They say:
----
... Apache Jena 3.0.1 [7] ...
[7] https://jena.apache.org/ retrieved at 3.7.2017
----
but 3/July/17 is 3.3.0 which has JENA-1195 fixed (in Jena 3.1.1) which
is careless and invalidates their figures.
Given this, references to the 2015 are spurious and misleading.
But is this research? A decent MSc project to build skills, but
benchmarking systems as research? Algorithms analysis maybe, but not
black-box performance.
And for Jena, after all, it is open source!
No consideration of the coverage or not of the SPARQL 1.1 test suite?
I quite like the idea of responsible benchmarking because ambush-papers
were also a feature of SPARQL 1.1 creation.
That said, we ought not to be worry that much, see it as good that Jena
is considered. Much worse things are said by sales teams about open
source software, including about Jena. (Example: our SDB page rightly
says "don't use it anymore" and that is used as "evidence" that the
whole of Jena is suspect.)
Andy
And, details, ...
PREFIX foaf: http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
...
<foaf:knows>∗
sad face.
