eyeling 1.6.13 → 1.6.14

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

@@ -3,69 +3,11 @@
 @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

@@ -1,53 +1,9 @@
 @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

@@ -2,51 +2,9 @@
 @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

@@ -1,315 +1,18 @@
 @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

@@ -1,33 +1,3 @@
 @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 .
-