@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix orcid: <https://orcid.org/> .
@prefix this: <http://purl.org/np/RAXOPc5VGxVOugfht8T5CzOQevnSbYbGHPLCA0k4O3A_g> .
@prefix sub: <http://purl.org/np/RAXOPc5VGxVOugfht8T5CzOQevnSbYbGHPLCA0k4O3A_g#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix pav: <http://purl.org/pav/> .
@prefix np: <http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#> .
@prefix doco: <http://purl.org/spar/doco/> .
@prefix c4o: <http://purl.org/spar/c4o/> .
sub:Head {
  this: np:hasAssertion sub:assertion ;
    np:hasProvenance sub:provenance ;
    np:hasPublicationInfo sub:pubinfo ;
    a np:Nanopublication .
}
sub:assertion {
  sub:paragraph c4o:hasContent "It is not trivial to decide on the subject of the main frame statement, since not all frames are meant to have exactly one core FE that would serve as a plausible logical subject candidate: most have many, e.g., FINISH_COMPETITION has COMPETITION, COMPETITOR and OPPONENT as core FEs in FrameNet. Therefore, we tackle this as per the following assumption: given the encyclopedic nature of our input corpus, both the logical and the topical subjects correspond in each document. Hence, each candidate sentence inherits the document subject. We acknowledge that such assumption strongly depends on the corpus: it applies to entity-centric documents, but will not perform well for general-purpose ones such as news articles. However, we believe it is still a valid in-scope solution fitting our scenario." ;
    a doco:Paragraph .
}
sub:provenance {
  sub:assertion prov:hadPrimarySource <http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/SW-170269> ;
    prov:wasAttributedTo orcid:0000-0002-5456-7964 .
}
sub:pubinfo {
  this: dcterms:created "2019-11-10T12:34:11+01:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
    pav:createdBy orcid:0000-0002-7114-6459 .
}