Constraint Monotonicity, Epistemic Splitting and Foundedness Could in General Be Too Strong in Answer Set Programming
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.
PDF AbstractTasks
Datasets
Add Datasets
introduced or used in this paper
Results from the Paper
Submit
results from this paper
to get state-of-the-art GitHub badges and help the
community compare results to other papers.
Methods
No methods listed for this paper. Add
relevant methods here
