took 0.0007033348083496094s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AgriNepalData took 6.914138793945312e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AgriNepalData took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for agrinepaldata took 8.488337516784668s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AGRIS took 262.31262254714966s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AGRIS took 0.0007624626159667969s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AGRIS took 0.560814619064331s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AGRIS took 0.020267486572265625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AGRIS took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AGRIS took 0.0007023811340332031s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AGRIS took 7.367134094238281e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AGRIS took 1.2636184692382812e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for agris took 422.97660541534424s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AGROVOC took 0.17787957191467285s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AGROVOC took 0.0005903244018554688s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for AGROVOC took 26.208402633666992s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for AGROVOC took 0.4961361885070801s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for AGROVOC took 14.594592094421387s
Interoperability | New terms check for AGROVOC took 2.8600621223449707s
Versatility | Languages check for AGROVOC took 30.146705150604248s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for AGROVOC took 30.09638810157776s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for AGROVOC took 0.10150456428527832s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for AGROVOC took 0.09990525245666504s
Availability | RDF dump link check for AGROVOC took 0.09894680976867676s
License | MR license check for AGROVOC took 0.10037636756896973s
License | HR license check for AGROVOC took 0.42859888076782227s
Amount of data | Number of property check for AGROVOC took 0.09626889228820801s
Understandability | Number of label check for AGROVOC took 30.096928119659424s
Understandability | URI regex check for AGROVOC took 0.24991178512573242s
Understandability | Vocabs check for AGROVOC took 0.10027933120727539s
Verifiability | Authors check for AGROVOC took 0.09854507446289062s
Verifiability | Publishers check for AGROVOC took 0.0980677604675293s
Performance | Throughput check for AGROVOC took 10.570538997650146s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for AGROVOC took 8.559226989746094e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for AGROVOC took 0.09910249710083008s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for AGROVOC took 0.09824419021606445s
Interlinking | skos check for AGROVOC took 0.521240234375s
Interlinking | skos check for AGROVOC took 0.1472916603088379s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for AGROVOC took 0.10084772109985352s
Currency | Creation date check for AGROVOC took 3.698695421218872s
Currency | Modification date check for AGROVOC took 1.1932077407836914s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for AGROVOC took 41.77500367164612s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for AGROVOC took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for AGROVOC took 0.09561729431152344s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for AGROVOC took 0.09492635726928711s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for AGROVOC took 0.09798192977905273s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for AGROVOC took 17.7358455657959s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for AGROVOC took 2.931276559829712s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for AGROVOC took 4.424426078796387s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for AGROVOC took 0.0968942642211914s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for AGROVOC took 12.206703662872314s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for AGROVOC took 19.27829670906067s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for AGROVOC took 1.5533106327056885s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for AGROVOC took 13.314202547073364s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for AGROVOC took 2.5326132774353027s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for AGROVOC took 0.09592175483703613s
Security | Sign check for AGROVOC took 0.09532427787780762s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for AGROVOC took 4.345755100250244s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AGROVOC took 0.6132686138153076s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AGROVOC took 0.020643949508666992s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AGROVOC took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AGROVOC took 0.0007097721099853516s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AGROVOC took 0.00011563301086425781s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for AGROVOC took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AGROVOC took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for agrovoc took 1853.4120953083038s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AGROVOC took 0.00010061264038085938s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AGROVOC took 0.0005986690521240234s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AGROVOC took 2.0022900104522705s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AGROVOC took 0.021245241165161133s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AGROVOC took 1.52587890625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AGROVOC took 0.0010962486267089844s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AGROVOC took 7.605552673339844e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AGROVOC took 1.3589859008789062e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for agrovoc-skos took 9.776653528213501s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.8573849201202393s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Analytics India Magazine took 0.0005686283111572266s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Analytics India Magazine took 2.6027629375457764s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Analytics India Magazine took 2.7406744956970215s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.1747756004333496s
Versatility | Languages check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.0848388671875s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.4831106662750244s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.0651373863220215s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.997565507888794s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.1180217266082764s
License | MR license check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.6747081279754639s
License | HR license check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.486433982849121s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.3211851119995117s
Understandability | Number of label check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.5449628829956055s
Understandability | URI regex check for Analytics India Magazine took 3.662428140640259s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.3944852352142334s
Verifiability | Authors check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.5958178043365479s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.4066283702850342s
Performance | Throughput check for Analytics India Magazine took 21.277446031570435s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Analytics India Magazine took 5.14984130859375e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.2985332012176514s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.4892094135284424s
Interlinking | skos check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.4033482074737549s
Interlinking | skos check for Analytics India Magazine took 0.16641974449157715s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.0467705726623535s
Currency | Creation date check for Analytics India Magazine took 2.9210171699523926s
Currency | Modification date check for Analytics India Magazine took 2.5994715690612793s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Analytics India Magazine took 2.7040603160858154s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Analytics India Magazine took 9.5367431640625e-07s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.6556129455566406s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.2515099048614502s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Analytics India Magazine took 1.1542422771453857s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Analytics India Magazine took 2.3739402294158936s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Analytics India Magazine took 0.0001690387725830078s
Security | Sign check for Analytics India Magazine took 1.5087780952453613s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Analytics India Magazine took 0.5412287712097168s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Analytics India Magazine took 0.21222376823425293s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Analytics India Magazine took 1.33514404296875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Analytics India Magazine took 0.0006854534149169922s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Analytics India Magazine took 3.457069396972656e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Analytics India Magazine took 7.152557373046875e-07s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Analytics India Magazine took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for AIM took 107.07669615745544s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for All India Survey of Higher Education took 261.9224421977997s
Availability | VoID file availability check for All India Survey of Higher Education took 0.0006105899810791016s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for All India Survey of Higher Education took 2.1869547367095947s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for All India Survey of Higher Education took 0.021047592163085938s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for All India Survey of Higher Education took 1.1444091796875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for All India Survey of Higher Education took 0.0007243156433105469s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for All India Survey of Higher Education took 3.457069396972656e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for All India Survey of Higher Education took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for AISHE took 267.25546431541443s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for  equipment ontology took 8.678436279296875e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for  equipment ontology took 0.0006303787231445312s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for  equipment ontology took 0.36365747451782227s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for  equipment ontology took 0.021058320999145508s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for  equipment ontology took 1.3589859008789062e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for  equipment ontology took 0.0009834766387939453s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for  equipment ontology took 3.743171691894531e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for  equipment ontology took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for akash took 3.244164228439331s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 1.6048645973205566s
Availability | VoID file availability check for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 0.0006911754608154297s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 0.3287935256958008s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 0.02163553237915039s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 0.000698089599609375s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 3.1948089599609375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for aksw.org Research Group dataset took 5.745887756347656e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aksworg took 11.295703411102295s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AlchemyAPI took 8.58306884765625e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AlchemyAPI took 0.0005042552947998047s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AlchemyAPI took 0.776932954788208s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AlchemyAPI took 0.020860671997070312s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AlchemyAPI took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AlchemyAPI took 0.0007402896881103516s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AlchemyAPI took 3.814697265625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AlchemyAPI took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for alchemyapi took 5.303213834762573s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 391.5923912525177s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 0.0007648468017578125s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 0.5151669979095459s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 0.020846843719482422s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 0.0007128715515136719s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 3.719329833984375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Alexandria Digital Library (ADL) Gazetteer took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for alexandria-digital-library-adl-gazetteer took 525.5160913467407s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for aliada-scanbit-net took 261.92168521881104s
Availability | VoID file availability check for aliada-scanbit-net took 0.0007586479187011719s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for aliada-scanbit-net took 0.40415096282958984s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for aliada-scanbit-net took 0.02039813995361328s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for aliada-scanbit-net took 1.4543533325195312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for aliada-scanbit-net took 0.0007090568542480469s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for aliada-scanbit-net took 0.0001690387725830078s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for aliada-scanbit-net took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aliada-scanbit-net took 1313.8232762813568s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Allen Brain Atlas took 8.130073547363281e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Allen Brain Atlas took 0.0006871223449707031s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Allen Brain Atlas took 0.3353283405303955s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Allen Brain Atlas took 0.02052140235900879s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Allen Brain Atlas took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Allen Brain Atlas took 0.0007076263427734375s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Allen Brain Atlas took 2.6941299438476562e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Allen Brain Atlas took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for allen-brain-atlas took 15.97834324836731s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.6546378135681152s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.0006186962127685547s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 108.41901159286499s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 2.7681939601898193s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 7.312468767166138s
Interoperability | New terms check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 3.5181076526641846s
Versatility | Languages check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 300.1000642776489s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 3.1993117332458496s
Security | Check HTTPS for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.9047513008117676s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.6007146835327148s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5938386917114258s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5828964710235596s
License | MR license check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5990092754364014s
License | HR license check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 30.598962783813477s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5897831916809082s
Understandability | Number of label check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.8798656463623047s
Understandability | URI regex check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.1380805969238281s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.582038402557373s
Verifiability | Authors check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5834391117095947s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.6327261924743652s
Performance | Throughput check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 10.937796115875244s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 8.511543273925781e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5428965091705322s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5858299732208252s
Interlinking | skos check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.6004693508148193s
Interlinking | skos check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5477285385131836s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5857257843017578s
Currency | Creation date check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5851783752441406s
Currency | Modification date check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5858492851257324s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 53.86328053474426s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.00518798828125s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5851826667785645s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.650827169418335s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.645596981048584s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 35.87886071205139s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 3.040240526199341s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 2.5748989582061768s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.6167221069335938s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 10.076403379440308s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 8.74931788444519s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 33.54492783546448s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.4309978485107422s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 10.936557531356812s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 2.7136447429656982s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.8610153198242188s
Security | Sign check for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5618298053741455s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 14995.302487373352s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.5760087966918945s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.021221637725830078s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 0.0008063316345214844s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 8.726119995117188e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.3520481586456299s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Allie Abbreviation And Long Form Database in Life Science took 1.049041748046875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for allie-abbreviation-and-long-form-database-in-life-science took 15717.2118973732s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Alojamientos took 8.20159912109375e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Alojamientos took 0.0004999637603759766s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Alojamientos took 1.2720904350280762s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Alojamientos took 0.021056652069091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Alojamientos took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Alojamientos took 0.0007181167602539062s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Alojamientos took 3.123283386230469e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Alojamientos took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for alojamientos-zaragoza took 6.9804840087890625s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 0.28397464752197266s
Availability | VoID file availability check for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 0.0004987716674804688s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 0.3301711082458496s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 0.02078533172607422s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 0.0007028579711914062s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 3.886222839355469e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for ALPINO RDF Treebank took 1.2874603271484375e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for alpino-rdf took 3.815608263015747s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AAT-atawil took 8.249282836914062e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AAT-atawil took 0.0006165504455566406s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AAT-atawil took 0.3469057083129883s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AAT-atawil took 0.021330833435058594s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AAT-atawil took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AAT-atawil took 0.0007088184356689453s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AAT-atawil took 3.218650817871094e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AAT-atawil took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for Altawil took 5.806368827819824s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 6.267138481140137s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 0.0006403923034667969s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 1.5974547863006592s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 0.02073979377746582s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 1.1444091796875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 0.0007064342498779297s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 3.170967102050781e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Auckland Museum Collections Online took 9.5367431640625e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for am-collections-online took 15.119361639022827s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Amer Nejma took 8.559226989746094e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Amer Nejma took 0.00045490264892578125s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Amer Nejma took 0.3968324661254883s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Amer Nejma took 0.0211944580078125s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Amer Nejma took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Amer Nejma took 0.0007131099700927734s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Amer Nejma took 3.266334533691406e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Amer Nejma took 9.298324584960938e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for Amer_Nejma took 2.891115665435791s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 8.463859558105469e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 0.00069427490234375s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 0.6049704551696777s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 0.020496606826782227s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 0.0007088184356689453s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 3.0279159545898438e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AMOn+: Cultural Variations in Interpersonal Communication Ontology took 1.239776611328125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for amon took 9.181287288665771s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 0.7712397575378418s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 0.0004858970642089844s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 2.120715618133545s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 0.020641088485717773s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 0.0007064342498779297s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 8.630752563476562e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Amsterdam Museum as Linked Open Data in the Europeana Data Model took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for amsterdam-museum-as-edm-lod took 17.25820755958557s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 0.00010704994201660156s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 0.0006759166717529297s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 0.4155576229095459s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 0.021195411682128906s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 9.298324584960938e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 0.0007100105285644531s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 2.86102294921875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Analisi del blog http://www.beppegrillo.it/ took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for analisi-del-blog-http-www-beppegrillo-it took 7.423468351364136s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Animal Diversity Web took 8.726119995117188e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Animal Diversity Web took 0.0007598400115966797s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Animal Diversity Web took 0.3782985210418701s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Animal Diversity Web took 0.02062058448791504s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Animal Diversity Web took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Animal Diversity Web took 0.0007574558258056641s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Animal Diversity Web took 4.029273986816406e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Animal Diversity Web took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for animal-diversity-web took 18.53099012374878s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Anime Dataset took 8.630752563476562e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Anime Dataset took 0.0006573200225830078s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Anime Dataset took 0.6124687194824219s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Anime Dataset took 0.020870447158813477s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Anime Dataset took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Anime Dataset took 0.0007011890411376953s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Anime Dataset took 2.765655517578125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Anime Dataset took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for Anime took 3.495133876800537s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for ANNO took 8.249282836914062e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for ANNO took 0.0006034374237060547s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for ANNO took 0.5357818603515625s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for ANNO took 0.02049994468688965s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for ANNO took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for ANNO took 0.0007195472717285156s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for ANNO took 3.218650817871094e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for ANNO took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for anno took 11.136973142623901s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 8.535385131835938e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 0.0005600452423095703s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 0.8675227165222168s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 0.0218508243560791s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 0.0007207393646240234s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 7.557868957519531e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Antique Cars Collection (Linked Cars) took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for AntiqueCarsCollection took 4.576244592666626s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for apache took 8.368492126464844e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for apache took 0.000698089599609375s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for apache took 0.8575210571289062s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for apache took 0.02066659927368164s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for apache took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for apache took 0.0007162094116210938s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for apache took 5.2928924560546875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for apache took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apache took 5.3186047077178955s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF took 1.3946254253387451s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF took 0.0006275177001953125s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF took 0.33323121070861816s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF took 0.021192550659179688s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF took 1.2874603271484375e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF took 0.0007343292236328125s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF took 4.6253204345703125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf took 17.813235759735107s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.4990081787109375s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.0006227493286132812s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 279.064129114151s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.403940200805664s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 2.3043479919433594s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 3.0261378288269043s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 44.48637008666992s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.1610949039459229s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.14652180671691895s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3839387893676758s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.37376999855041504s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3708043098449707s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.46034908294677734s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.4682910442352295s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.6382646560668945s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.45420312881469727s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.7478735446929932s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3686184883117676s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.4237689971923828s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3910961151123047s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 11.998332977294922s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.00010442733764648438s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.36869239807128906s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.37067484855651855s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3724253177642822s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.24284601211547852s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3708477020263672s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.373960018157959s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3720591068267822s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 93.61311602592468s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3924679756164551s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3701820373535156s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.37435078620910645s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.121866226196289s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.009944915771484375s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 2.5764567852020264s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.40012288093566895s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 4.917670249938965s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 8.67085075378418s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 95.27979111671448s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.4461767673492432s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 5.749592304229736s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 2.8300280570983887s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.39451074600219727s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.3703432083129883s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 11.299368619918823s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.0391550064086914s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.020812034606933594s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 0.0007078647613525391s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 4.553794860839844e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.9073486328125e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF CA-IT took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-ca-it took 666.1577839851379s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.2528359889984131s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.0003974437713623047s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 281.6024625301361s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.4324641227722168s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 2.201287269592285s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 3.1229472160339355s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 44.74737310409546s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.1552793979644775s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.14655351638793945s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.38786983489990234s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.36960339546203613s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.6031415462493896s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3726181983947754s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.4634413719177246s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.47455763816833496s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.5618274211883545s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.7335720062255859s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.36646509170532227s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.4499225616455078s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3683605194091797s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 12.34883427619934s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.00011801719665527344s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3697366714477539s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3750340938568115s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3720283508300781s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.2423546314239502s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3716094493865967s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.41524600982666016s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3708913326263428s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 94.04927062988281s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.4003920555114746s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3727579116821289s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3721811771392822s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.9666955471038818s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.010004281997680664s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 2.664318561553955s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.6309432983398438s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 4.794087648391724s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 8.404579877853394s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 95.75540661811829s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.4443867206573486s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 5.672373533248901s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 2.9439659118652344s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.4081258773803711s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.3744227886199951s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 10.214694738388062s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.75984525680542s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.020828723907470703s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 0.0006990432739257812s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 5.2928924560546875e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.430511474609375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EN-CA took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-en-ca took 674.176206111908s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.24107027053833008s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.0005755424499511719s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 275.82108306884766s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.4506325721740723s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 2.358721971511841s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 3.008737087249756s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 43.96541666984558s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.2061398029327393s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.1448838710784912s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.42784953117370605s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4105827808380127s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4993436336517334s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4100148677825928s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.49977564811706543s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4138765335083008s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4444129467010498s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.8146843910217285s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.40769338607788086s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.44997334480285645s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4093947410583496s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 12.270604848861694s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 8.869171142578125e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.40741515159606934s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4090898036956787s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.41115522384643555s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.2439115047454834s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4085993766784668s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.41213440895080566s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4113631248474121s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 94.3790934085846s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4376547336578369s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.41233134269714355s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4067270755767822s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.2603271007537842s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.00997161865234375s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 2.736450672149658s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4093635082244873s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 4.974134206771851s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 8.682553052902222s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 96.55021166801453s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.5914299488067627s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 5.775610446929932s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 3.0715513229370117s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4472839832305908s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4090611934661865s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 10.245206117630005s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.4512925148010254s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.020945072174072266s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.1444091796875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 0.0006961822509765625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 5.14984130859375e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.9073486328125e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EN-ES took 1.2874603271484375e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-en-es took 669.2367103099823s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.24287867546081543s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.0004773139953613281s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 276.6102125644684s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 1.4914491176605225s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 2.289905548095703s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 3.1839141845703125s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 44.42034649848938s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 1.329596996307373s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.1440277099609375s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4276866912841797s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4195518493652344s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.7162859439849854s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.42392659187316895s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.6619324684143066s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.7712695598602295s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.5318877696990967s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.8135378360748291s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.742823600769043s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.45075297355651855s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.40810394287109375s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 12.219015121459961s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 8.463859558105469e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4125638008117676s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.7266740798950195s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4263482093811035s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.24491548538208008s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4101216793060303s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.42731237411499023s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.48659348487854004s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 93.9926278591156s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 3.457069396972656e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.43900513648986816s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.41530346870422363s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4077718257904053s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.9907798767089844s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.009966850280761719s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 2.7042503356933594s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.4115262031555176s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 4.968581914901733s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 8.500870704650879s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 96.50743079185486s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 1.4583652019500732s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 5.912536859512329s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 3.1385951042175293s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.44278645515441895s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.40647077560424805s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 10.54586672782898s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.9952309131622314s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.021094799041748047s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 1.239776611328125e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 0.0007042884826660156s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 4.935264587402344e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EN-GL took 1.33514404296875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-en-gl took 658.6378054618835s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.24225735664367676s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.0006961822509765625s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 278.606379032135s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.4953856468200684s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 2.324493646621704s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 2.9807426929473877s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 44.502100467681885s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.3870058059692383s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.146806001663208s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.41352248191833496s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4086494445800781s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.47726988792419434s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.5521354675292969s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.6432051658630371s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.6739165782928467s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4472079277038574s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.819939136505127s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4088890552520752s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.45937228202819824s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4063689708709717s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 12.175230264663696s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 8.368492126464844e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.40615010261535645s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.40833044052124023s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4121520519256592s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.2433938980102539s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.40912771224975586s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4099125862121582s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.41092896461486816s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 94.7454924583435s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4369981288909912s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.41443467140197754s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4248542785644531s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.0425384044647217s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.009983539581298828s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 2.6887078285217285s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.4073348045349121s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 5.118847846984863s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 8.682387351989746s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 97.43194389343262s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.5383491516113281s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 6.11450457572937s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 3.0641160011291504s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.44544100761413574s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.45669054985046387s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 11.06251335144043s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 3.1487691402435303s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.0214540958404541s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 0.0007245540618896484s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 4.696846008300781e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EO-CA took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-eo-ca took 674.4914264678955s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.24236202239990234s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.0004971027374267578s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 277.09542655944824s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.5199439525604248s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 2.2388596534729004s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 3.1470394134521484s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 44.24823594093323s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.1599376201629639s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.14551472663879395s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.37418675422668457s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.36728358268737793s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.3667912483215332s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.6232092380523682s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.458573579788208s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.3707568645477295s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.4033071994781494s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.7471933364868164s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.37158846855163574s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.44774770736694336s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.36976146697998047s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 12.2320077419281s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 8.797645568847656e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.36635661125183105s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.36693620681762695s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.3708667755126953s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.24278044700622559s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.40918993949890137s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.38498950004577637s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.37331604957580566s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 93.83803868293762s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.3809242248535156s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.38048887252807617s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.352492094039917s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.0248522758483887s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.010071992874145508s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 2.717728853225708s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.5403177738189697s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 4.766836643218994s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 8.411855936050415s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 96.55488562583923s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.522258996963501s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 5.73833966255188s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 3.0511019229888916s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.380892276763916s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.32219719886779785s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 10.139675617218018s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.4004819393157959s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.021043777465820312s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 0.0007121562957763672s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 4.982948303222656e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EO-EN took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-eo-en took 656.3238513469696s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.2502729892730713s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.0006420612335205078s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 297.97497606277466s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 1.7106363773345947s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 2.203474760055542s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 2.883195638656616s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 45.668951988220215s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 1.289691686630249s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.14374971389770508s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.35004305839538574s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.31263279914855957s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3142979145050049s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3291029930114746s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.4496018886566162s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3294031620025635s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3495190143585205s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.6262743473052979s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.7919495105743408s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3581545352935791s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3129863739013672s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 11.580274105072021s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 4.124641418457031e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3949456214904785s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.31594419479370117s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3145723342895508s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.24058771133422852s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.36359477043151855s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3307793140411377s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.32638096809387207s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 93.88682889938354s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 7.867813110351562e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.38256359100341797s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.32299256324768066s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.31955981254577637s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.8601925373077393s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.010223865509033203s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 2.6335291862487793s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3174858093261719s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 4.634020090103149s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 8.349774837493896s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 95.85837650299072s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 1.4647839069366455s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 5.681762218475342s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 3.0220494270324707s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3562321662902832s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3158073425292969s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 10.030690670013428s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.3293323516845703s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.020734548568725586s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 0.0007066726684570312s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 4.601478576660156e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 1.9073486328125e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EO-ES took 9.298324584960938e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-eo-es took 680.1277203559875s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.24195384979248047s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.0006895065307617188s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 276.05685806274414s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.3359582424163818s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 2.114032745361328s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 3.0762856006622314s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 44.19209170341492s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.0999226570129395s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.14531278610229492s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3443300724029541s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3209869861602783s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.35785627365112305s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.35294222831726074s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.40628743171691895s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.31895899772644043s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3523232936859131s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.6284925937652588s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3133406639099121s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3558320999145508s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3150146007537842s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 12.057421207427979s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 8.440017700195312e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.32625579833984375s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3152468204498291s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3155817985534668s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.24483108520507812s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3513166904449463s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.317730188369751s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3719475269317627s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 94.03375363349915s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.31666111946105957s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3150343894958496s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.31996655464172363s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.049103021621704s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.009948015213012695s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 2.6597700119018555s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3151235580444336s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 4.69820237159729s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 8.448047161102295s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 97.0340895652771s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.565399169921875s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 5.826026201248169s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 3.1474061012268066s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.32347893714904785s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.3131988048553467s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 10.341173887252808s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.3525643348693848s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.024665117263793945s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.1444091796875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 0.0006997585296630859s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 5.459785461425781e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 1.430511474609375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EO-FR took 9.5367431640625e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-eo-fr took 661.9223039150238s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.33998942375183105s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.0006744861602783203s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 281.2422921657562s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.436471939086914s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 2.2957217693328857s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 2.9262375831604004s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 44.17475461959839s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.2630441188812256s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.14570403099060059s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3206150531768799s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31531715393066406s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.32602453231811523s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31946492195129395s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.40610551834106445s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3208348751068115s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3527514934539795s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.9392964839935303s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.4531409740447998s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.39380955696105957s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3164026737213135s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 12.134160280227661s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 8.320808410644531e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31214118003845215s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31432485580444336s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.35558557510375977s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.2438185214996338s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3133366107940674s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31652283668518066s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.44776201248168945s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 94.11318373680115s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.35981154441833496s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31371331214904785s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3791165351867676s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.907947301864624s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.010178089141845703s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 2.609084367752075s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.31307506561279297s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 4.787937164306641s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 8.336424350738525s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 95.31967496871948s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.5226335525512695s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 5.8812243938446045s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 3.156468629837036s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 2.3968138694763184s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.3145468235015869s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 10.177412271499634s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.2901864051818848s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.021062135696411133s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 0.0007228851318359375s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 4.9114227294921875e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 2.1457672119140625e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF ES-AN took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-es-an took 669.7486987113953s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.24195027351379395s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.0005905628204345703s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 276.1601185798645s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 1.328681230545044s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 2.174028158187866s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 2.8770179748535156s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 43.981985569000244s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 1.108410358428955s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.14466238021850586s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.31986379623413086s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.31428003311157227s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3134117126464844s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3169698715209961s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.4045522212982178s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3242011070251465s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3504509925842285s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.6268846988677979s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.31432557106018066s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.36253905296325684s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3118476867675781s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 12.019176721572876s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 8.559226989746094e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3147084712982178s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3290877342224121s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.31452345848083496s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.24396896362304688s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3153219223022461s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.31658363342285156s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.31322312355041504s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 94.02020764350891s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3396627902984619s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3144245147705078s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3145585060119629s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.9050381183624268s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.009984731674194336s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 2.6190762519836426s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3126230239868164s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 4.725082635879517s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 8.362732887268066s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 96.32927703857422s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 1.5411300659179688s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 5.666289329528809s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 2.9871108531951904s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3420412540435791s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.3155531883239746s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 10.258548259735107s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 14.453548669815063s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.021106481552124023s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 0.0007083415985107422s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 5.030632019042969e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 2.1457672119140625e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF ES-AST took 2.3603439331054688e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-es-ast took 697.7072083950043s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31351637840270996s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.0007402896881103516s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 275.20491886138916s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 1.3447651863098145s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 2.257938861846924s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 2.9821856021881104s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 43.88462829589844s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 1.241187572479248s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.14449334144592285s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.32100820541381836s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3124053478240967s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31716132164001465s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31424522399902344s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.4069092273712158s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.5706052780151367s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.34745240211486816s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.6215527057647705s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3101060390472412s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.35353827476501465s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31081175804138184s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 12.198778629302979s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 8.893013000488281e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31317877769470215s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3135359287261963s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31419801712036133s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.2521684169769287s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31226110458374023s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31325721740722656s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3126065731048584s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 93.28468155860901s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 8.58306884765625e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3411521911621094s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.31421923637390137s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3137810230255127s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.9040553569793701s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.010035514831542969s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 2.6358590126037598s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3174092769622803s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 4.737374782562256s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 8.38979434967041s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 95.75934743881226s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 1.453941822052002s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 5.690950870513916s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 2.9970757961273193s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3419070243835449s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.3487412929534912s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 10.351015567779541s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.6364178657531738s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.0211639404296875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 0.0007104873657226562s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 4.5299530029296875e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 1.9073486328125e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF ES-CA took 5.9604644775390625e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-es-ca took 705.0073208808899s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.27165675163269043s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.0006186962127685547s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 275.0657343864441s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 1.337218999862671s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 2.1722021102905273s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 3.137098550796509s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 43.75531983375549s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 1.0972959995269775s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.14855027198791504s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3132779598236084s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.30603599548339844s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.30715441703796387s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3091261386871338s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.40531039237976074s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.31264805793762207s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3607513904571533s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.613173246383667s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.30587220191955566s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3495969772338867s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.30821657180786133s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 11.99371337890625s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 8.487701416015625e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.30762338638305664s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3063995838165283s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3160586357116699s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.27024102210998535s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.30668044090270996s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.34376096725463867s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.31079673767089844s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 93.6712896823883s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.33866024017333984s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3083963394165039s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3051636219024658s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.9459376335144043s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.010072708129882812s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 2.7290236949920654s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.31552696228027344s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 4.664839029312134s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 8.48519515991211s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 98.01189684867859s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 1.573105812072754s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 5.83394980430603s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 3.148139715194702s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.3371310234069824s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.31723546981811523s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 10.356951713562012s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.5190944671630859s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.021165132522583008s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 1.2874603271484375e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 0.0007131099700927734s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 4.673004150390625e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 2.6226043701171875e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF ES-GL took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-es-gl took 653.7471408843994s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.2432539463043213s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.0005795955657958984s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 275.67369174957275s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 1.4001243114471436s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 2.4559664726257324s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 3.4626872539520264s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 43.74865198135376s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 1.244520902633667s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.14537405967712402s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.32139110565185547s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3059508800506592s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3305354118347168s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3292534351348877s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.4027271270751953s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3129847049713135s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3417487144470215s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.6198616027832031s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.30623912811279297s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.35630178451538086s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.30535078048706055s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 12.249144554138184s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.0005514621734619141s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.30870676040649414s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3083174228668213s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3105180263519287s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.24295353889465332s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3115715980529785s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3251919746398926s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3092501163482666s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 92.58383631706238s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 7.62939453125e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3427298069000244s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.3212714195251465s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.31594276428222656s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.9099085330963135s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.010154962539672852s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 2.6208925247192383s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.31563615798950195s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 4.71744179725647s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 8.363974571228027s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 95.96101236343384s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 1.465686559677124s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 5.64605712890625s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 3.025083303451538s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.34881591796875s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.31720876693725586s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 11.266265153884888s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 1.3316175937652588s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.10978555679321289s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 2.0742416381835938e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 0.0016660690307617188s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 9.250640869140625e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 2.6226043701171875e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF ES-PT took 7.152557373046875e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-es-pt took 658.9527344703674s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.24347710609436035s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.0006618499755859375s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 280.67703461647034s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 1.4340112209320068s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 2.2379963397979736s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 4.115698575973511s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 43.77612328529358s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 1.1901655197143555s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.14700555801391602s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.31411170959472656s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3099243640899658s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.30709290504455566s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3161485195159912s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.40019989013671875s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.31969714164733887s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3436605930328369s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.614863395690918s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3075449466705322s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3501763343811035s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3078267574310303s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 12.73600459098816s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 8.869171142578125e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3050398826599121s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.30596137046813965s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.30652785301208496s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.23990797996520996s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3053109645843506s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.30889439582824707s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3083622455596924s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 94.41162490844727s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3357079029083252s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.309614896774292s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3101959228515625s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.9063382148742676s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.010123968124389648s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 2.634000539779663s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.30799412727355957s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 4.766088962554932s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 8.339999914169312s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 96.96575999259949s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 1.763707160949707s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 6.054651260375977s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 3.060173988342285s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.3346738815307617s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.309220552444458s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 19.910838842391968s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 1.8791477680206299s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.09993934631347656s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 3.838539123535156e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.0012433528900146484s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 0.0002880096435546875s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 2.384185791015625e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF ES-RO took 1.2636184692382812e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-es-ro took 677.3273913860321s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.24438834190368652s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.0005314350128173828s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 277.3307297229767s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.3657348155975342s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 2.2241013050079346s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 3.9200146198272705s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 43.73351192474365s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.2637553215026855s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.1468648910522461s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.310075044631958s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3067190647125244s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.30763697624206543s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3103804588317871s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3979682922363281s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3105754852294922s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3437790870666504s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.6171426773071289s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3656597137451172s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3526487350463867s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.30794262886047363s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 11.985347032546997s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 8.916854858398438e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3066072463989258s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.30700254440307617s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.30999231338500977s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.24376201629638672s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.34319257736206055s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.312868595123291s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.30791544914245605s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 94.79182267189026s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.71661376953125e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3387115001678467s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.311220645904541s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.34644055366516113s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.9326207637786865s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.010012149810791016s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 3.21486234664917s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3104093074798584s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 4.626827239990234s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 8.760708808898926s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 96.73852396011353s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.6274280548095703s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 5.9201819896698s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 3.1532325744628906s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.35086965560913086s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.3145873546600342s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 19.824819803237915s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.3852949142456055s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.06638860702514648s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.1444091796875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 0.0007526874542236328s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 5.6743621826171875e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 2.1457672119140625e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EU-EN took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-eu-en took 674.3331210613251s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.2416825294494629s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.0006005764007568359s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 277.46060013771057s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 1.362701416015625s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 2.184718608856201s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 3.1813883781433105s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 43.746219873428345s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 1.111262321472168s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.14584660530090332s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.32115960121154785s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3118283748626709s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31268978118896484s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31534457206726074s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.4048953056335449s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3248932361602783s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.35030531883239746s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.6333808898925781s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31540369987487793s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3571498394012451s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31412649154663086s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 12.175172805786133s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 8.416175842285156e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31229591369628906s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31224870681762695s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3157644271850586s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.24485445022583008s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31519341468811035s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3161592483520508s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.32213354110717773s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 93.49904727935791s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.34201526641845703s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3155839443206787s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3126413822174072s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.9039158821105957s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.010082244873046875s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 2.6374669075012207s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.31434059143066406s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 4.666689395904541s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 8.344872951507568s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 96.29064965248108s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 1.469864845275879s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 5.885843992233276s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 2.9758718013763428s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.34700989723205566s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.3145148754119873s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 10.592934608459473s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.6048793792724609s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.021189212799072266s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 0.0007276535034179688s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 4.553794860839844e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF EU-ES took 1.3113021850585938e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-eu-es took 674.1301124095917s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.24055790901184082s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.0006451606750488281s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 278.38981914520264s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 1.363065242767334s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 2.1907155513763428s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 3.282780408859253s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 43.74452495574951s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 1.0968408584594727s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.14594125747680664s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.31321263313293457s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3066246509552002s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.315704345703125s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3254680633544922s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.46007657051086426s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.31355905532836914s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.34565234184265137s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.6165432929992676s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3076305389404297s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3503992557525635s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3109252452850342s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 12.068218469619751s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 8.940696716308594e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.30744385719299316s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.30808234214782715s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3099081516265869s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.2466738224029541s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.30838465690612793s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3124353885650635s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3489198684692383s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 94.1172707080841s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.33415937423706055s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.32088160514831543s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3870420455932617s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.9079208374023438s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.010025262832641602s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 2.7482829093933105s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.30901122093200684s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 4.787598371505737s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 8.484937191009521s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 95.18705010414124s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 1.4628615379333496s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 5.854309558868408s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 2.989591598510742s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3856370449066162s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.3186061382293701s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 9.88671088218689s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.33096814155578613s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.02131962776184082s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 1.7404556274414062e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 0.000701904296875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 5.221366882324219e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 2.1457672119140625e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF FR-CA took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-fr-ca took 662.6867096424103s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.24311304092407227s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.0005769729614257812s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 277.5912375450134s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 1.3740363121032715s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 2.265442132949829s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 2.9159860610961914s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 43.87965750694275s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 1.2541654109954834s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.14610910415649414s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.3783242702484131s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.37172651290893555s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.400998592376709s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.37529659271240234s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.46441149711608887s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.37374258041381836s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.4085707664489746s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.7386507987976074s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.36929869651794434s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.41106224060058594s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.36965274810791016s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 12.016841650009155s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 8.940696716308594e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.37340760231018066s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.3716144561767578s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.39035892486572266s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.24293112754821777s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.37607908248901367s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.3790445327758789s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.3691248893737793s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 93.60499358177185s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.3960447311401367s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.36946582794189453s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.36881232261657715s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.9643821716308594s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.010057687759399414s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 2.6814591884613037s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.37192654609680176s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 4.840703725814819s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 8.539634943008423s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 100.06894159317017s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 2.0307323932647705s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 5.787953615188599s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 3.0485427379608154s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.4013247489929199s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.3678908348083496s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 10.287971019744873s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 2.174677610397339s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.1485764980316162s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 1.4543533325195312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 0.0011067390441894531s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 5.5789947509765625e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF FR-ES took 1.430511474609375e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-fr-es took 664.8822922706604s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.24366974830627441s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.0003871917724609375s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 274.6984372138977s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.4168779850006104s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 2.303626537322998s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 3.028691053390503s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 43.69228458404541s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.335996150970459s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.14873790740966797s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.37362194061279297s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.37157368659973145s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.37226438522338867s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.37699103355407715s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.4660065174102783s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.37395191192626953s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.44513773918151855s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.8000891208648682s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3707921504974365s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.42395734786987305s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3725240230560303s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 12.02043104171753s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 8.249282836914062e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3692147731781006s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.36760687828063965s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3716578483581543s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.24349308013916016s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.36953091621398926s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.371173620223999s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3743271827697754s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 93.26596283912659s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3499748706817627s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3172037601470947s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3140685558319092s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.9127888679504395s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.010060548782348633s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 2.749846935272217s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.3147416114807129s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 4.835393667221069s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 8.496706247329712s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 97.63265800476074s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.5874228477478027s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 5.998739719390869s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 2.9785752296447754s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.35129547119140625s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.31424379348754883s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 11.254275560379028s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.6031134128570557s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.03671979904174805s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 0.0007231235504150391s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 4.506111145019531e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF OC-CA took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-oc-ca took 658.7734949588776s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.24019217491149902s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.0007405281066894531s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 278.6999237537384s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.58040452003479s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 2.213467836380005s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 3.1322336196899414s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 44.52674698829651s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.2576513290405273s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.14764785766601562s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.32007408142089844s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.32062435150146484s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.31540751457214355s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.316378116607666s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.41788578033447266s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.33817076683044434s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3728816509246826s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.6414177417755127s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3325510025024414s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.35614585876464844s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.31244540214538574s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 12.195503234863281s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 9.703636169433594e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3153221607208252s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.31509900093078613s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.32990384101867676s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.24204182624816895s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.31504034996032715s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3208458423614502s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.31773853302001953s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 93.26545310020447s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.39112257957458496s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3536837100982666s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3567779064178467s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.958381175994873s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.010177135467529297s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 2.6442348957061768s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.3572413921356201s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 4.844337701797485s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 8.491510152816772s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 97.33571195602417s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.477388620376587s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 5.682663679122925s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 3.005445718765259s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.35157275199890137s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.31688785552978516s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 10.26486086845398s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.7858679294586182s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.03526473045349121s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 0.0007140636444091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 5.125999450683594e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.6689300537109375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF OC-ES took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-oc-es took 657.0808057785034s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.2442326545715332s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.000614166259765625s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 274.90254163742065s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 1.362307071685791s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 2.1579551696777344s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 2.9303038120269775s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 43.825138330459595s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 1.2036845684051514s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.1469099521636963s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.32538890838623047s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.31362318992614746s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3151271343231201s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3344440460205078s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.4043314456939697s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.31873083114624023s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.35686421394348145s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.628711462020874s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.31290650367736816s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.357219934463501s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3155703544616699s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 12.192551851272583s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 8.749961853027344e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3173246383666992s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.316664457321167s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.32721543312072754s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.2442460060119629s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.31351399421691895s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3174138069152832s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.31554198265075684s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 94.110426902771s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 8.821487426757812e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3396475315093994s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3330838680267334s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.31571221351623535s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.9055466651916504s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.010130167007446289s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 2.621483564376831s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.32517218589782715s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 4.6834001541137695s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 8.341550588607788s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 95.85935831069946s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 1.468583345413208s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 6.536314010620117s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 2.97942852973938s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.3473818302154541s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.317460298538208s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 10.767202854156494s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.43543362617492676s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.021732807159423828s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 0.0006952285766601562s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 4.458427429199219e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 1.430511474609375e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF PT-CA took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-pt-ca took 662.910059928894s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.24239301681518555s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.0006260871887207031s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 275.7127969264984s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 1.3933537006378174s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 2.2675957679748535s
Interoperability | New terms check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 3.092334747314453s
Versatility | Languages check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 43.597941637039185s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 1.1047451496124268s
Security | Check HTTPS for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.14447450637817383s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31968259811401367s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31319332122802734s
Availability | RDF dump link check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3144700527191162s
License | MR license check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3156616687774658s
License | HR license check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.4163198471069336s
Amount of data | Number of property check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3169994354248047s
Understandability | Number of label check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.34944772720336914s
Understandability | URI regex check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.6321964263916016s
Understandability | Vocabs check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3129081726074219s
Verifiability | Authors check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3547086715698242s
Verifiability | Publishers check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3144364356994629s
Performance | Throughput check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 12.197105646133423s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 8.726119995117188e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31468820571899414s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3330373764038086s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3153536319732666s
Interlinking | skos check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.2448110580444336s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3119823932647705s
Currency | Creation date check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31643152236938477s
Currency | Modification date check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31287097930908203s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 93.81960701942444s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 8.821487426757812e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3473975658416748s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3199903964996338s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.3245093822479248s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.9156255722045898s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.009989738464355469s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 2.6856558322906494s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31529664993286133s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 4.64613938331604s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 8.488172769546509s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 96.60822486877441s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 1.5253865718841553s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 5.744816303253174s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 3.035038948059082s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.39731478691101074s
Security | Sign check for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.31935691833496094s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 10.333281517028809s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 2.900785446166992s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.021121740341186523s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 1.811981201171875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 0.0007154941558837891s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 5.0067901611328125e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 1.9073486328125e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Apertium RDF PT-GL took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for apertium-rdf-pt-gl took 658.6267991065979s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AragoDBPedia took 0.5999560356140137s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AragoDBPedia took 0.0006594657897949219s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for AragoDBPedia took 2.7459723949432373s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for AragoDBPedia took 1.7268333435058594s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for AragoDBPedia took 0.779679536819458s
Interoperability | New terms check for AragoDBPedia took 2.184680938720703s
Versatility | Languages check for AragoDBPedia took 60.47719144821167s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for AragoDBPedia took 3.7779555320739746s
Security | Check HTTPS for AragoDBPedia took 0.2263185977935791s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for AragoDBPedia took 0.5456080436706543s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for AragoDBPedia took 0.3811802864074707s
Availability | RDF dump link check for AragoDBPedia took 0.37900209426879883s
License | MR license check for AragoDBPedia took 0.4904017448425293s
License | HR license check for AragoDBPedia took 5.318073987960815s
Amount of data | Number of property check for AragoDBPedia took 0.3771357536315918s
Understandability | Number of label check for AragoDBPedia took 0.4622840881347656s
Understandability | URI regex check for AragoDBPedia took 0.8105461597442627s
Understandability | Vocabs check for AragoDBPedia took 0.41014552116394043s
Verifiability | Authors check for AragoDBPedia took 0.7093076705932617s
Verifiability | Publishers check for AragoDBPedia took 0.3852884769439697s
Performance | Throughput check for AragoDBPedia took 10.858550786972046s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for AragoDBPedia took 8.869171142578125e-05s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for AragoDBPedia took 0.4240593910217285s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for AragoDBPedia took 0.3750779628753662s
Interlinking | skos check for AragoDBPedia took 0.5720593929290771s
Interlinking | skos check for AragoDBPedia took 0.3278334140777588s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for AragoDBPedia took 0.41486644744873047s
Currency | Creation date check for AragoDBPedia took 0.374126672744751s
Currency | Modification date check for AragoDBPedia took 0.7453742027282715s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for AragoDBPedia took 5.971763849258423s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for AragoDBPedia took 2.86102294921875e-06s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for AragoDBPedia took 0.37955641746520996s
Accuracy | Check Functional Property for AragoDBPedia took 0.42088985443115234s
Accuracy | Check Inverse Functional Property for AragoDBPedia took 0.4128429889678955s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for AragoDBPedia took 1.2988402843475342s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for AragoDBPedia took 0.029689788818359375s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for AragoDBPedia took 0.0329129695892334s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for AragoDBPedia took 0.3688323497772217s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for AragoDBPedia took 4.244480609893799s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for AragoDBPedia took 0.5891342163085938s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for AragoDBPedia took 2.7059831619262695s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined classes for AragoDBPedia took 1.527693271636963s
Consistency | Check Invalid usage of undefined properties for AragoDBPedia took 5.4309728145599365s
Conciseness | Check Extensional conciseness for AragoDBPedia took 0.03755927085876465s
Conciseness | Check Intensional conciseness for AragoDBPedia took 0.5178754329681396s
Security | Sign check for AragoDBPedia took 0.49651312828063965s
Availability | Check URIs Dereferenciability for AragoDBPedia took 3061.3699703216553s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AragoDBPedia took 0.4797356128692627s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AragoDBPedia took 0.021790027618408203s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AragoDBPedia took 1.9073486328125e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AragoDBPedia took 0.0007419586181640625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AragoDBPedia took 5.698204040527344e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for AragoDBPedia took 2.86102294921875e-06s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AragoDBPedia took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aragodbpedia took 3245.836420059204s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Archives Hub Linked Data took 30.22571563720703s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Archives Hub Linked Data took 0.0018227100372314453s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Archives Hub Linked Data took 2.0673987865448s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Archives Hub Linked Data took 0.021067142486572266s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Archives Hub Linked Data took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Archives Hub Linked Data took 0.0007271766662597656s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Archives Hub Linked Data took 4.673004150390625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Archives Hub Linked Data took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for archiveshub-linkeddata took 74.57817554473877s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Archivi ISMA took 30.135489463806152s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Archivi ISMA took 0.0006694793701171875s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Archivi ISMA took 0.4676237106323242s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Archivi ISMA took 0.021381378173828125s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Archivi ISMA took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Archivi ISMA took 0.0007100105285644531s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Archivi ISMA took 2.7418136596679688e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Archivi ISMA took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for archivio-isma took 81.35271167755127s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for ARIADNE took 0.40293335914611816s
Availability | VoID file availability check for ARIADNE took 0.0008356571197509766s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for ARIADNE took 0.4085228443145752s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for ARIADNE took 0.020774126052856445s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for ARIADNE took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for ARIADNE took 0.0007140636444091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for ARIADNE took 3.8623809814453125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for ARIADNE took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ariadne took 133.02460885047913s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Aristotle University took 2.0709829330444336s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Aristotle University took 0.0007112026214599609s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Aristotle University took 0.4586787223815918s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Aristotle University took 0.022882461547851562s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Aristotle University took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Aristotle University took 0.0007100105285644531s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Aristotle University took 3.0994415283203125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Aristotle University took 1.239776611328125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aristotle-university took 5.717895984649658s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 4.940858364105225s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 0.000530242919921875s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 1.053532600402832s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 0.021032333374023438s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 0.0007071495056152344s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 2.956390380859375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Transcription profiling of human, chimp and mouse brain took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for arrayexpress-e-afmx-1 took 19.23606824874878s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 8.559226989746094e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 0.00044345855712890625s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 0.7396752834320068s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 0.023062467575073242s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 0.0007207393646240234s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 2.9087066650390625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Transcription profiling of mouse cell types and tissues (GNF/Novartis) took 1.049041748046875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for arrayexpress_e-afmx-4 took 2.5619983673095703s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 3.9365310668945312s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 0.0005519390106201172s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 0.3295576572418213s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 0.02051401138305664s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 0.000713348388671875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 3.910064697265625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Transcription profiling of rat bladder after inoculation with bladder cancer cells took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for arrayexpress_e-mtab-104 took 12.471735000610352s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 8.702278137207031e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 0.0006263256072998047s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 0.436068058013916s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 0.020426034927368164s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 0.0007112026214599609s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 0.0001010894775390625s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Entornos interactivos. Arte en los nuevos medios (GNOSS) took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for artenuevosmedios-gnoss took 11.277420997619629s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Arthroscopy community took 8.702278137207031e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Arthroscopy community took 0.0005452632904052734s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Arthroscopy community took 0.41894030570983887s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Arthroscopy community took 0.02138972282409668s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Arthroscopy community took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Arthroscopy community took 0.0007243156433105469s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Arthroscopy community took 0.00010848045349121094s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Arthroscopy community took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for arthroscopy took 29.388174057006836s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 3.2733078002929688s
Availability | VoID file availability check for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 0.0006170272827148438s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 0.34951138496398926s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 0.021117210388183594s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 0.00074005126953125s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 7.891654968261719e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for The National Taiwan Museum's Formosan Aborigines Collections Digitizing Project (NTM-Formosan-Aborigines) took 1.1920928955078125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-_NTM-Formosan-Aborigines took 13.008245944976807s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 2.2418601512908936s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 0.0005381107330322266s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 1.7329132556915283s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 0.020568370819091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 0.0007050037384033203s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 7.486343383789062e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Archive of the Art Textbooks of Elementary and Public Schools in the Japanese Colonial Period (AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks) took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-AS-NTUE-School-Art-Textbooks took 12.593379259109497s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 2.2308740615844727s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 0.0006225109100341797s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 0.3481266498565674s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 0.020842790603637695s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 1.5974044799804688e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 0.0007283687591552734s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 9.202957153320312e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Taiwan Fauna Database Research: Taiwan Digital Fish Species Database (AS-TFD-Fish-Species) took 1.239776611328125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-AS-TFD-Fish-Species took 13.312690734863281s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 2.2383415699005127s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 0.0005867481231689453s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 0.39048004150390625s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 0.022351503372192383s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 0.0007240772247314453s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 3.933906555175781e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Database of Chinese Rare Books (CRB) took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-CRB took 15.968732357025146s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 2.2340688705444336s
Availability | VoID file availability check for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 0.0006203651428222656s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 0.34867072105407715s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 0.02139449119567871s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 0.0007092952728271484s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 8.7738037109375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for The Chinese Television System Educational and Cultural Programs Digital Archive (CTS-TV-Programs) took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-CTS-TV-Programs took 12.27177095413208s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 2.2443199157714844s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 0.0006270408630371094s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 0.3873453140258789s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 0.020839452743530273s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 9.298324584960938e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 0.0007123947143554688s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 3.4809112548828125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Database of Qing Official Titles (DQOT) took 1.049041748046875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-DQOT took 12.652857065200806s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 2.2404427528381348s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 0.000629425048828125s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 0.3492696285247803s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 0.022344589233398438s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 0.0007150173187255859s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 8.0108642578125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Database of the Han Wooden Slips Character Dictionary (WCD) took 1.2636184692382812e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-IHP-WCD took 12.610067367553711s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 2.97048020362854s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 0.0006089210510253906s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 0.9704065322875977s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 0.021909713745117188s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 0.0007233619689941406s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 8.344650268554688e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Linked Taiwan Artists (LTA) took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-Linked-Taiwan-Artists took 15.628528118133545s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 2.2372806072235107s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 0.0005588531494140625s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 0.3485684394836426s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 0.020656108856201172s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 0.0007131099700927734s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 5.125999450683594e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Research on the Aquatic Animals in Taiwan and its Neighborhood Area (NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan) took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-NMMBA-Aquatic-Animals-in-Taiwan took 11.443810939788818s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 2.2363944053649902s
Availability | VoID file availability check for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 0.0006039142608642578s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 0.5746605396270752s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 0.022565126419067383s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 0.0007066726684570312s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 4.935264587402344e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for The Digital Collection of Taiwan's Fish Otoliths (NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths) took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-NMMBA-Fish-Otoliths took 12.010393619537354s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 3.6395111083984375s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 0.0003027915954589844s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 0.4141533374786377s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 0.020837068557739258s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 9.5367431640625e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 0.0007126331329345703s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 4.57763671875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Dataset of the Qing Secret Societies (Sect of the Shifokou Wangs' Clan) took 5.7220458984375e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-Qing-Secret-Societies took 15.082498550415039s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 2.2268800735473633s
Availability | VoID file availability check for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 0.0012073516845703125s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 0.3511199951171875s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 0.020915508270263672s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 1.0013580322265625e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 0.0007140636444091797s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 7.772445678710938e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for The Tibetan Collection Audio Archive Research Project (Tibetan Audio Archive) took 9.5367431640625e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC-Tibetan-Audio-Archive took 10.80996036529541s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 2.2358620166778564s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 0.0005562305450439453s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 0.6062905788421631s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 0.021029949188232422s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 9.298324584960938e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 0.0007138252258300781s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 7.700920104980469e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Dataset of the Chen Cheng-po’s Paintings and Documents (CCP) in the Taiwan Archive Information System (TAIS- ITH/ASCDC) at the Institute of Taiwan History, Academia Sinica took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC_-_CCP_Archive took 13.454169034957886s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 2.23665452003479s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 0.0005977153778076172s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 0.3479163646697998s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 0.02130866050720215s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 9.775161743164062e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 0.0007114410400390625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 4.220008850097656e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Database of Names and Biographies (DNB) took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for ASCDC_-_DNB took 10.571571588516235s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 8.487701416015625e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 0.0005095005035400391s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 1.1373693943023682s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 0.02337956428527832s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 0.0007059574127197266s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 6.508827209472656e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Atlante Sintattico d'Italia (ASIt) took 1.0967254638671875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for asit took 13.294722080230713s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 4.1484832763671875e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 0.0005674362182617188s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 0.32831716537475586s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 0.022210359573364258s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 9.059906005859375e-06s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 0.0007021427154541016s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 3.62396240234375e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Automated Similarity Judgment Program lexical data took 1.2636184692382812e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for asjp took 5.830628871917725s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for ASN:US took 261.8098614215851s
Availability | VoID file availability check for ASN:US took 0.0007886886596679688s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for ASN:US took 2.8036909103393555s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for ASN:US took 0.021486520767211914s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for ASN:US took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for ASN:US took 0.0007295608520507812s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for ASN:US took 0.00013065338134765625s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for ASN:US took 1.239776611328125e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for asn-us took 406.22128558158875s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 8.20159912109375e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 0.0006470680236816406s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 0.43114686012268066s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 0.021033287048339844s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 0.0007152557373046875s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 3.337860107421875e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Talis Aspire - Manchester Metropolitan University took 9.059906005859375e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for aspire-mmu took 4.545547008514404s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for associations took 5.936622619628906e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for associations took 1.1648378372192383s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for associations took 0.3301277160644531s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for associations took 0.020798683166503906s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for associations took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for associations took 0.0007486343383789062s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for associations took 7.367134094238281e-05s
Interoperability | Check the re-using of existing vocabs for associations took 0.7328763008117676s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for associations took 7.3909759521484375e-06s
INFO | --- Analysis for associations took 10.679100036621094s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 0.24718809127807617s
Availability | VoID file availability check for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 0.00026726722717285156s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 0.32403039932250977s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 0.020703792572021484s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 1.3589859008789062e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 0.0009500980377197266s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 4.0531158447265625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for ATC publikovaná SÚKL took 1.3113021850585938e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for atc-publikovan--s-kl took 3.0400547981262207s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 8.487701416015625e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 0.0005507469177246094s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 0.3327598571777344s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 0.021280288696289062s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 1.0251998901367188e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 0.0007183551788330078s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 0.00010013580322265625s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Athelia RFID, a global knowledge network of RFID technology took 1.1682510375976562e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for athelia-rfid took 16.69182300567627s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AUEB Linked Open Data took 4.969189882278442s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AUEB Linked Open Data took 0.0006182193756103516s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AUEB Linked Open Data took 0.8610055446624756s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AUEB Linked Open Data took 0.020940780639648438s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AUEB Linked Open Data took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AUEB Linked Open Data took 0.0007119178771972656s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AUEB Linked Open Data took 3.24249267578125e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AUEB Linked Open Data took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for aueb-linked-open-data took 9.375157594680786s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 0.6366722583770752s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 0.0005609989166259766s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 0.34674620628356934s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 0.02228260040283203s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 0.0007090568542480469s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 5.030632019042969e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Augustini Confessiones in LiLa took 1.1205673217773438e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for AugustiniConfessiones took 3.860515594482422s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 0.602067232131958s
Availability | VoID file availability check for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 0.0006234645843505859s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 0.7619340419769287s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 0.020603179931640625s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 1.0728836059570312e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 0.0007123947143554688s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 9.179115295410156e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for Alpine Ski Racers of Austria took 1.2159347534179688e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for austrian_ski_racers took 5.063300848007202s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for AVsOnto took 8.535385131835938e-05s
Availability | VoID file availability check for AVsOnto took 0.0002956390380859375s
Completeness | Calculation of interlinking completeness for AVsOnto took 0.5611691474914551s
Reputation | Calculation of the PageRank for AVsOnto took 0.021068334579467773s
Interlinking | Calculation of Degree of Connection for AVsOnto took 1.049041748046875e-05s
Interlinking | Calculation of Centrality for AVsOnto took 0.0007157325744628906s
Interlinking | Calculation of Clustering coefficient for AVsOnto took 3.147125244140625e-05s
Believability | Calculation of trust value for AVsOnto took 1.1444091796875e-05s
INFO | --- Analysis for AVsOnto took 3.756643772125244s
Availability | SPARQL endpoint availability check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.22616267204284668s
Availability | VoID file availability check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.2902982234954834s
Extra | Recovery of all triples for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 14.879554033279419s
Performance | Total latancy measurement for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.601599931716919s
Amount of data | Number of triples check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 300.0986375808716s
Interoperability | New terms check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 1.4876854419708252s
Versatility | Languages check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 300.0690915584564s
Interpretability | Number of blank nodes check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 300.0877435207367s
Security | Check HTTPS for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.2505321502685547s
Interpretability | RDF structures check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.15758252143859863s
Versatility | Serialization formats check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.15137410163879395s
Availability | RDF dump link check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.12165522575378418s
License | MR license check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 113.4475793838501s
License | HR license check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 300.10428977012634s
Amount of data | Number of property check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.15607213973999023s
Understandability | Number of label check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 90.43280696868896s
Understandability | URI regex check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.41149020195007324s
Understandability | Vocabs check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.11405038833618164s
Verifiability | Authors check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 53.57644033432007s
Verifiability | Publishers check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 214.79253935813904s
Performance | Throughput check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 10.522552967071533s
Amount of data | Check the number of entities for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.00013709068298339844s
Verifiability | Contribs. check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 63.53351712226868s
Interlinking | sameAs chians check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 87.57991242408752s
Interlinking | skos check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.1592545509338379s
Interlinking | skos check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.2197713851928711s
Timeliness | dataset update frequency check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.15717840194702148s
Currency | Creation date check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 164.11132645606995s
Currency | Modification date check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.548842191696167s
Rep.Conc. | URIs length for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 70.96247267723083s
Interoperability | New vocabularies check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 1.4781951904296875e-05s
Consistency | Deprecated classes/propertiers check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.15206670761108398s
Accuracy | Check Empty annotation labels for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 12.133013725280762s
Accuracy | Check White space in annotation for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 2.498339891433716s
Accuracy | Check Datatype consistency for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 6.408789157867432s
Consistency | Disjoint class check for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.11788415908813477s
Consistency | Check Misplaced properties for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 0.32834362983703613s
Consistency | Misplaced classes for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 9.530000448226929s
Consistency | Check Ontology hijacking for B3Kat - Library Union Catalogues of Bavaria, Berlin and Brandenburg took 10.60375690460205s
