Protected completions of first-order general logic programs

1990 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
James J. Lu ◽  
V. S. Subrahmanian
1989 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-399
Author(s):  
Aida Batarekh ◽  
V.S. Subrahmanian

Given a first order language L, and a notion of a logic L w.r.t. L, we investigate the topological properties of the space of L-structures for L. We show that under a topology called the query topology which arises naturally in logic programming, the space of L-models (where L is a decent logic) of any sentence (set of clauses) in L may be regarded as a (closed, compact) T4-space. We then investigate the properties of maps from structures to structures. Our results allow us to apply various well-known results on the fixed-points of operators on topological spaces to the semantics of logic programming – in particular, we are able to derive necessary and sufficient topological conditions for the completion of covered general logic programs to be consistent. Moreover, we derive sufficient conditions guaranteeing the consistency of program completions, and for logic programs to be determinate. We also apply our results to characterize consistency of the unions of program completions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 402-412
Author(s):  
LEVON HAYKAZYAN

AbstractThere are many different semantics for general logic programs (i.e. programs that use negation in the bodies of clauses). Most of these semantics are Turing complete (in a sense that can be made precise), implying that they are undecidable. To obtain decidability one needs to put additional restrictions on programs and queries. In logic programming it is natural to put restrictions on the underlying first-order language. In this note, we show the decidability of the Clark's completion semantics for monadic general programs and queries.


1990 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 465-483
Author(s):  
V.S. Subrahmanian

Large logic programs are normally designed by teams of individuals, each of whom designs a subprogram. While each of these subprograms may have consistent completions, the logic program obtained by taking the union of these subprograms may not. However, the resulting program still serves a useful purpose, for a (possibly) very large subset of it still has a consistent completion. We argue that “small” inconsistencies may cause a logic program to have no models (in the traditional sense), even though it still serves some useful purpose. A semantics is developed in this paper for general logic programs which ascribes a very reasonable meaning to general logic programs irrespective of whether they have consistent (in the classical logic sense) completions.


1996 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weidong Chen ◽  
David S. Warren
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document