Abstract
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.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 465-483 |
Number of pages | 19 |
Journal | Fundamenta Mathematicae |
Volume | 13 |
Issue number | 4 |
State | Published - Dec 1990 |
Externally published | Yes |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Algebra and Number Theory