Stable Models of A Set of Propositional Formulas
Rules, and even disjunctive rules, have a rather special syntactic form, in comparison with arbitrary propositional formulas. Each disjunctive rule is essentially an implication such that its antecedent (the body of the rule) is a conjunction of literals, and its consequent (head) is a disjunction of atoms. David Pearce and Paolo Ferraris showed how to extend the definition of a stable model to sets of arbitrary propositional formulas. This generalization has applications to answer set programming.
Pearce's formulation looks very different from the original definition of a stable model. Instead of reducts, it refers to equilibrium logic -- a system of nonmonotonic logic based on Kripke models. Ferraris's formulation, on the other hand, is based on reducts, although the process of constructing the reduct that it uses differs from the one described above. The two approaches to defining stable models for sets of propositional formulas are equivalent to each other.
Read more about this topic: Stable Model Semantics
Famous quotes containing the words stable, models, set and/or formulas:
“And neigh like Boanerges—
Then—punctual as a Star
Stop—docile and omnipotent
At its own stable door—”
—Emily Dickinson (1830–1886)
“... your problem is your role models were models.”
—Jane Wagner (b. 1935)
“Although knaves win in every political struggle, although society seems to be delivered over from the hands of one set of criminals into the hands of another set of criminals, as fast as the government is changed, and the march of civilization is a train of felonies, yet, general ends are somehow answered.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
“You treat world history as a mathematician does mathematics, in which nothing but laws and formulas exist, no reality, no good and evil, no time, no yesterday, no tomorrow, nothing but an eternal, shallow, mathematical present.”
—Hermann Hesse (1877–1962)