Documentation candidate, not a scholarly release or independent validation. OWL sources and governed registries remain authoritative. No manuscript is included.

Bounded rc.4 tutorial

This engineering exercise reads committed synthetic ontology artifacts. It does not use private source workbooks, demonstrate treatment effects or test SQL parity.

1. Obtain the exact source snapshot

git clone https://github.com/ArazSaieArasi3/SemRisk.git
cd SemRisk
git checkout 67247f13ba5d0c7d32163f2b3e848af15067d92e
python -m venv .venv
. .venv/bin/activate
python -m pip install rdflib==7.6.0

2. Inspect an explicit asserted distinction

from pathlib import Path
from rdflib import Graph, URIRef
from rdflib.namespace import OWL, RDFS
root = Path('.')
g = Graph().parse(root / 'docs/formal/0.2.0-rc.4/asserted-closure.nt', format='nt')
scenario = URIRef('urn:semrisk:entity:SR-CPT-006')
event = URIRef('urn:semrisk:entity:SR-CPT-007')
assert len(g) == 1618
assert (scenario, OWL.disjointWith, event) in g or (event, OWL.disjointWith, scenario) in g
assert (scenario, RDFS.subClassOf, URIRef('http://purl.org/nemo/gufo#SituationType')) in g
print('1618 asserted triples; scenario/event distinction found')

Expected output is the one printed line. This reads explicit triples; it does not run an OWL reasoner. Removing the checked disjointness triple makes the corresponding assertion fail. A record's workflow status does not by itself establish a change in the managed Risk.

3. Trace the interpretation

Locate SR-CPT-006 and SR-CPT-007 in the formal term index, read their exact source modules and compare the scenario/occurrence conceptual view. Use the Explorer only as a locator. Anonymous axioms and omitted constructs must be checked in the formal source, not inferred from graph position.

4. Keep versions separate

The historical rc.1 route and its tests retain their old inputs and denominators. Do not transfer its eight-task SQL result to the complete rc.4 candidate. External reader tasks and final release identity remain open.