Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T00:04:18.303Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction to the special issue on Programming with answer sets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2003

CHITTA BARAL ,
ALESSANDRO PROVETTI  and
TRAN CAO SON
CHITTA BARAL
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA (e-mail: chitta@asu.edu)
ALESSANDRO PROVETTI
Affiliation:
Department of Physics – Computer Science Section, University of Messina, Messina, I-98166 Italy (e-mail: ale@unime.it)
TRAN CAO SON
Affiliation:
Computer Science Department, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, USA (e-mail: tson@cs.nmsu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The search for an appropriate characterization of negation as failure in logic programs in the mid 1980s led to several proposals. Amongst them the stable model semantics – later referred to as answer set semantics, and the well-founded semantics are the most popular and widely referred ones. According to the latest (September 2002) list of most cited source documents in the CiteSeer database (http://citeseer.nj.nec.com) the original stable model semantics paper (Gelfond and Lifschitz, 1988) is ranked 10th with 649 citations and the well-founded semantics paper (Van Gelder et al., 1991) is ranked 70th with 306 citations. Since 1988 – when stable models semantics was proposed – there has been a large body of work centered around logic programs with answer set semantics covering topics such as: systematic program development, systematic program analysis, knowledge representation, declarative problem solving, answer set computing algorithms, complexity and expressiveness, answer set computing systems, relation with other non-monotonic and knowledge representation formalisms, and applications to various tasks.

Type
Regular Papers
Information
Theory and Practice of Logic Programming , Volume 3 , Issue 4-5 , July 2003 , pp. 387 - 391
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)