- From: Wagner, G.R. <G.R.Wagner@tm.tue.nl>
- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:09:43 +0100
- To: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
> On December 11, Wagner, G.R. writes:
> > Under the minimal model semantics, a rule does no longer have the
> > same intended models as the corresponding implication. This is easy
> > to see: consider the rule q :- ~p. It has only one intended (i.e.
> > minimal) model, which may be expressed by the set {q}, whereas the
> > corresponding material implication ~p -> q, which is equivalent to q
> > v p, has two intended/minimal models: {q} and {p}.
What I said does not hold for the minimal model, but for the
stable model semantics. Sorry.
-Gerd
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2002 15:09:47 UTC