D. A. Plaisted. Non-horn clause programming without contrapositives. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 4, 1988. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Linear Objects: logical processes with built-in inheritance - Andreoli, Pareschi (1991) (217 citations) (Correct)
....program formulae with multiple heads , i.e. having the form (Head 1 : Headn ) Body: where each Head i is a positive literal. We shall see how the connective acts as a form of disjunction. LO is from this point of view on a similar line of extensions of Prolog like those described in [20, 27], which also allow multiple heads with a disjunctive reading. However, there is one crucial distinction to be made, in that our use of disjunction will be quite more restrictive than the one adopted in the approaches above, although it is also 1 going to be interestingly related to them: the ....
....a corresponding disjunctive theorem of LO encoding the given substitution. This is what entitles us to refer to the LO disjunction as constructive restriction of classical disjunction. By contrast, indefinite answer substitutions will characterize extensions of Prolog such as those described in [20, 27], which allow, like LO, disjunctive heads of clauses but assume full classical disjunction. Let us consider for example the following theorem of Classical Logic (the example is taken from [20] p(a) p(b) c 9x p(x) In languages like those of [20, 27] this query yields the indefinite answer ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
D. A. Plaisted. Non-horn clause programming without contrapositives. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 4, 1988.
Linear Objects: logical processes with built-in inheritance - Andreoli, Pareschi (217 citations) (Correct)
....program clauses with multiple heads , i.e. having the form (Head 1 : Headn ) Body: where each Head i is a positive literal. We shall see how the connective acts as a form of disjunction. LO is from this point of view on a similar line of extensions of Prolog like those described in [15, 21], which also allow multiple heads with a disjunctive reading. However, there is one crucial distinction to be made, in that our use 1 of disjunction will be quite more restrictive than the one adopted in the approaches above, although it is also going to be interestingly related to them: the ....
....a corresponding disjunctive theorem of LO encoding the given substitution. This is what entitles us to refer to the LO disjunction as constructive restriction of classical disjunction. By contrast, indefinite answer substitutions will characterize extensions of Prolog such as those described in [15, 21], which allow, like LO, disjunctive heads of clauses but assume full classical disjunction. Let us consider for example the following theorem of Classical Logic (the example is taken from [15] p(a) p(b) c 9x p(x) In languages like those of [15, 21] this formula is provable with the ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
D. A. Plaisted. Non-horn clause programming without contrapositives. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 4, 1988.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC