| appearance as argument number 1 |
|
| (instance consistent BinaryPredicate) | Merge.kif 17099-17099 | consistent is an instance of binary predicate |
| (instance consistent SymmetricRelation) | Merge.kif 17100-17100 | consistent is an instance of symmetric relation |
| (domain consistent 1 Proposition) | Merge.kif 17101-17101 | The number 1 argument of consistent is an instance of proposition |
| (domain consistent 2 Proposition) | Merge.kif 17102-17102 | The number 2 argument of consistent is an instance of proposition |
| (documentation consistent EnglishLanguage "(consistent ?PROP1 ?PROP2) means that the two Propositions ?PROP1 and ?PROP2 are consistent with one another, i.e. it is possible for both of them to be true at the same time.") | Merge.kif 17103-17105 | The number 2 argument of consistent is an instance of proposition |
| appearance as argument number 2 |
|
|
| antecedent |
|
|
| (=> (and (property ?AGREEMENT Contract) (partyToAgreement ?AGENT1 ?AGREEMENT) (partyToAgreement ?AGENT2 ?AGREEMENT) (instance ?PROC IntentionalProcess) (agent ?PROC ?AGENT1) (realization ?PROC ?PROP) (not (consistent ?PROP ?AGREEMENT))) (modalAttribute (exists (?LEGAL) (and (instance ?LEGAL LegalAction) (plaintiff ?LEGAL ?AGENT2) (defendant ?LEGAL ?AGENT1))) Possibility)) |
Mid-level-ontology.kif 15647-15661 | If All of the following hold: (1) X the attribute contract (2) X is a party to agreement of Y (3) X is a party to agreement of Z (4) W is an instance of intentional process (5) Y is an agent of W (6) W expresses the content of V (7) X is not a consistent of V, then the statement there exists U such that U is an instance of legal action, Z is the plaintiff in U, and Y is the defendant in U has the modal force of possibility |
| consequent |
|
|
| (=> (instance ?DIS Disagreeing) (exists (?A1 ?A2 ?STATE1 ?STATE2 ?STMT1 ?STMT2) (and (subProcess ?STATE1 ?DIS) (subProcess ?STATE2 ?DIS) (agent ?STATE1 ?A1) (agent ?STATE2 ?A2) (not (equal ?A1 ?A2)) (containsInformation ?STATE1 ?STMT1) (containsInformation ?STATE2 ?STMT2) (not (consistent ?STMT1 ?STMT2))))) |
Merge.kif 13333-13346 | If X is an instance of disagreeing, then All of the following hold: (1) there exist Y, Z,, , W,, , V,, , U (2) T such that W is a subprocess of X (3) V is a subprocess of X (4) Y is an agent of W (5) Z is an agent of V (6) equal Y (7) Z (8) W contains information U (9) V contains information T (10) T is not a consistent of U |
| (<=> (modalAttribute ?F1 Legal) (not (exists (?F2) (and (modalAttribute ?F2 Law) (not (consistent ?F1 ?F2)))))) |
Mid-level-ontology.kif 15349-15356 | The statement X has the modal force of legal if, only if there doesn't exist Y such that the statement Y has the modal force of law, and Y is not a consistent of X |
| (=> (instance ?ACTION CriminalAction) (exists (?LAW ?CONTENT ?CRIME) (and (modalAttribute ?LAW Law) (containsInformation ?LAW ?CONTENT) (realization ?ACTION ?CRIME) (not (consistent ?CONTENT ?CRIME))))) |
Mid-level-ontology.kif 15361-15368 | If X is an instance of criminal action, then there exist Y, Z, W such that the statement Y has the modal force of law, Y contains information Z, X expresses the content of W, and W is not a consistent of Z |
| (=> (instance ?C Correcting) (exists (?D ?S ?SP ?CP) (and (instance ?D Disagreeing) (subProcess ?C ?D) (instance ?S Stating) (subProcess ?S ?D) (containsInformation ?S ?SP) (containsInformation ?C ?CP) (refers ?CP ?SP) (not (consistent ?CP ?SP))))) |
Mid-level-ontology.kif 32356-32368 | If X is an instance of correcting, then All of the following hold: (1) there exist Y, Z,, , W (2) V such that Y is an instance of disagreeing (3) X is a subprocess of Y (4) Z is an instance of stating (5) Z is a subprocess of Y (6) Z contains information W (7) X contains information V (8) V includes a reference to W (9) W is not a consistent of V |
| (=> (and (instance ?CAO CivilAffairsOperation) (located ?CAO ?NATION) (instance ?NATION Nation) (instance ?LAW (RegionalLawFn ?NATION)) (realization ?CAO ?CONTENT)) (consistent ?LAW ?CONTENT)) |
MilitaryProcesses.kif 2263-2271 | If X is an instance of civil affairs operation, X is located at Y, Y is an instance of nation, Z is an instance of the regional law of Y, and X expresses the content of W, then W is a consistent of Z |
| (=> (and (instance ?TR TravelRequest) (instance ?TP TravelPolicy)) (exists (?FORMULA1 ?FORMULA2) (and (realization ?TR ?FORMULA1) (realization ?TP ?FORMULA2) (consistent ?FORMULA1 ?FORMULA2)))) |
TravelPolicies.kif 517-525 | If X is an instance of an employee must request permission to go in a BusinessTrip and Y is an instance of TravelPolicy, then there exist Z, W such that X expresses the content of Z, Y expresses the content of W, and W is a consistent of Z |
| (=> (instance ?OOP OutOfPolicyAccom) (exists (?ORG ?POL ?PROP1 ?PROP2) (and (instance ?ORG Organization) (instance ?POL Policy) (policyOwner ?ORG ?POL) (containsInformation ?POL ?PROP1) (containsInformation ?OOP ?PROP2) (not (consistent ?PROP1 ?PROP2))))) |
TravelPolicies.kif 1339-1349 | If X is an instance of OutOfPolicyAccom, then All of the following hold: (1) there exist Y, Z,, , W (2) V such that Y is an instance of organization (3) Z is an instance of policy (4) Y enacts policy Z (5) Z contains information W (6) X contains information V (7) V is not a consistent of W |
|
Show full definition with tree view
Show simplified definition (without tree view)
Show simplified definition (with tree view)
|
|
Sigma web home Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) web home
Sigma version 3.0 is open source software produced by Articulate Software and its partners