Solutions to "Just KNIME It!" Challenge 18

@badger101 That’s a quite common pattern for free and open source nodes. We developers who create such nodes in our spare time with limited resources usually don’t want to spend much money on expensive certificates to sign the nodes. So if you know the source (URL, HTTPS, reliable vendor), you can safely install such nodes.

NodePit says this:

You might see a warning regarding missing signing/certificates. You can safely ignore this. Most community developers of free and open source products do not sign their products to avoid large costs for acquiring certificates.

The Spellchecker Nodes are developed by @qqilihq who also develops the Palladian Nodes and the Selenium Nodes. So I would consider them safe :slight_smile:

Best regards,
Daniel

3 Likes

@danielesser ,

:smile: Thank you so much for the explanation. Really appreciate it. I was busy these last 2 days creating tools to address my previous concern, which now is not a concern anymore based from what you just wrote.

I’m deciding now whether I should keep these to myself, or to publish them on the hub as an alternative:

4 Likes

Dingtalk_20220530171951

2 Likes

Thanks for the great explanation, @danielesser and thanks for rising that question @badger101. Here’s some additional 5 cents about that topic (from the maker of the Spellchecker nodes perspective):

We (NodePit and Selenium Nodes) currently do not sign the jars (no matter if it’s for free or for paid nodes). Signing them gives little objective security benefits but it’s a big hassle on top of the plenty of big hassles one faces in the Eclipse/KNIME development ecosystem (and which we rather invest in building great software).

Why no security benefits? As seen above, most users do not really know what “signing” exactly means. Facts: It will not protect you from bad/malevolent software. There is no external entity involved which “validates”, “authenticates” or “reviews” the “signed” software at all. At the end, the main reason for signing the software would just be about getting rid of that annoying dialog (which is definitely frightening).

So. Should you “trust” the Spellchecker nodes? This question I cannot answer :slight_smile:

Should you make your decision based on that unsigned content dialog? I think no.

By the way: For any questions about these nodes, don’t hesitate to get in touch!

–Philipp

2 Likes

@qqilihq Thanks a lot!!! Sure :slight_smile:

1 Like

@qqilihq Update: I just downloaded and tested your node. It worked remarkably well! Will definitely keep it as my permanent collection to use when it matters :ok_hand:

4 Likes

Whoah! This is super cool and insightful!

2 Likes

Hey

Here’s my solution.
I tried a few of the purpose build nodes, however I wasn’t pleased with the result. The most accurate that I got, was using a simple contains().

/MMU

2 Likes

MY take on this weeks challenge.

2 Likes

i am just starting here , great interface and forum overall . Motivating challenges :smiley:

3 Likes

Thanks for your feedback! :smiley: We’re looking forward to seeing your solutions!

1 Like

As always on Tuesdays, here’s our solution to last week’s #justknimeit challenge! :boom: :boom:

A heavy use of similarity search and regular expressions, no spellchecking.

Thanks for the participation! Lots of great insights this time around.

We hope to see you tomorrow for a new challenge!

4 Likes

tthank you for the welcoming appreciation

1 Like

Hello everyone !
My take on this challenge.

I’ve build a sort of scoring matrix to decide to which “category” the Finding fits better. I’ve done this by using the String Similarity Node from NodePit.

My workflow basically split each row, word by word, and then calculates the Leventshtein Similarity between each word and the Possible Finding.

After a few transformations, I search for the max similarity percentage for each Finding, so we can have the final classifications:

There are a couple of cases in where the Finding have two keyword in its description. For example this line could be either coating or missing

I see that some of you have a spelling analysis also, I did not do this, just to keep it simple.

See y’all on the next one !

6 Likes

Interesting to learn new about the similarity search node, although, I used it before for a different algorithm. Thanks for the challenge. Nevertheless, 5 nodes.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.