The meaning of negative premises in transition system specifications II
This paper reviews several methods to associate transition relations to transition system specifications with negative premises in Plotkin's structural operational style. Besides a formal comparison on generality and relative consistency, the methods are also evaluated on their taste in determining which specifications are meaningful and which are not.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- R.N. Bol & J.F. Groote (1991): The meaning of negative premises in transition system specifications (extended abstract). In J. Leach Albert, B. Monien & M. Rodríguez, editors: Proceedings 18th ICALP, Madrid, LNCS 510, Springer-Verlag, pp. 481–494. Full version to appear in JACM.Google Scholar
- K.L. Clark (1978): Negation as failure. In H. Gallaire & J. Minker, editors: Logic and Databases, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 293–322.Google Scholar
- F. Fages (1991): A new fixpoint semantics for general logic programs compared with the well-founded and the stable model semantics. New Generation Computing 9(4), pp. 425–443.Google Scholar
- A. van Gelder, K. Ross & J.S. Schlipf (1991): The well-founded semantics for general logic programs, JACM 38(3), pp. 620–650.Google Scholar
- M. Gelfond & V. Lifschitz (1988): The stable model semantics for logic programming. In R. Kowalski & K. Bowen, editors: Proceedings 5thInternational Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, Cambridge, USA, pp. 1070–1080.Google Scholar
- G.D. Plotkin (1981): A structural approach to operational semantics. Report DAIMI FN-19, Computer Science Department, Aarhus University.Google Scholar
- T.C. Przymusinski (1988): On the declarative semantics of deductive databases and logic programs. In Jack Minker, editor: Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., pp. 193–216.Google Scholar