Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
In many knowledge representation formalisms, a constructive semantics is defined based on sequential applications of rules or of a semantic operator. These constructions often share the property that rule applications must be delayed until it is safe to do so: until it is known that the condition that triggers the rule will continue to hold. This intuition occurs for instance in the well-founded semantics of logic programs and in autoepistemic logic. In this paper, we formally define the safety criterion algebraically. We study properties of so-called safe inductions and apply our theory to logic programming and autoepistemic logic. For the latter, we show that safe inductions manage to capture the intended meaning of a class of theories on which all classical constructive semantics fail. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2018 | 10.1016/j.artint.2018.03.008 | Artificial Intelligence |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
Approximation fixpoint theory,Lattice operator,Inductive definitions,Induction process,Construction,Well-founded semantics,Groundedness,Logic programming,Autoepistemic logic,Abstract argumentation | Knowledge representation and reasoning,Autoepistemic logic,Programming language,Constructive,Intuition,Artificial intelligence,Operator (computer programming),Logic programming,Rotation formalisms in three dimensions,Semantics,Machine learning,Mathematics | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
259 | 1 | 0004-3702 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
0 | 0.34 | 15 |
Authors | ||
3 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bart Bogaerts | 1 | 83 | 16.49 |
| Joost Vennekens | 2 | 434 | 37.36 |
| Marc Denecker | 3 | 1626 | 106.40 |