The authors assumed that NE pairs that appear on a similar context may be grouped and that each is an instance of the same relation.
Finally, talking about candidate relata, we talk about types of objects that possibly function as the relata of an instance of the reduction-relation, rather than these objects themselves.
The relation between soul and body, on Aristotle's view, is also an instance of the more general relation between form and matter: thus an ensouled, living body is a particular kind of in-formed matter.
Then we choose R′ to be the relation: [λxy (x≠a & y≠b & Rxy) ∨ (x = ιu(Pu&Rub) & y=ιu(Qu&Rau))] To see that there is such a relation, note that once we replace the abbreviations x=ιu(Pu&Rub) and y=ιu(Qu&Rau) by primitive notation, the matrix of the λ-expression is a formula of the form φ x,y) which can be used in an instance of the Comprehension Principle for Relations.
If this were the correct explanation, then we could not distinguish between x being earlier than y, and x being later than y, for whenever there is an instance of one relation, there is also an instance of the other.
In these cases the categorization relation is to be interpreted as an instance-of relation.
max-cardinality: An instance of the class defined by the slot-constraint can be related to at most n distinct instances of the class-expression via the slot relation (similar are min-cardinality and, as a shortcut, cardinality).
A viable solution is a sophisticated weighted vote based on the prediction labels assigned to each instance of the relation [ 29].
Some authors, however, prefer to draw a distinction here and to treat actions as relations between agents and events, namely as instances of the relation of 'bringing about' that may hold between an agent and an event [von Wright 1963; Chisholm 1964; Bach 1980; Bishop 1983; Segerberg 1989], or perhaps the relation 'seeing to it that' [Belnap et al. 2001].
He added some new categories, however, such as causal power (shakti) and the moment (kshana), and recognized that there are as many instances of the relation of inherence as there are cases of it (as contrasted with the older view that there is only one inherence that is itself present in all cases of inherence).
