English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Recently, the notions of subjective constraint monotonicity, epistemicsplitting, and foundedness have been introduced for epistemic logic programs,with the aim to use them as main criteria respectively intuitions to comparedifferent answer set semantics proposed in the literature on how they complywith these intuitions. In this note, we consider these three notions anddemonstrate on some examples that they may be too strong in general and mayexclude some desired answer sets respectively world views. In conclusion, theseproperties should not be regarded as mandatory properties that every answer setsemantics must satisfy in general.

Constraint Monotonicity, Epistemic Splitting and Foundedness Could in General Be Too Strong in Answer Set Programming