Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/APSbot
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Approved--Ymblanter (talk) 00:35, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
APSbot (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: ArthurPSmith (talk • contribs • logs)
Task/s: add nuclear decay data from the National Nuclear Data Center (Q16821319) to wikidata.
Code: From pywikibot - available from github See also special floating point number stringification needed for pywikibot to work properly: User_talk:Tobias1984#very_small_numbers_in_pywikibot.3F.3F
Function details: The code takes a CSV file of nuclear decay information obtained from the list of isotopes in wikidata and the decay information for the associated isotope on the public NNDC website (this is done with a separate script) - currently I am working with just the half-life quantity values but plan to add decay modes also (perhaps as a separate task?) The pywikibot function then checks whether the half-life property has already been entered for a given isotope and whether it agrees with the current value from NNDC; if they agree it checks the source information, and adds a source reference to NNDC if not already present. If there is no half-life property it adds the current value with a source reference and retrieved date.
Impact: there are currently 3179 isotope entries in wikidata (ground state, not isomers) that would be regularly checked for NNDC values. 2744 of them have half-life quantity values that can be used (some of the NNDC values are a line-width in keV or MeV that need to be translated to half-life values via this formula). Some of those values have already been entered - see for example helium-8 (Q12624958). The bot would go through the remaining entries and add the data where missing. I also plan to run it regularly (maybe every few months) and update values that have changed or are new.
Testing: I've run through about 110 nuclides, inserting half-life and source claims for them, using the bot. See beryllium-12 (Q14646117) for example. Full list at Special:Contributions/APSbot.
--ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @ArthurPSmith: Support Is the standard deviation consistently given in 2 sigma? I would think another qualifier would be good that described the "+/- number" (this is really what it is actually). For example "Type of deviation" --(Item)--> "2 sigma". - The test edits look good and I think this is a very useful bot task. --Tobias1984 (talk) 04:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe for NNDC what they provide is 1-sigma uncertainty numbers. Do you have some examples elsewhere where somebody has used a qualifier for the uncertainty? It seems like a good idea. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @ArthurPSmith: I will start a proposal. But if it doesn't finish in time, we can always add more qualifiers later. --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe for NNDC what they provide is 1-sigma uncertainty numbers. Do you have some examples elsewhere where somebody has used a qualifier for the uncertainty? It seems like a good idea. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Snipre
Physikerwelt
Pamputt
Petermahlzahn
Jibe-b
Restu20
Daniel Mietchen
TomT0m
ArthurPSmith
Mu301
Sarilho1
SR5
DavRosen
Danmichaelo
Ptolusque
PhilMINT
Malore
Thibdx
Ranjithsiji
Niko.georgiev
Simon Villeneuve
Toni 001
Marc André Miron
DePiep
RShigapov
CarlFriedberg
Crocodilecoup
Mkomboti
Amorenobr (talk) 01:27, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Valverde667 (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
fgnievinski
- Comment Just a thing about the reference. Please add the retrieved date or the version of the database. I don't know if the database has some version number. Then can you just add a small title in the reference section ? When people will built the link in the WP article they will enjoy to be able to read a readable text in the reference section instead of an ugly URL. What do you prefer:
- http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/reCenter.jsp?z=4&n=8 , National Nuclear Data Center, 15 October 2015
- beryllium-12 , National Nuclear Data Center, 15 October 2015
- Snipre (talk) 14:56, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Snipre: I will check on version number, but the bot is already putting in the retrieved date as part of the source data - under beryllium-12 (Q14646117) for example the reference is:
- reference URL - http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/reCenter.jsp?z=4&n=8
- retrieved - 15 October 2015
- stated in - National Nuclear Data Center
- ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- For the retrieved date, this is ok, this date is the most common way to set a temporal marker. The only problem of retrieved date, this is its missing link between the date and the most updated document at that date. But this is a small problem.
- For the reference data, can you just have a look at the reference section of this article and explain us what do you read for the link to the NuDat 2.1 database ? I don't read any url but a nice text, NuDat 2.1 database, instead of http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/.
- When you create an URL you usually create a text to display in order to avoid the display of the url which often doesn't provide any information to the reader about the content to which the link directs.
- The nice thing to see would be to have as reference data something like
- reference URL - http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/reCenter.jsp?z=4&n=8
- retrieved - 15 October 2015
- stated in - National Nuclear Data Center
- title - Half life data from NuDat 2.1 database
- in order to be able a nice reference like "National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory. Half life data from NuDat 2.1 database (retrieved 15 October 2015)." and not "National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory. http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/reCenter.jsp?z=4&n=8 (retrieved 15 October 2015)." Snipre (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh - are you just asking for a 'title' field in the source reference? (by the way the current version is NuDat 2.6, not 2.1) Anyway, I can certainly add that in, I will plan on it. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, I tried, but failed. If you mean to use the 'title' property (P1476) this is impossible at the moment as it has a value type of 'monolingual text' which is not supported by pywikibot yet. Also I'm really not sure this is the right property; it implies that is the title of the referenced work, not necessarily an explanatory label to be placed over a link. If there's a specific property appropriate to database version, or maybe 'label' that would seem better. However I can't find anything that makes sense. Let me know what property you think is needed here, maybe point to a specific example where it's been implemented in wikidata already (or you can edit yourself) and I'll do it if it's possible. Thanks ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Snipre: How about edition number (P393) - it seems to be used mainly for books and sporting events, but it seems an appropriate property for this too (I would put in the string "NuDat 2.6" I think in this case?) ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- And see fluorine-22 (Q15135600) for latest test using edition number (P393) ... ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ymblanter, ArthurPSmith: Just create a new item for the NutDat database and use it instead of National Nuclear Data Center item, because it is strange to use "stated in" for an organization. edition number (P393) seems good. Apart the change of item for the "stated in", this is good for. No need to ping me again. The bot can run. Snipre (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok - see magnesium-30 (Q18844487); I'll use this format going forward and for updates. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ymblanter, ArthurPSmith: Just create a new item for the NutDat database and use it instead of National Nuclear Data Center item, because it is strange to use "stated in" for an organization. edition number (P393) seems good. Apart the change of item for the "stated in", this is good for. No need to ping me again. The bot can run. Snipre (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- And see fluorine-22 (Q15135600) for latest test using edition number (P393) ... ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh - are you just asking for a 'title' field in the source reference? (by the way the current version is NuDat 2.6, not 2.1) Anyway, I can certainly add that in, I will plan on it. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Snipre: I will check on version number, but the bot is already putting in the retrieved date as part of the source data - under beryllium-12 (Q14646117) for example the reference is:
- Any remaining issues with this request?--Ymblanter (talk) 01:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ymblanter, Snipre, Tobias1984: I believe this is ready to run. I have done 50 more test nuclides, for example sodium-29 (Q18844509). ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @ArthurPSmith: Support Is the quantity or rounding of Wikidata broken again? https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q18844509&type=revision&diff=262816133&oldid=255567347 shows up as 45+-1 and the diff shows
Amount 44.9 millisecond, Upper bound 46.1 millisecond, Lower bound 43.699999999999996 millisecond
. --Tobias1984 (talk) 16:40, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @ArthurPSmith: Support Is the quantity or rounding of Wikidata broken again? https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q18844509&type=revision&diff=262816133&oldid=255567347 shows up as 45+-1 and the diff shows
- @Ymblanter, Snipre, Tobias1984: I believe this is ready to run. I have done 50 more test nuclides, for example sodium-29 (Q18844509). ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]