In such a case, the object term of the base assertion is used for the classification of the nonalignment.
The second way to resolve a discrepancy is the removal of the is_a link from the subject term of the base assertion to the subject term at the superclass level.
Consider the base assertion 1,3-dichloro-2-propanol is metabolized in 1,3-dichloro-2-propanol metabolism, which states that 1,3-dichloro-2-propanol can be metabolized in a 1,3-dichloro-2-propanol-metabolism process.
For each base assertion (represented as a triple of a subject class, property and object class), each of the class's direct superclasses is checked to see if it is within the domain of the property.
If so, it is checked if at least one of the object classes of the property of the superclass subsumes the object class of the property of the base assertion.
A general, automatic solution to such an inconsistency is the propagation of the object class of the base assertion up to the superclass level; this is the type of upward propagation we previously extensively employed in our ontology-enrichment work so as to ensure the global consistency of the ontologies when adding enriching assertions.
The first is to add an is_a link from the object term of the base assertion to the object term at the superclass level (or, in the case of multiple object terms at the superclass level, to at least one of the object terms).
There is only one object class for each base assertion, while there can be more than one object class at the level of the superclass, since monotonicity as one travels down the class hierarchy is preserved as long as an object class of a property of a class is subsumed by at least one object class of the property of the superclass.
The set of allowed classes at the superclass level (the one-member set chlorinated hydrocarbon metabolism) should subsume the set of allowed classes at the base-assertion level (the one-member set 1,3-dichloro-2-propanol metabolism).
Despite its histrionic headline the Newsweek article eventually admits (correctly) that research evidence on pornography effects is mixed, and difficult to base causal assertions on.
Meanwhile, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, known for its close ties to the nuclear power industry, seems to accept Entergy's word that certain safety and environmental mitigation measures aren't necessary, while withholding the data on which they base their assertions.
