[rules-users] Runtime Exception null accessor

[Wolfgang Laun]

There's no point in continuing this thread, based on incomplete conditions
meant to implement incompletely communicated requirements. You meant
well, but I don't see what (in any of your posts) would help to avoid
the problem you've
originally reported - there's no indication for me that it was caused
by an incomplete or faulty condition in the first place.

It's very likely that the corrections you've posted avoid that the
rule fires for
certain combinations of NEs, and this may very well be the reason you
don't see the original problem any more.

But, repeating myself: based on incomplete data, all of this is rather moot.

-W

On 26/02/2013, Bojan Janisch <bojan.janisch at scai.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> I do not need to find the minimum distance between two named entities. I
> just have to know that
> there is not another one which is nearer to the first named entity. But my
> mistake was, that I
> did not handle all possible states that the named entities can have.
>
> Of course what you wrote isn't wrong, it is just another way to guarantee
> that no other named
> entity is nearer than the current two.
>
> By the way I see now that I just put the same block a second time. Sorry for
> this mistake, my
> solution is
>
> not $ne3:NamedEntity(
> q3:QuestionId,
> q3.contains("bodySide") || q3.contains("anatomy"),
> ne3_begin:begin,
> ne3_end:end,
> ne3_begin > ne1_end && ne3_end < ne2_begin ||
> ne3_begin > ne2_end && ne3_end < ne1_begin)
>
> Later in the rule I'm checking with an eval condition that these 2 named
> entities are in range
> of approximately 10 chars.
>
> Maybe that will lighten your mind. The earlier post wasn't correct. I'm
> still not using a function,
> but that may change if I face more such problems in the future.
>
> How you see, I only test that a specific NamedEntity is not between the
> first and the second. That does not
> guarantee that the two nearest NamedEntities are always a match. But that
> isn't wanted.
>
> Greetings
> Bojan
>
>
>
> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Wolfgang Laun" <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
> An: "Rules Users List" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Februar 2013 15:15:33
> Betreff: Re: [rules-users] Runtime Exception null accessor
>
> Your rule doesn't look right to me, even after the fix, provided I've
> understood
> everything correctly. (I'm assuming that a NamedEntity is a range in a
> text and ranges don't overlap.) I would have thought that the distance
> between two nonoverlapping ranges is given by
>
> function int d( NamedEntity x, NamedEntity y ){
>     return Math.min( Math.abs( x.getBeg() - y.getEnd() ),
>                      Math.abs( y.getBeg() - x.getEnd() ) );
> }
>
> and that such d-values need to be compared to guarantee the minimum,
> taking care to replace NamedEntities with equal contents( "anatomy",
> etc) when comparing one distance to another.
>
> -W
>
>
>
>
>
> On 26/02/2013, Bojan Janisch <bojan.janisch at scai.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>> Hey again,
>>
>> I've solved the problem. Seems that the error came from an unhandled
>> condition.
>> I hope that the following example helps other people with similar
>> problems:
>>
>> //Checking if there is and Anatomy-Attribute
>> $ne1:NamedEntity(
>> ct1:coveredText,
>> q1:QuestionId,
>> q1.contains("anatomy"),
>> label1:ResponseAttribute,
>> ne1_begin:begin,
>> ne1_end:end)
>>
>> //Checking if there is also a BodySide-Attribute
>> $ne2:NamedEntity(
>> ct2:coveredText,
>> q2:QuestionId,
>> q2.contains("bodySide"),
>> label2:ResponseAttribute,
>> ne2_begin:begin,
>> ne2_end:end)
>>
>> //Checking that there is no other Attribute nearer
>> not $ne3:NamedEntity(
>> q3:QuestionId,
>> q3.contains("bodySide") || q3.contains("anatomy"),
>> ne3_begin:begin,
>> ne3_end:end,
>> (ne3_begin > ne1_end && (ne3_begin - ne1_end) < (ne1_begin - ne2_end)) ||
>> (ne3_end < ne1_begin && (ne1_begin - ne3_end) < (ne2_begin - ne1_end)))
>>
>> The last condition of ne3 does not handel the fact that ne1 is before ne2.
>> And I'm also not testing for this fact otherwise. So I changed the last
>> condition into:
>>
>> not $ne3:NamedEntity(
>> q3:QuestionId,
>> q4.contains(".bodySide") || q4.contains("anatomy"),
>> ne3_begin:begin,
>> ne3_end:end,
>> ne3_begin > ne1_end && ((ne1_end - ne3_begin) < (ne1_end - ne2_begin)) ||
>> ne3_end < ne1_begin && ((ne1_begin - ne3_end) < (ne1_begin - ne2_end)))
>>
>> Now it is not allowed that a named entity with questionId of anatomy or
>> bodyside is
>> between ne1 and ne2 (doesn't matter which comes first). The runtime
>> exception did not
>> occur anymore after I changed the rule.
>>
>> So seems that the null accessor was a result of an unhandled condition.
>>
>> Greetings
>> Bojan
>>
>> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>> Von: "Bojan Janisch" <bojan.janisch at scai.fraunhofer.de>
>> An: "Rules Users List" <rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
>> Gesendet: Montag, 25. Februar 2013 18:11:46
>> Betreff: Runtime Exception null accessor
>>
>> Hello Guys,
>>
>> I've thought many hours about this problem, but don't know how to fix it.
>> I've also searched the web, getting only some unfinished problems. Maybe
>> someone here knows how to solve it:
>>
>> Each time I'm running JDrools through my textfiles (I'm using it in
>> textmining concepts), I get the same runtime exception:
>>
>> 25.02.2013 18:03:59
>> org.apache.uima.collection.impl.cpm.engine.CPMThreadGroup process
>> SCHWERWIEGEND: The CPM thread group caught the following unhandled error:
>> java.lang.RuntimeException (Thread Name: Thread-5)
>> 25.02.2013 18:03:59
>> de.fraunhofer.scai.bio.uima.core.deploy.StatusCallbackListenerImpl
>> entityProcessComplete(151)
>> SCHWERWIEGEND: Exception occurred
>> java.lang.RuntimeException: Null accessor on node: a1_begin
>> 	at
>> de.fraunhofer.scai.bio.uima.core.deploy.StatusCallbackListenerImpl.entityProcessComplete(StatusCallbackListenerImpl.java:151)
>> 	at
>> org.apache.uima.collection.impl.cpm.engine.CPMThreadGroup.notifyListener(CPMThreadGroup.java:103)
>> 	at
>> org.apache.uima.collection.impl.cpm.engine.CPMThreadGroup.uncaughtException(CPMThreadGroup.java:86)
>> 	at java.lang.Thread.dispatchUncaughtException(Thread.java:1888)
>>
>> For me it looks like an unhandeld race condition (but I'm not quite sure).
>> Does someone have had this or a similar problem regarding null accessors
>> at
>> runtime?
>>
>> Thanks for your help.
>>
>> Bojan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users