Results 11  20
of
42,409
Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics
, 1990
"... Many systems that exhibit nonmonotonic behavior have been described and studied already in the literature. The general notion of nonmonotonic reasoning, though, has almost always been described only negatively, by the property it does not enjoy, i.e. monotonicity. We study here general patterns of ..."
Abstract

Cited by 624 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
of view are developed in parallel. The former point of view was pioneered by D. Gabbay in [10], while the latter has been advocated by Y. Shoham in [38]. Five such families are defined and characterized by representation theorems, relating the two points of view. One of the families of interest
Convex Analysis
, 1970
"... In this book we aim to present, in a unified framework, a broad spectrum of mathematical theory that has grown in connection with the study of problems of optimization, equilibrium, control, and stability of linear and nonlinear systems. The title Variational Analysis reflects this breadth. For a lo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5350 (67 self)
 Add to MetaCart
progressed also to the study of socalled stationary points, critical points, and other indications of singularity that a point might have relative to its neighbors, especially in association with existence theorems for differential equations.
A Framework for Defining Logics
 JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
, 1993
"... The Edinburgh Logical Framework (LF) provides a means to define (or present) logics. It is based on a general treatment of syntax, rules, and proofs by means of a typed calculus with dependent types. Syntax is treated in a style similar to, but more general than, MartinLof's system of ariti ..."
Abstract

Cited by 807 (45 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The Edinburgh Logical Framework (LF) provides a means to define (or present) logics. It is based on a general treatment of syntax, rules, and proofs by means of a typed calculus with dependent types. Syntax is treated in a style similar to, but more general than, MartinLof's system of arities. The treatment of rules and proofs focuses on his notion of a judgement. Logics are represented in LF via a new principle, the judgements as types principle, whereby each judgement is identified with the type of its proofs. This allows for a smooth treatment of discharge and variable occurrence conditions and leads to a uniform treatment of rules and proofs whereby rules are viewed as proofs of higherorder judgements and proof checking is reduced to type checking. The practical benefit of our treatment of formal systems is that logicindependent tools such as proof editors and proof checkers can be constructed.
Term Rewriting Systems
, 1992
"... Term Rewriting Systems play an important role in various areas, such as abstract data type specifications, implementations of functional programming languages and automated deduction. In this chapter we introduce several of the basic comcepts and facts for TRS's. Specifically, we discuss Abstra ..."
Abstract

Cited by 613 (18 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Term Rewriting Systems play an important role in various areas, such as abstract data type specifications, implementations of functional programming languages and automated deduction. In this chapter we introduce several of the basic comcepts and facts for TRS's. Specifically, we discuss Abstract Reduction Systems
Domain Theory
 Handbook of Logic in Computer Science
, 1994
"... Least fixpoints as meanings of recursive definitions. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 546 (25 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Least fixpoints as meanings of recursive definitions.
A Threshold of ln n for Approximating Set Cover
 JOURNAL OF THE ACM
, 1998
"... Given a collection F of subsets of S = f1; : : : ; ng, set cover is the problem of selecting as few as possible subsets from F such that their union covers S, and max kcover is the problem of selecting k subsets from F such that their union has maximum cardinality. Both these problems are NPhar ..."
Abstract

Cited by 778 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Given a collection F of subsets of S = f1; : : : ; ng, set cover is the problem of selecting as few as possible subsets from F such that their union covers S, and max kcover is the problem of selecting k subsets from F such that their union has maximum cardinality. Both these problems are NPhard. We prove that (1 \Gamma o(1)) ln n is a threshold below which set cover cannot be approximated efficiently, unless NP has slightly superpolynomial time algorithms. This closes the gap (up to low order terms) between the ratio of approximation achievable by the greedy algorithm (which is (1 \Gamma o(1)) ln n), and previous results of Lund and Yannakakis, that showed hardness of approximation within a ratio of (log 2 n)=2 ' 0:72 lnn. For max kcover we show an approximation threshold of (1 \Gamma 1=e) (up to low order terms), under the assumption that P != NP .
Temporal and modal logic
 HANDBOOK OF THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
, 1995
"... We give a comprehensive and unifying survey of the theoretical aspects of Temporal and modal logic. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1300 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We give a comprehensive and unifying survey of the theoretical aspects of Temporal and modal logic.
Crowds: Anonymity for Web Transactions
 ACM Transactions on Information and System Security
, 1997
"... this paper we introduce a system called Crowds for protecting users' anonymity on the worldwide web. Crowds, named for the notion of "blending into a crowd", operates by grouping users into a large and geographically diverse group (crowd) that collectively issues requests on behalf o ..."
Abstract

Cited by 831 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper we introduce a system called Crowds for protecting users' anonymity on the worldwide web. Crowds, named for the notion of "blending into a crowd", operates by grouping users into a large and geographically diverse group (crowd) that collectively issues requests on behalf of its members. Web servers are unable to learn the true source of a request because it is equally likely to have originated from any member of the crowd, and even collaborating crowd members cannot distinguish the originator of a request from a member who is merely forwarding the request on behalf of another. We describe the design, implementation, security, performance, and scalability of our system. Our security analysis introduces degrees of anonymity as an important tool for describing and proving anonymity properties.
Results 11  20
of
42,409