Each Frame is connected to at least some other frame by a Frame-to-Frame relation, i.e., there are no lonely Frames.

The coreset property of frame elements propagated up the inheritance relation, i.e.: Each frame element in a coreset must have at least one corresponding frame element in the parent frame. All these parent frame elements must be part of one coreset of the parent frame. This rule is necessary from the logic point of view, saying that the child frame is more specific than the parent frame (you must not introduce new frame elements into a core set because this would open the semantic space of the child frame instead of narrowing it). That means that the restrictions of the child frame must imply the restricions of the parent frame. Frame elements in the coreset are logically connected via "or" whereas all other (except for extrathematic) frame elements are logically connected via "and". So for two frame elements a and b the rule says that if we have "a or b" in the child frame we cannot have "a and b" in the parent frame.

The excludes property of frame elements is inherited, i.e.: For each frame element f1 excluding another FE f2 of the parent frame we determine the corresponding frame elements f1' and f2' in the child frame. If both exist then they also should exclude each other. This rule is nice to have from the linguistic point of view but not really necessary from the logic point of view (i.e., that the restrictions of the child frame should imply the restrictions of the parent frame).

The Frame Elements that are mapped to each other as part of an inheritance relation should have the same type.

All semantic types of an FE are inherited if it is mapped to another FE as part of an inheritance relation.

The coreset property of frame elements is inherited, i.e.: For each frame element in a coreset of the parent frame we determine the corresponding frame elements in the child frame. If there are at least 2 then these must be part of a coreset of the child frame. This rule is nice to have from the linguistic point of view but not really necessary from the logic point of view (i.e., that the restrictions of the child frame should imply the restrictions of the parent frame).

All semantic types of a parent frame (except the "Non ..." types) are inherited to all child frames.

For an Inchoative\_of relation, each core (or core-unexpressed) FE of the parent Frame should be mapped to a FE of the child Frame.

For an Causative\_of relation, each core (or core-unexpressed) FE (except perhaps Agent or Cause) of the parent Frame should be mapped to a FE of the child Frame.

If Frames A and B point to a common Frame C via Subframe then A and B should not be connected at all except by the precedence relation. At the moment the precedence relation is a META relation, not expressed in the Relation Table, which might change in the future. Then, we have to use filterNotElem in order to get all Frame-to-Frame relations except Precedence...

For a Using relation, one core (or core-unexpressed) FE of the parent Frame should be mapped to a FE of the child Frame.

The Frame Elements that are mapped to each other as part of a Using relation should have the same type.

All semantic types of an FE are inherited if it is mapped to another FE as part of an using relation.

The Frame Elements that are mapped to each other as part of a Perspective_on relation should have the same type.

All semantic types of a parent frame are inherited to all child frames that use the parent Frame.

For each Frame we require that all of its semantic types are respected by all its LUs

For each Lemma connected to a LU we require that if it has multiple LexemeEntries then it exactly one of them is the head word and the part of speech of its associated Lexeme is the same as the part of speech of the Lemma.

We require that the descriptions of LUs start either with FN: or COD:.

Within each Frame the Names and Abbreviations of each Frame Element are unique (necessary for referencing them in the XML definitions).

Within the definition of a Frame Element belonging to a Frame F, for each referenced Frame Element we find a corresponding Frame Element (equal name or abbreviation) bound to the Frame F.

Within each Frame's definition for each referenced Frame Element we find a corresponding Frame Element (equal name or abbreviation) bound to this Frame.

Each core (or core-unexpressed) FE of a (not non-lexical) Frame has examples (not necessarily marking this Frame Element).

Each (not non-lexical) Frame has at least one example in the Frame definition.

Each core (and core-unexpressed) FE of a Frame is accounted for in the Frame's definition.

Each core (or core-unexpressed) FE of a (not non-lexical) Frame we find an example in the Frame definition.

For each core (or core-unexpressed) FE of a (not non-lexical) Frame we find an example in the FE definition.

Each annotated target of each Frame Element example of a Frame actually evokes that Frame.

Each annotated target in a Frame example actually evokes that Frame.

Each core (or core-unexpressed) FE of a Frame has a definition, i.e., it is referenced in its own definition.

For each frame element referenced in the documentation we find a frame element in the database with the same name.

For each frame referenced in the documentation we find a frame in the database with the same name.

For each LU or Lexeme marked as \ment{} in the documentation we find a similar LU or a similar Lexeme in the database. Comparison is not case sensitive, white spaces might be any character in the DB. Multi-word LUs Lexemes are taken into account. Words separated by any punctuation symbol are treated as extra LUs / Lexemes.

The Frame Elements that are mapped to each other as part of an inheritance relation should have the same names. This is no really formal rule but good to know for AI applications. Therefore, its priority is set to 0.

Each Frame is in the inheritance hierarchy.

For each sentence we require that if the sentence is about frame elements then there is no not annotated word equal to a frame element name in the database (i.e. all frame element names are properly annotated).

For each sentence we require that if the sentence is about frames then there is no not annotated word equal to a frame name in the database (i.e. all frame names are properly annotated).

For each FrameElement that is part of a CoreSet we require that this FrameElement is actually core (or core unexpressed) and a member of the Frame associated with the CoreSet relation.

For each Frame we require at least one LU, except for those Frames that have a semantic type "Non-Lexical"

Each Frame has at least one core (or core-unexpressed) frame element.

If a frame has any LUs then its semantic type should not be "Non-Lexical"

Each Frame has at least one frame element.

There should be no source reference for the Frame relations CoreSet, Excludes, and Requires (i.e., those relations are unary in the way that they say that there are FEs in this Frame that belong to the CoreSet, exclude each other, or require one another)

Every Frame relation (except CoreSet, Excludes, Requires, ReFraming) should have a valid (i.e. non-null and existent) source reference.

Every Frame relation should have a valid (i.e. non-null and existent) target reference.

The Frame-to-Frame relations Inheritance, Using, Inchoative of, and Causative of should be acyclic.

Between two Frames there should exist at most one relation of type Inheritance, Using, SubFrame, Inchoative of, and Causative of.

Every Frame Element relation should have a valid (i.e. non-null and existent) source reference. This rule can be evaluated much faster than its corresponding rule in ReulesFERelationSanity.xml because now we use the SQL database to select the appropriate FE and don't look ourselves within all FEs

Every Frame Element relation should have a valid (i.e. non-null and existent) target reference. This rule can be evaluated much faster than its corresponding rule in ReulesFERelationSanity.xml because now we use the SQL database to select the appropriate FE and don't look ourselves within all FEs

All core Frame Elements of a Frame are inherited if they are not part of a coreset or an excludes set of this Frame.

At least one Frame Element of each coreset of a Frame is inherited.

Of two mutually excluding FEs of a Frame either both are not core or at least one of them is core and inherited.

The excludes property of frame elements propageted upwards the inheritance relation, i.e.: For each frame element f1 excluding another FE f2 of the child frame we determine the corresponding frame elements f1' and f2' in the parent frame. If both exist then they also should exclude each other. This rule is necessary from the logic point of view, saying that the child frame is more specific than the parent frame. That means that the restrictions of the child frame must imply the restricions of the parent frame. Frame elements that exclude each other are logically connected via "xor" whereas all other (except for extrathematic) frame elements are logically connected via "and". So for two frame elements a and b the rule says that if we have "a xor b" in the child frame we cannot have "a and b" in the parent frame.

The requires property of frame elements is propagated upwards, i.e.: For each frame element f1 requiring another FE f2 of the child frame we determine the corresponding frame elements f1' and f2' in the parent frame. If both exist then they also should require each other. This rule is necessary from the logic point of view, saying that the child frame is more specific than the parent frame. That means that the restrictions of the child frame must imply the restricions of the parent frame. Frame elements that require each other are logically connected via "implies" whereas all other (except for extrathematic) frame elements are logically connected via "and". So for two frame elements a and b the rule says that if we have "a implies b" in the child frame we cannot have "a and b" in the parent frame.

Inherited Frame Elements should not change the coreness type from non-extrathematic to extrathematic. This rule is comprised by inheritance_mapped_FEs_same_type but it is much more important.

The requires property of frame elements is inherited, i.e.: For each frame element f1 requiring another FE f2 of the parent frame we determine the corresponding frame elements f1' and f2' in the child frame. If both exist then they also should require each other or there is no frame element relation between them (which means that f1' and f2' are both(!) necessary). This rule is nice to have from the linguistic point of view but not really necessary from the logic point of view (i.e., that the restrictions of the child frame should imply the restrictions of the parent frame).

If two Frames are related (by inheritance, using, causative of, inchoative of, subframe perspective of relation) then those Frame Elements having the same names should be mapped.

For a Perspective_on relation, one core (or core-unexpressed) FE of the parent Frame should be mapped to a FE of the child Frame.

For a Subframe relation, one core (or core-unexpressed) FE of the parent Frame should be mapped to a FE of the child Frame.

If Frames A and B are connected via a precedes relation then they must be subframes of a common Frame C.

All semantic types of a parent frame are inherited to all child frames that use the parent Frame.

All semantic types of an FE are inherited if it is mapped to another FE as part of an perspective_on relation.

If Frames A and B point to a common Frame C via Seealso then A and B should not be connected by Seealso.

For each Lemma connected to a LU we require that if it has only one LexemeEntry then the part of speech of the associated Lexeme is the same as the part of speech of the Lemma.

If a Frame A points to B via Seealso then the definition of B should mention Frame A.

Each document of the documentation is parsable.