Constraint Monotonicity, Epistemic Splitting and Foundedness Could in General Be Too Strong in Answer Set Programming
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recently, the notions of subjective constraint monotonicity, epistemic splitting, and foundedness have been introduced for epistemic logic programs, with the aim to use them as main criteria respectively intuitions to compare different answer set semantics proposed in the literature on how they comply with these intuitions. In this note, we consider these three notions and demonstrate on some examples that they may be too strong in general and may exclude some desired answer sets respectively world views. In conclusion, these properties should not be regarded as mandatory properties that every answer set semantics must satisfy in general.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Oct 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 1.
2 papers.
- 2021Refining the Semantics of Epistemic Specificationscited by 2
- 2023Epistemic Logic Programs: a study of some propertiescited by 1
- 2023Epistemic Logic Programs: a study of some properties28 Sep 2023
- 2021Refining the Semantics of Epistemic Specifications17 Sep 2021