 m_1\;\forall m_2\; \forall b\; 
(\; 
\hspace{-5mm} & ( & \hspace{-5mm} instance(b,Brood) \wedge 
member(m_1,b) \wedge
member(m_2,b)
) \\
& \;\rightarrow \; & \label{axiom:BroodSibling}
sibling(m_1,m_2)       
\;)\end{aligned}$$ According to the type information in axioms (\[axiom:domainSibling1\]-\[axiom:domainSibling2\]), both arguments of are restricted to be instance of. Consequently, by translation (see [@ALR12] for more details), axiom (\[axiom:BroodSibling\]) gives raise to the following rule-axiom in v2.4: $$\label{formula:oneSortedBroodSibling}
\begin{array}{rll}
\forall  m_1 \; \forall  m_2 \; \forall  b \;( \hspace{-7pt} &    ( \hspace{-10pt} &  instance( m_1,Organism) \; \wedge \\
 & &  instance( m_2,Organism) \; \wedge \\
 & & instance( b,Brood) \; \wedge \\
 & & member( m_1, b) \; \wedge \\
 & & member( m_2, b)  \; ) \; \rightarrow\\
 & \multicolumn{2}{l}{sibling( m_1, m_2) \; )}
\end{array}$$ Since its inner subformula is logically equivalent to the following disjunction (in negation normal form): $$\label{subformula:oneSortedBroodSiblingDisjunction}
\begin{array}{rl}
( \;\hspace{-10pt} & 
 \neg instance( m_1,Organism) \; \vee\\
 & \neg instance( m_2,Organism) \; \vee \\
 & \neg instance( b,Brood) \; \vee\\
 & \neg member( m_1, b) \; \vee\\
 & \neg member( m_2, b) \; )
\end{array}
\begin{array}{c}
~ \\
~ \\

m_1\;\forall m_2\; \forall b\; 
 (\; 
 \hspace{-5 mm } & (& \hspace{-5 mm } instance(b, Brood) \wedge 
 member(m_1,b) \wedge 
 member(m_2,b) 
) \\ 
 & \;\rightarrow \; & \label{axiom: BroodSibling } 
 sibling(m_1,m_2)       
 \;)\end{aligned}$$ According to the type information in axioms (\[axiom: domainSibling1\]-\[axiom: domainSibling2\ ]), both argument of are restrict to be instance of. Consequently, by translation (see [ @ALR12 ] for more detail), axiom (\[axiom: BroodSibling\ ]) gives raise to the following principle - maxim in v2.4: $ $ \label{formula: oneSortedBroodSibling } 
 \begin{array}{rll } 
 \forall   m_1 \; \forall   m_2 \; \forall   b \; (\hspace{-7pt } &     (\hspace{-10pt } &   instance (m_1,Organism) \; \wedge \\ 
  & &   instance (m_2,Organism) \; \wedge \\ 
  & & instance (b, Brood) \; \wedge \\ 
  & & member (m_1, b) \; \wedge \\ 
  & & member (m_2, b)   \ ;) \; \rightarrow\\ 
  & \multicolumn{2}{l}{sibling (m_1, m_2) \ ;) } 
 \end{array}$$ Since its inner subformula is logically equivalent to the following disjunction (in negation normal shape ): $ $ \label{subformula: oneSortedBroodSiblingDisjunction } 
 \begin{array}{rl } 
 (\;\hspace{-10pt } & 
  \neg instance (m_1,Organism) \; \vee\\ 
  & \neg instance (m_2,Organism) \; \vee \\ 
  & \neg example (b, Brood) \; \vee\\ 
  & \neg member (m_1, b) \; \vee\\ 
  & \neg member (m_2, b) \ ;) 
 \end{array } 
 \begin{array}{c } 
 ~ \\ 
 ~ \\
 m_1\;\flrall m_2\; \forall b\; 
(\; 
\hspace{-5om} & ( & \hspace{-5mm} nbstancx(b,Brood) \wedge 
mdmber(m_1,b) \wedge
member(m_2,b)
) \\
& \;\righterroq \; & \lqbel{axiom:BroodSibling}
skbling(m_1,m_2)       
\;)\ene{alijned}$$ According to the tyiz infkvmatimi in axioms (\[axipm:domainSitling1\]-\[axiom:domahnRiyling2\]), both arguments of are restrictqd to br lnstance of. Cogseqlegtly, by translation (see [@ALR12] for more dstails), exiom (\[axiom:BroocSibling\]) gives raise to thf foplowing rule-axiom ln v2.4: $$\label{firmujq:oneSortedBruodSibling}
\begin{array}{rlm}
\forall  m_1 \; \forall  m_2 \; \forall  c \;( \hs'ace{-7pt} &    ( \hwpafg{-10pt} &  instanre( m_1,Ordanism) \; \wedgc \\
 & &  itstance( m_2,Organism) \; \wecge \\
 & & instance( b,Brood) \; \wedje \\
 & & member( m_1, b) \; \weqge \\
 & & mekbzr( m_2, b)  \; ) \; \rightarrow\\
 & \nultiwolukn{2}{l}{skvlivg( j_1, k_2) \; )}
\end{argay}$$ Since its inner subfirmula is logically ezlovalent to tge foljoring disjunction (in negation normal fork): $$\lzbel{subformula:oneSortedVroodSiblingDisjunctiln}
\begin{arway}{rl}
( \;\hspace{-10pt} & 
 \neg instance( m_1,Organism) \; \vee\\
 & \neg instenze( n_2,Ovgankwm) \; \vee \\
 & \neg instance( b,Brood) \; \vee\\
 & \neg member( i_1, b) \; \nee\\
 & \neg member( m_2, b) \; )
\end{arrau}
\bfgog{array}{c}
~ \\
~ \\

m_1\;\forall m_2\; \forall b\; (\; \hspace{-5mm} & \hspace{-5mm} \wedge member(m_1,b) member(m_2,b) ) \\ sibling(m_1,m_2) According to the information in axioms both arguments of are restricted to instance of. Consequently, by translation (see [@ALR12] for more details), axiom (\[axiom:BroodSibling\]) gives to the following rule-axiom in v2.4: $$\label{formula:oneSortedBroodSibling} \begin{array}{rll} \forall m_1 \; \forall m_2 \forall \;( & \hspace{-10pt} & instance( m_1,Organism) \; \wedge \\ & & instance( m_2,Organism) \; \wedge \\ & & b,Brood) \; \wedge \\ & & member( m_1, \; \wedge \\ & member( m_2, b) \; ) \rightarrow\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{sibling( m_1, \; \end{array}$$ its inner subformula logically equivalent to the following disjunction (in negation normal form): $$\label{subformula:oneSortedBroodSiblingDisjunction} \begin{array}{rl} ( \;\hspace{-10pt} & \neg instance( \; \vee\\ instance( m_2,Organism) \vee & instance( b,Brood) \; \neg member( m_1, b) \; \vee\\ m_2, b) \; ) \end{array} \begin{array}{c} ~ \\ \\
 m_1\;\forall m_2\; \forall b\; 
(\; 
\hspace{-5mm} & ( & \hsPace{-5mm} instAnce(b,broOd) \wEdGe 
meMber(M_1,b) \wedge
member(m_2,B)
) \\
& \;\RighTarrow \; & \label{axiom:BroodSIblinG}
sIBlinG(M_1,m_2)       
\;)\End{alIgned}$$ AcCOrDINg tO tHe TypE iNFoRmatiOn iN axioms (\[Axiom:domaiNSiBlIng1\]-\[axiom:domaINSIbling2\]), both ArgUments of are rEstRicted To Be iNStancE of. conseQuentlY, By tranSlation (seE [@Alr12] for moRE detailS), AXiOm (\[axIom:BroodSibling\]) giVEs RAise to the folloWing ruLe-AXiOM In v2.4: $$\LabEl{formula:oNesorteDbroodSiBLiNG}
\BEgiN{Array}{rll}
\foralL  m_1 \; \forall  m_2 \; \foRAll  B \;( \hspacE{-7pT} &    ( \hsPAce{-10pt} &  iNstanCe( M_1,orgAnism) \; \wedge \\
 & &  iNstaNce( m_2,OrganIsm) \; \wedGE \\
 & & instanCE( b,Brood) \; \Wedge \\
 & & mEmbEr( m_1, B) \; \wedGE \\
 & & mEmBer( M_2, b)  \; ) \; \RIghTArRow\\
 & \MUltIcolumn{2}{l}{SiBlIng( m_1, m_2) \; )}
\End{aRRAY}$$ sincE itS innEr subFormula is logiCalLy eqUIvaLent tO the fOlloWiNg disJunctiOn (in nEgAtion normal form): $$\LabeL{subformuLa:oNesorTeDBrooDsiblinGDiSjuNction}
\bEgin{arrAY}{rl}
( \;\HsPACE{-10pT} & 
 \neg instance( m_1,OrganIsM) \; \VEe\\
 & \Neg instaNce( m_2,OrGAnIsM) \; \Vee \\
 & \neg inStAncE( b,BrOOD) \; \vee\\
 & \nEg meMBeR( m_1, b) \; \vee\\
 & \neG membeR( M_2, b) \; )
\EnD{array}
\bEgIn{arraY}{c}
~ \\
~ \\

 m_1\;\forall m_2\; \foral l b\; 
(\;  
\hs pac e{- 5m m} &  ( &  \hspace{-5mm} inst ance(b,Brood) \wedge membe r( m _1,b )  \ wedge 
member ( m_ 2 , b))\\ 
&\; \ ri ghtar row  \; & \ label{axio m:B ro odSibling}
s i bl ing(m_1,m_ 2)      
\;)\e nd{ aligne d} $$A ccord ing  to t he typ e  infor mation in  a x ioms ( \ [axiom: d o ma inSi bling1\]-\[axiom: d om a inSibling2\]),  bothar g um e n tsofare restri ct ed to be inst a nc e o f.C onsequently,by translat i on(see [ @A LR1 2 ] formorede t ail s), axiom ( \[ax iom:Brood Siblin g \]) giv e s raise  to th e f oll owin g  r ul e-a xi o m i n  v 2.4 :  $$ \label{f or mu la:on eSor t e d B rood Sib ling }
\be gin{array}{rl l}\for a ll m_1\; \f oral l m_2\; \fo rall b  \;( \hspace{-7 pt}&    ( \h spa ce {-1 0p t} &instan ce(  m_ 1,Organ ism) \; \we dg e \ \ & &  instance( m_ 2, O r ga nism) \;  \wedg e  \ \& & inst an ce(  b,B r o od) \ ; \w e dg e \\
 && memb e r(  m _1, b)\;  \wedg e\\ && mem b er(m_2, b )  \; )\; \r i ghtarrow\\
 &\ multicolumn{2 } {l } { si b ling ( m _1, m_2) \;  )}\ end{ arra y }$ $ S i nce i ts in ne r  s u bformula is logical ly  equiv alent  to the follo wing disju n c t ion (innega t io n  normal form):  $$\l abel{subfo r mula:one Sorte dBroodSi blingDisj u n ction}
\ beg in{ arr ay} { r l} 
( \;\hspace{ - 1 0pt}  &  
 \neg  in stance(  m_ 1,O rga nis m)  \; \vee\ \
 & \ne gin st an ce(  m_2, O rganism)  \ ; \ ve e \ \
 &\ neg in stanc e( b ,B ro o d)\; \vee \ \&  \ne gme mber ( m _1 , b)\; \ v ee\ \
 & \n eg member ( m _ 2, b )\;  )
\end {array}
\begi n{ array}{c}~\\~ \\

 m_1\;\forall_m_2\; \forall_b\; 
(\; 
\hspace{-5mm} &_( &_\hspace{-5mm}_instance(b,Brood) \wedge_
member(m_1,b)_\wedge
member(m_2,b)
) \\
& \;\rightarrow_\; & \label{axiom:BroodSibling}
sibling(m_1,m_2)_   _  
\;)\end{aligned}$$_According_to the type information in axioms (\[axiom:domainSibling1\]-\[axiom:domainSibling2\]), both arguments of are restricted to be_instance_of. Consequently,_by_translation_(see [@ALR12] for more details),_axiom (\[axiom:BroodSibling\]) gives raise to_the following_rule-axiom in v2.4: $$\label{formula:oneSortedBroodSibling}
\begin{array}{rll}
\forall  m_1 \; \forall__m_2 \; \forall_ b \;( \hspace{-7pt} &    (_\hspace{-10pt} &  instance( m_1,Organism) \;_\wedge \\
 &_&__instance( m_2,Organism) \; \wedge_\\
 & & instance( b,Brood) \;_\wedge \\
 & & member( m_1,_b) \; \wedge \\
 & & member(_m_2, b)  \; ) \;_\rightarrow\\
 & \multicolumn{2}{l}{sibling( m_1, m_2)_\; )}
\end{array}$$_Since its inner subformula is_logically equivalent to_the following_disjunction (in negation_normal form): $$\label{subformula:oneSortedBroodSiblingDisjunction}
\begin{array}{rl}
( \;\hspace{-10pt} & 
_\neg instance( m_1,Organism)_\; \vee\\
 & \neg instance( m_2,Organism)_\;_\vee \\
 &_\neg_instance(_b,Brood) \;_\vee\\
 & \neg_member(_m_1, b)_\;_\vee\\
 & \neg member( m_2, b)_\;_)
\end{array}
\begin{array}{c}
~ \\
~ \\
