eyeling 1.5.12 → 1.5.13

package/examples/output/derived-backward-rule-2.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+@prefix : <http://example.org/socrates#> .
+@prefix log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> .
+@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
+@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   {
+#       :Socrates a :Human .
+#   } <= true .
+# This triple is the head of a forward rule with an empty premise,
+# so it holds unconditionally whenever the program is loaded.
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+{
+    :Socrates a :Human .
+} <= true .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   {
+#       :Human rdfs:subClassOf :Mortal .
+#   } <= true .
+# This triple is the head of a forward rule with an empty premise,
+# so it holds unconditionally whenever the program is loaded.
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+{
+    :Human rdfs:subClassOf :Mortal .
+} <= true .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :Socrates a :Mortal .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :Socrates a :Human .
+#   :Human rdfs:subClassOf :Mortal .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?S a ?A .
+#     ?A rdfs:subClassOf ?B .
+#   } => {
+#     ?S a ?B .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :Human
+#   ?B = :Mortal
+#   ?S = :Socrates
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:Socrates a :Mortal .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :test :is true .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :Socrates a :Mortal .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     :Socrates a :Mortal .
+#   } => {
+#     :test :is true .
+#   } .
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:test :is true .
+

package/examples/output/derived-backward-rule.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+@prefix : <https://eyereasoner.github.io/ns#> .
+@prefix log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   {
+#       ?x :childOf ?y .
+#   } <= {
+#       ?y :parentOf ?x .
+#   } .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :parentOf :invOf :childOf .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?p :invOf ?q .
+#   } => {
+#     {
+#         ?x ?q ?y .
+#     } <= {
+#         ?y ?p ?x .
+#     } .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?p = :parentOf
+#   ?q = :childOf
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+{
+    ?x :childOf ?y .
+} <= {
+    ?y :parentOf ?x .
+} .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :bob :hasParent :alice .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :bob :childOf :alice .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?x :childOf ?y .
+#   } => {
+#     ?x :hasParent ?y .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?x = :bob
+#   ?y = :alice
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:bob :hasParent :alice .
+

package/examples/output/derived-rule.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+@prefix : <https://eyereasoner.github.io/ns#> .
+@prefix log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#> .
+@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   {
+#       ?y a :Dog .
+#   } => {
+#       :test :is true .
+#   } .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :Minka a :Cat .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?x a :Cat .
+#   } => {
+#     {
+#         ?y a :Dog .
+#     } => {
+#         :test :is true .
+#     } .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?x = :Minka
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+{
+    ?y a :Dog .
+} => {
+    :test :is true .
+} .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :test :is true .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :Charly a :Dog .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?y a :Dog .
+#   } => {
+#     :test :is true .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?y = :Charly
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:test :is true .
+

package/examples/output/dijkstra.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,315 @@
+@prefix : <https://eyereasoner.github.io/ns#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:b :a) :edge 4 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :b) :edge 4 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :a
+#   ?B = :b
+#   ?C = 4
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:b :a) :edge 4 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:c :a) :edge 2 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :c) :edge 2 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :a
+#   ?B = :c
+#   ?C = 2
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:c :a) :edge 2 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:c :b) :edge 1 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:b :c) :edge 1 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :b
+#   ?B = :c
+#   ?C = 1
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:c :b) :edge 1 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:d :b) :edge 5 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:b :d) :edge 5 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :b
+#   ?B = :d
+#   ?C = 5
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:d :b) :edge 5 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:d :c) :edge 8 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:c :d) :edge 8 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :c
+#   ?B = :d
+#   ?C = 8
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:d :c) :edge 8 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:e :c) :edge 10 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:c :e) :edge 10 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :c
+#   ?B = :e
+#   ?C = 10
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:e :c) :edge 10 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:e :d) :edge 2 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:d :e) :edge 2 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :d
+#   ?B = :e
+#   ?C = 2
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:e :d) :edge 2 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:f :d) :edge 6 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:d :f) :edge 6 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :d
+#   ?B = :f
+#   ?C = 6
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:f :d) :edge 6 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:f :e) :edge 3 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:e :f) :edge 3 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (?A ?B) :edge ?C .
+#   } => {
+#     (?B ?A) :edge ?C .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?A = :e
+#   ?B = :f
+#   ?C = 3
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:f :e) :edge 3 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :c :d :f) 16) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :c :d :f) 16) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 16
+#   ?Path = (:a :c :d :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :c :d :f) 16) .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :c :d :e :f) 15) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :c :d :e :f) 15) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 15
+#   ?Path = (:a :c :d :e :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :c :d :e :f) 15) .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :c :e :f) 15) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :c :e :f) 15) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 15
+#   ?Path = (:a :c :e :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :c :e :f) 15) .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :b :d :f) 15) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :b :d :f) 15) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 15
+#   ?Path = (:a :b :d :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :b :d :f) 15) .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :b :d :e :f) 14) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :b :d :e :f) 14) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 14
+#   ?Path = (:a :b :d :e :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :b :d :e :f) 14) .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :c :b :d :f) 14) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :c :b :d :f) 14) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 14
+#   ?Path = (:a :c :b :d :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :c :b :d :f) 14) .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   (:a :f) :path ((:a :c :b :d :e :f) 13) .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   (:a :f) :dijkstra ((:a :c :b :d :e :f) 13) .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     (:a :f) :dijkstra (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } => {
+#     (:a :f) :path (?Path ?Cost) .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Cost = 13
+#   ?Path = (:a :c :b :d :e :f)
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+(:a :f) :path ((:a :c :b :d :e :f) 13) .
+

package/examples/output/dog.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+@prefix : <https://eyereasoner.github.io/ns#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :alice :mustHave :dogLicense .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :alice :hasDog :dog5 .
+#   (1 {
+#       :alice :hasDog ?Dog .
+#   } (1 1 1 1 1)) log:collectAllIn ?Scope .
+#   (1 1 1 1 1) math:sum 5 .
+#   5 math:greaterThan 4 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?Subject :hasDog ?Any .
+#     (1 {
+#         ?Subject :hasDog ?Dog .
+#     } ?List) log:collectAllIn ?Scope .
+#     ?List math:sum ?Count .
+#     ?Count math:greaterThan 4 .
+#   } => {
+#     ?Subject :mustHave :dogLicense .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?Any = :dog5
+#   ?Count = 5
+#   ?List = (1 1 1 1 1)
+#   ?Subject = :alice
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:alice :mustHave :dogLicense .
+

package/examples/output/equals.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+@prefix : <http://example.org/socrates#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :test :is true .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :X = :Y .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     :X = :Y .
+#   } => {
+#     :test :is true .
+#   } .
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:test :is true .
+

package/examples/output/existential-rule.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+@prefix : <http://example.org/socrates#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :Socrates :is _:sk_0 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :Socrates a :Human .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?S a :Human .
+#   } => {
+#     ?S :is _:B .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?S = :Socrates
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:Socrates :is _:sk_0 .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :Plato :is _:sk_1 .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :Plato a :Human .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?S a :Human .
+#   } => {
+#     ?S :is _:B .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?S = :Plato
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:Plato :is _:sk_1 .
+

package/examples/output/fibonacci.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+@prefix : <https://eyereasoner.github.io/eye/reasoning#> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :test :is {
+#       0 :fibonacci 0 .
+#       1 :fibonacci 1 .
+#       10 :fibonacci 55 .
+#       100 :fibonacci 354224848179261915075 .
+#   } .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   0 :fibonacci 0 .
+#   1 :fibonacci 1 .
+#   10 :fibonacci 55 .
+#   100 :fibonacci 354224848179261915075 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     0 :fibonacci ?F0 .
+#     1 :fibonacci ?F1 .
+#     10 :fibonacci ?F10 .
+#     100 :fibonacci ?F100 .
+#   } => {
+#     :test :is {
+#         0 :fibonacci ?F0 .
+#         1 :fibonacci ?F1 .
+#         10 :fibonacci ?F10 .
+#         100 :fibonacci ?F100 .
+#     } .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?F0 = 0
+#   ?F1 = 1
+#   ?F10 = 55
+#   ?F100 = 354224848179261915075
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:test :is {
+    0 :fibonacci 0 .
+    1 :fibonacci 1 .
+    10 :fibonacci 55 .
+    100 :fibonacci 354224848179261915075 .
+} .
+

package/examples/output/for-all-in.n3

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+@prefix : <http://example.org/> .
+
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Proof for derived triple:
+#   :result :is true .
+# It holds because the following instance of the rule body is provable:
+#   :c a :CompositeTask .
+#   ({
+#       :c :subTask ?s .
+#   } {
+#       ?s :state :Completed .
+#   }) log:forAllIn ?_b1 .
+# via the schematic forward rule:
+#   {
+#     ?c a :CompositeTask .
+#     ({
+#         ?c :subTask ?s .
+#     } {
+#         ?s :state :Completed .
+#     }) log:forAllIn ?_b1 .
+#   } => {
+#     :result :is true .
+#   } .
+# with substitution (on rule variables):
+#   ?c = :c
+# Therefore the derived triple above is entailed by the rules and facts.
+# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+:result :is true .
+