### Table 2. First SPARQL query for public services that match the found properties.

"... In PAGE 37: ... Due to the fact that two PADomain values are found, two que- ries are performed. The first is given in Table2 . A similar query is executed for gea: CommunityAndSocialServices PADomain.... ..."

### Table 1: Consistency checking for theorem provers and model builders

1999

"... In PAGE 10: ... Model building o ers a partial solution to this problem: as well as calling the theorem prover with input : , simultaneously call the model builder with input . In practice, this should successfully deal with many of the formulas the theorem prover can apos;t handle, as is shown in Table1 . Here the top row lists possible responses from the theorem prover to : , while the left hand column lists possible responses of the model builder to .... ..."

Cited by 16

### Table IV. Percentage of snapshots discarded due to inconsistency

### Table 5. Axioms for updates.

2003

"... In PAGE 2: ... He argues that the inconsistency of an ASM (clash in simultaneous updates) can only be detected when the ASM is in normal form and that the transformation of the ASM into normal form by a pre-processor is more efficient than a formalization of consistency in terms of logical axioms as we do it in our system. We do think that a suitable theorem prover can automatically process and simplify our consistency conditions (Lemma 3 and Table5 ) without problems. Poetzsch-Heffter introduces in [8] a basic logic for a class of ASMs consisting of simultaneous updates of 0-ary functions (dynamic constants) and if-then-else rules only.... ..."

Cited by 36

### Table 4: Disjoint clusters

2003

"... In PAGE 4: ... The rationale is that descendants are likely to be subtopics of a parent; therefore, it is sensible to include them. Example: The third column in Table4 reflects the updated cluster frequent items in the disjoint clusters. The potential descendant of cluster C(patient) is clus- ter C(patient, treatment).... In PAGE 5: ... All leaf clusters that contain no document can be removed. Example: Consider the clusters in Table4 . We start to build the tree from 2-clusters (i.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 4: Disjoint clusters

"... In PAGE 4: ... The rationale is that descendants are likely to be subtopics of a parent; therefore, it is sensible to include them. Example: The third column in Table4 reflects the updated cluster frequent items in the disjoint clusters. The potential descendant of cluster C(patient) is clus- ter C(patient, treatment).... In PAGE 5: ... All leaf clusters that contain no document can be removed. Example: Consider the clusters in Table4 . We start to build the tree from 2-clusters (i.... ..."

### Table 4: Disjoint clusters

"... In PAGE 4: ... The rationale is that descendants are likely to be subtopics of a parent; therefore, it is sensible to include them. Example: The third column in Table4 reflects the updated cluster frequent items in the disjoint clusters. The potential descendant of cluster C(patient) is clus- ter C(patient; treatment).... In PAGE 5: ... All leaf clusters that contain no document can be removed. Example: Consider the clusters in Table4 . We start to build the tree from 2-clusters (i.... ..."

### Table 5. Axioms for updates.

2003

"... In PAGE 2: ... He argues that the inconsistency of an ASM (clash in simultaneous updates) can only be detected when the ASM is in normal form and that the transformation of the ASM into normal form by a pre-processor is more e cient than a formalization of consistency in terms of logical axioms as we do it in our system. We do think that a suitable theorem prover can automatically process and simplify our consistency conditions (Lemma 3 and Table5 ) without problems. Poetzsch-He ter introduces in [8] a basic logic for a class of ASMs consisting of simultaneous updates of 0-ary functions (dynamic constants) and if-then-else rules only.... ..."

Cited by 36

### Table 3: Inconsistent covers for different classes of formulas

"... In PAGE 13: ... This method is called ICMUS (find a strict Inconsistent Cover of MUSes) and described in Algorithm 4. In Table3 , some typical experimental results are provided. Unsurprisingly, a lot of instances exhibit very small inconsistent covers in terms of the number of involved clauses.... ..."