💡 Summary
Effect Ontology extracts structured knowledge graphs from unstructured text using ontology-guided LLM prompting.
🎯 Target Audience
🤖 AI Roast: “Powerful, but the setup might scare off the impatient.”
Risk: Medium. Review: shell/CLI command execution; outbound network access (SSRF, data egress); API keys/tokens handling and storage. Run with least privilege and audit before enabling in production.
Effect Ontology
A functional, type-safe system for extracting structured knowledge graphs from unstructured text using ontology-guided LLM prompting. Built with Effect-TS, implementing a mathematically rigorous pipeline based on topological catamorphism and monoid folding.
Mathematical Foundation
The system transforms OWL ontologies into LLM prompts via a topological catamorphism over a directed acyclic graph (DAG). The ontology is modeled as a dependency graph G = (V, E) where:
- Vertices (V): OWL classes, identified by IRIs
- Edges (E):
rdfs:subClassOfrelationships, oriented as Child → Parent - Context (Γ): A mapping from nodes to their data (labels, properties, comments)
The prompt generation is defined as a fold over this graph using an algebra α:
α: D × List<R> → R
where D is the node data domain and R is the result monoid. The algorithm processes nodes in topological order, ensuring dependencies (subclasses) are computed before dependents (superclasses).
Result Monoid: The system uses a KnowledgeIndex monoid (HashMap-based) rather than string concatenation. This enables:
- Queryable structure: O(1) lookup by IRI instead of linear search
- Context pruning: Focus operations select relevant classes without dumping entire ontology
- Deferred rendering: Structure is preserved until final prompt assembly
The monoid operation is HashMap union with custom merge semantics, satisfying associativity and identity laws required for correct folding.
Why Effect
Effect provides the mathematical abstractions and type safety needed for this pipeline:
Typed Error Channels: The E channel in Effect<A, E, R> ensures all failure modes are explicit and composable. Graph cycles, missing nodes, LLM failures, and RDF parsing errors are tracked through the type system.
Dependency Injection: The R channel enables clean service composition via Layers. The extraction pipeline depends on LlmService, RdfService, and ShaclService, all provided through Effect's context system without global state or manual wiring.
Structured Concurrency: Effect's Fiber model provides cancellation and resource management. The extraction pipeline uses scoped services (PubSub) that automatically clean up when the Effect scope ends.
Referential Transparency: All operations are pure or explicitly effectful. The topological solver, algebra application, and prompt rendering are deterministic and testable without mocks.
Architecture
The pipeline follows a three-phase architecture:
Turtle RDF
↓ [Graph/Builder]
Graph<NodeId> + OntologyContext
↓ [Prompt/Solver + knowledgeIndexAlgebra]
KnowledgeIndex (HashMap<IRI, KnowledgeUnit>)
↓ [Prompt/Enrichment]
Enriched KnowledgeIndex (with inherited properties)
↓ [Prompt/Render]
StructuredPrompt
↓ [Prompt/PromptDoc]
Prompt String
↓ [Services/Llm]
KnowledgeGraph (JSON)
↓ [Services/Rdf]
N3.Store (RDF quads)
↓ [Services/Shacl]
ValidationReport + Turtle
Phase 1: Pure Fold - The graph solver applies the algebra in topological order, building a raw KnowledgeIndex with class definitions and structure (parent/child relationships).
Phase 2: Effectful Enrichment - The InheritanceService computes effective properties (own + inherited) for each class. This is separate from the fold because inheritance flows downward (parent → child) while the fold processes upward (child → parent).
Phase 3: Rendering - The enriched index is rendered to a StructuredPrompt, then to a formatted string using @effect/printer for declarative document construction.
Usage
Basic Extraction
import { ExtractionWorkflow, ExtractionWorkflowLive } from "@effect-ontology/core-v2" import type { RunConfig } from "@effect-ontology/core-v2/Domain/Model/ExtractionRun" import { Effect } from "effect" const text = "Alice is a person who knows Bob. Bob works for Acme Corp." const config: RunConfig = { ontologyPath: "./ontologies/foaf.ttl", concurrency: 4, chunking: { maxChunkSize: 800, preserveSentences: true } } const program = Effect.gen(function* () { const workflow = yield* ExtractionWorkflow return yield* workflow.extract(text, config) }).pipe( Effect.provide(ExtractionWorkflowLive), Effect.scoped ) const graph = await Effect.runPromise(program) console.log(graph)
Expected Output
Input Text:
Alice is a person who knows Bob. Bob works for Acme Corp.
Generated Prompt (excerpt):
SYSTEM INSTRUCTIONS
Class: Person
Properties:
- name (string)
- knows (Person)
Class: Organization
Properties:
- name (string)
TASK
Extract knowledge graph from the following text:
Alice is a person who knows Bob. Bob works for Acme Corp.
LLM Output (JSON):
{ "entities": [ { "@id": "_:person1", "@type": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person", "properties": [ { "predicate": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "object": "Alice" }, { "predicate": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows", "object": { "@id": "_:person2" } } ] }, { "@id": "_:person2", "@type": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person", "properties": [ { "predicate": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "object": "Bob" } ] }, { "@id": "_:org1", "@type": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Organization", "properties": [ { "predicate": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name", "object": "Acme Corp" } ] } ] }
Final RDF (Turtle):
_:person1 a foaf:Person ; foaf:name "Alice" ; foaf:knows _:person2 . _:person2 a foaf:Person ; foaf:name "Bob" . _:org1 a foaf:Organization ; foaf:name "Acme Corp" .
LLM Integration
The system uses @effect/ai's LanguageModel.generateObject for structured output generation. The schema is dynamically generated from the ontology vocabulary:
const schema = makeKnowledgeGraphSchema(classIris, propertyIris)
This ensures the LLM can only emit entities with types and properties that exist in the ontology. The schema is a union of literal IRIs, providing type safety at both the schema level (Effect Schema validation) and the LLM level (structured output constraints).
The prompt is constructed from the KnowledgeIndex, which can be pruned using focus operations to reduce token usage. For example, if extracting only Person entities, the context can be limited to Person and its ancestors, excluding unrelated classes like Vehicle or Document.
Project Structure
packages/@core-v2/src/
Domain/ # Schemas, models, and error types
Service/ # LLM, RDF, NLP, extraction, entity resolution services
Workflow/ # StreamingExtraction, TwoStageExtraction, EntityResolutionGraph
Runtime/ # Production layer composition (tracing, rate limits, caches)
Telemetry/ # OpenTelemetry attributes/exporters
Prompt/ # Prompt helpers and renderers
Schema/ # Shared schema definitions
Utils/ # Common utilities
Testing
The codebase includes property-based tests verifying monoid laws, topological ordering guarantees, and inheritance correctness. All tests use Effect's test layer pattern for dependency injection.
Tracing
OpenTelemetry tracing can be enabled to capture LLM call metrics and performance insights:
# Enable tracing (default: true) export TRACING_ENABLED=true # Jaeger endpoint (default: http://localhost:14268/api/traces) export JAEGER_ENDPOINT=http://localhost:14268/api/traces
Running Jaeger Locally
To visualize traces, run Jaeger using Docker:
docker run -d --name jaeger \ -p 16686:16686 \ -p 14268:14268 \ jaegertracing/all-in-one:latest
Then view traces at http://localhost:16686
What Gets Traced
The extraction pipeline automatically annotates spans with:
- LLM Provider: Model name and provider (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, etc.)
- Token Usage: Input/output token counts for cost tracking
- Estimated Cost: Calculated cost in USD based on token usage
- Extraction Metrics: Entity and triple counts per extraction
- Request Details: Prompt text and response text (optional)
This enables:
- Performance debugging of LLM calls
- Cost attribution and billing
- Bottleneck identification
- Quality monitoring of extractions
Disabling Tracing
To disable tracing:
export TRACING_ENABLED=false
Or omit the environment variable (tracing is enabled by default).
References
- Engineering Specification:
docs/effect_ontology_engineering_spec.md- Formal mathematical specification - Higher-Order Monoid:
docs/higher_order_monoid_implementation.md- KnowledgeIndex architecture - Effect Patterns:
docs/effect-patterns/- Idiomatic Effect-TS patterns used throughout
Pros
- Type-safe extraction process.
- Efficient knowledge graph generation.
- Mathematically rigorous foundation.
- Supports structured concurrency.
Cons
- Complex mathematical concepts may deter beginners.
- Requires understanding of ontologies.
- Dependency on Effect-TS framework.
- Setup may be cumbersome for new users.
Related Skills
pytorch
S“It's the Swiss Army knife of deep learning, but good luck figuring out which of the 47 installation methods is the one that won't break your system.”
claude-mods
A“Powerful, but the setup might scare off the impatient.”
mcpspy
A“MCPSpy: because who doesn't want to spy on their AI's secrets?”
Disclaimer: This content is sourced from GitHub open source projects for display and rating purposes only.
Copyright belongs to the original author mepuka.
