Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Large formalizations carry the risk of inconsistency, and hence may lead to instances of spurious reasoning. This paper describes a new approach and tool that automatically probes large first-order axiomatizations for inconsistency, by selecting subsets of the axioms centered on certain function and predicate symbols, and handling the subsets to a first-order theorem prover to test for unsatisfiability. The tool has been applied to several large axiomatizations, inconsistencies have been found, inconsistent cores extracted, and semi-automatic analysis of the inconsistent cores has helped to pinpoint the axioms that appear to be the underlying cause of inconsistency.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 8 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 12 | |
| downloads | 18 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts