The family of concurrent logic programming languages
ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
Separating concurrent languages with categories of language embeddings
STOC '91 Proceedings of the twenty-third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
On the expressive power of programming languages
ESOP '90 Selected papers from the symposium on 3rd European symposium on programming
Embedding as a tool for language comparison
Information and Computation
Some direct theories of nonmonotonic inheritance
Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming (vol. 3)
Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming (vol. 3)
A semantic decomposition of defeasible logics
AAAI '99/IAAI '99 Proceedings of the sixteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence and the eleventh Innovative applications of artificial intelligence conference innovative applications of artificial intelligence
The next 700 programming languages
Communications of the ACM
Representation results for defeasible logic
ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL)
Embedding as a Tool for Language Comparison: On the CSP Hierarchy
CONCUR '91 Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Concurrency Theory
A Flexible Framework for Defeasible Logics
Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Twelfth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence
Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity
Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
Embedding defeasible logic into logic programming
Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
Proceedings of the 2010 International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation
International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation
What are the necessity rules in defeasible reasoning?
LPNMR'11 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning
A Classification Theory Of Semantics Of Normal Logic Programs: I. Strong Properties
Fundamenta Informaticae
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
We address the relative expressiveness of defeasible logics in the framework DL. Relative expressiveness is formulated as the ability to simulate the reasoning of one logic within another logic. We show that such simulations must be modular, in the sense that they also work if applied only to part of a theory, in order to achieve a useful notion of relative expressiveness. We present simulations showing that logics in DL with and without the capability of team defeat are equally expressive. We also show that logics that handle ambiguity differently-ambiguity blocking versus ambiguity propagating-have distinct expressiveness, with neither able to simulate the other under a different formulation of expressiveness.