A characterization of answer sets for logic programs

Checking if a program has an answer set, and if so, compute its answer sets are just some of the important problems in answer set logic programming. Solving these problems using Gelfond and Lifschitz's original definition of answer sets is not an easy task. Alternative characterizations of answer sets for nested logic pro- grams by Erdem and Lifschitz, Lee and Lifschitz, and You et al. are based on the completion semantics and various notions of tightness. However, the notion of tightness is a local notion in the sense that for different answer sets there are, in general, different level mappings capturing their tightness. This makes it hard to be used in the design of algorithms for computing answer sets. This paper proposes a characterization of answer sets based on sets of generating rules. From this char- acterization new algorithms are derived for computing answer sets and for per- forming some other reasoning tasks. As an application of the characterization a sufficient and necessary condition for the equivalence between answer set seman- tics and completion semantics has been proven, and a basic theorem is shown on computing answer sets for nested logic programs based on an extended notion of loop formulas. These results on tightness and loop formulas are more general than that in You and Lin's work.     

Logic programs with exceptions

We extend logic programming to deal with default reasoning by allowing the explicit representation of exceptions in addition to general rules. To formalise this extension, we modify the answer set semantics of Gelfond and Lifschitz, which allows both classical negation and negation as failure. We also propose a transformation which eliminates exceptions by using negation by failure. The transformed program can be implemented by standard logic programming methods, such as SLDNF. The explicit representation of rules and exceptions has the virtue of greater naturalness of expression. The transformed program, however, is easier to implement.     

Semantic Vector Models and Functional Models for Pregroup Grammars

We show that vector space semantics and functional semantics in two-sorted first order logic are equivalent for pregroup grammars. We present an algorithm that translates functional expressions to vector expressions and vice-versa. The semantics is compositional, variable free and invariant under change of order or multiplicity. It includes the semantic vector models of Information Retrieval Systems and has an interior logic admitting a comprehension schema. A sentence is true in the interior logic if and only if the ‘usual’ first order formula translating the sentence holds. The examples include negation, universal quantifiers and relative pronouns.     

What is failure? An approach to constructive negation

A standard approach to negation in logic programming is negation as failure. Its major drawback is that it cannot produce answer substitutions to negated queries. Approaches to overcoming this limitation are termed constructive negation. This work proposes an approach based on construction offailed trees for some instances of a negated query. For this purpose a generalization of the standard notion of a failed tree is needed. We show that a straightforward generalization leads to unsoundness and present a correct one.The method is applicable to arbitrary normal programs. If finitely failed trees are concerned then its semantics is given by Clark completion in 3-valued logic (and our approach is a proper extension of SLDNF-resolution). If infinite failed trees are allowed then we obtain a method for the well-founded semantics. In both cases soundness and completeness are proved.     

Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction

Logic programs with ordered disjunction (LPODs) contain a new connective which allows representing alternative, ranked options for problem solutions in the heads of rules: A × B intuitively means that if possible A , but if A is not possible, then at least B . The semantics of logic programs with ordered disjunction is based on a preference relation on answer sets. We show how LPODs can be implemented using answer set solvers for normal programs. The implementation is based on a generator, which produces candidate answer sets and a tester which checks whether a given candidate is maximally preferred and produces a better candidate if it is not. We also discuss the complexity of reasoning tasks based on LPODs and possible applications.     

Autoepistemic logics as a unifying framework for the semantics of logic programs

In this paper, it is shown that a three-valued autoepistemic logic provides an elegant unifying framework for some of the major semantics of normal and disjunctive logic programs and logic programs with classical negation, namely, the stable semantics, the well-founded semantics, supported models, Fitting's semantics, Kunen's semantics, the stationary semantics, and answer sets. For the first time, so many semantics are embedded into one logic. The framework extends previous results—by Gelfond, Lifschitz, Marek, Subrahmanian, and Truszczynski —on the relationships between logic programming and Moore's autoepistemic logic. The framework suggests several new semantics for negation-as-failure. In particular, we will introduce the epistemic semantics for disjunctive logic programs. In order to motivate the epistemic semantics, an interesting class of applications called ignorance tests will be formalized; it will be proved that ignorance tests can be defined by means of the epistemic semantics, but not by means of the old semantics for disjunctive programs. The autoepistemic framework provides a formal foundation for an environment that integrates different forms of negation. The role of classical negation and various forms of negation-by-failure in logic programming will be briefly discussed.     

Paraconsistent Declarative Semantics for Extended Logic Programs

We introduce a fixpoint semantics for logic programs with two kinds of negation: an explicit negation and a negation-by-failure. The programs may also be prioritized, that is, their clauses may be arranged in a partial order that reflects preferences among the corresponding rules. This yields a robust framework for representing knowledge in logic programs with a considerable expressive power. The declarative semantics for such programs is particularly suitable for reasoning with uncertainty, in the sense that it pinpoints the incomplete and inconsistent parts of the data, and regards the remaining information as classically consistent. As such, this semantics allows to draw conclusions in a non-trivial way, even in cases that the logic programs under consideration are not consistent. Finally, we show that this formalism may be regarded as a simple and flexible process for belief revision.     

Hypothetical reasoning in logic programs

In order to express incomplete knowledge, extended logic programs have been proposed as logic programs with classical negation along with negation as failure. This paper discusses ways to deal with a broad class of common sense knowledge by using extended logic programs. For this purpose, we present a uniform approach for dealing with both incomplete and contradictory programs, as a simple framework of hypothetical reasoning in which some rules are dealt with as candidate hypotheses that can be used to augment the background theory. This theory formation framework can be used for default reasoning, contradiction removals, the closed world assumption, and abduction. We also show a translation of the theory formation framework to an extended logic program whose answer sets correspond to the consistent belief sets of augmented theories.     

N-Prolog and equivalence of logic programs

The aim of this work is to develop a declarative semantics for N-Prolog with negation as failure. N-Prolog is an extension of Prolog proposed by Gabbay and Reyle (1984, 1985), which allows for occurrences of nested implications in both goals and clauses. Our starting point is an operational semantics of the language defined by means of top-down derivation trees. Negation as finite failure can be naturally introduced in this context. A goal-G may be inferred from a database if every top-down derivation of G from the database finitely fails, i.e., contains a failure node at finite height.Our purpose is to give a logical interpretation of the underlying operational semantics. In the present work (Part 1) we take into consideration only the basic problems of determining such an interpretation, so that our analysis will concentrate on the propositional case. Nevertheless we give an intuitive account of how to extend our results to a first order language. A full treatment of N-Prolog with quantifiers will be deferred to the second part of this work.Our main contribution to the logical understanding of N-Prolog is the development of a notion of modal completion for programs, or databases. N-Prolog deductions turn out to be sound and complete with respect to such completions. More exactly, we introduce a natural modal three-valued logic PK and we prove that a goal is derivable from a propositional program if and only if it is implied by the completion of the program in the logic PK. This result holds for arbitrary programs. We assume no syntactic restriction, such as stratification (Apt et al. 1988; Bonner and McCarty 1990). In particular, we allow for arbitrary recursion through negation.Our semantical analysis heavily relies on a notion of intensional equivalence for programs and goals. This notion is naturally induced by the operational semantics, and is preserved under substitution of equivalent subexpressions. Basing on this substitution property we develop a theory of normal forms of programs and goals. Every program can be effectively transformed into an equivalent program in normal form. From the simple and uniform structure of programs in normal form one may directly define the completion.     

'Classical' Negation in Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Logic Programming

Gelfond and Lifschitz were the first to point out the need for a symmetric negation in logic programming and they also proposed a specific semantics for such negation for logic programs with the stable semantics, which they called 'classical'. Subsequently, several researchers proposed different, often incompatible, forms of symmetric negation for various semantics of logic programs and deductive databases. To the best of our knowledge, however, no systematic study of symmetric negation in non-monotonic reasoning was ever attempted in the past. In this paper we conduct such a systematic study of symmetric negation. We introduce and discuss two natural, yet different, definitions of symmetric negation: one is called strong negation and the other is called explicit negation. For logic programs with the stable semantics, both symmetric negations coincide with Gelfond–Lifschitz' 'classical negation'. We study properties of strong and explicit negation and their mutual relationship as well as their relationship to default negation 'not', and classical negation '¬'. We show how one can use symmetric negation to provide natural solutions to various knowledge representation problems, such as theory and interpretation update, and belief revision. Rather than to limit our discussion to some narrow class of nonmonotonic theories, such as the class of logic programs with some specific semantics, we conduct our study so that it is applicable to a broad class of non-monotonic formalisms. In order to achieve the desired level of generality, we define the notion of symmetric negation in the knowledge representation framework of AutoEpistemic logic of Beliefs, introduced by Przymusinski.     

Iterative belief revision in extended logic programming

Extended logic programming augments conventional logic programming with both default and explicit negation. Several semantics for extended logic programs have been proposed that extend the well-founded semantics for logic programs with default negation (called normal programs). We show that two of these extended semantics are intractable; both Dung's grounded argumentation semantics and the well-founded semantics of Alferes et al. are NP-hard. Nevertheless, we also show that these two semantics have a common core, a more restricted form of the grounded semantics, which is tractable and can be computed iteratively in quadratic time. Moreover, this semantics is a representative of a rich class of tractable semantics based on a notion of iterative belief revision.     

Strong order equivalence

Recently, strong equivalence for Answer Set Programming has been studied intensively, and was shown to be beneficial for modular programming and automated optimization. In this paper we define the novel notion of strong order equivalence for logic programs with preferences (ordered logic programs). Based on this definition we give, for several semantics for preference handling, necessary and sufficient conditions for programs to be strongly order equivalent. These results allow us also to associate a so-called SOE structure to each ordered logic program, such that two ordered logic programs are strongly order equivalent if and only if their SOE structures coincide. We also present the relationships among the studied semantics with respect to strong order equivalence, which differs considerably from their relationships with respect to preferred answer sets. Furthermore, we study the computational complexity of several reasoning tasks associated to strong order equivalence. Finally, based on the obtained results, we present – for the first time – simplification methods for ordered logic programs.     

A new approach to hybrid probabilistic logic programs

This paper presents a novel revision of the framework of Hybrid Probabilistic Logic Programming, along with a complete semantics characterization, to enable the encoding of and reasoning about real-world applications. The language of Hybrid Probabilistic Logic Programs framework is extended to allow the use of non-monotonic negation, and two alternative semantical characterizations are defined: stable probabilistic model semantics and probabilistic well-founded semantics. These semantics generalize the stable model semantics and well-founded semantics of traditional normal logic programs, and they reduce to the semantics of Hybrid Probabilistic Logic programs for programs without negation. It is the first time that two different semantics for Hybrid Probabilistic Programs with non-monotonic negation as well as their relationships are described. This proposal provides the foundational grounds for developing computational methods for implementing the proposed semantics. Furthermore, it makes it clearer how to characterize non-monotonic negation in probabilistic logic programming frameworks for commonsense reasoning. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Semantics and complexity of recursive aggregates in answer set programming

The addition of aggregates has been one of the most relevant enhancements to the language of answer set programming (ASP). They strengthen the modelling power of ASP in terms of natural and concise problem representations. Previous semantic definitions typically agree in the case of non-recursive aggregates, but the picture is less clear for aggregates involved in recursion. Some proposals explicitly avoid recursive aggregates, most others differ, and many of them do not satisfy desirable criteria, such as minimality or coincidence with answer sets in the aggregate-free case.In this paper we define a semantics for programs with arbitrary aggregates (including monotone, antimonotone, and nonmonotone aggregates) in the full ASP language allowing also for disjunction in the head (disjunctive logic programming — DLP). This semantics is a genuine generalization of the answer set semantics for DLP, it is defined by a natural variant of the Gelfond–Lifschitz transformation, and treats aggregate and non-aggregate literals in a uniform way. This novel transformation is interesting per se also in the aggregate-free case, since it is simpler than the original transformation and does not need to differentiate between positive and negative literals. We prove that our semantics guarantees the minimality (and therefore the incomparability) of answer sets, and we demonstrate that it coincides with the standard answer set semantics on aggregate-free programs.Moreover, we carry out an in-depth study of the computational complexity of the language. The analysis pays particular attention to the impact of syntactical restrictions on programs in the form of limited use of aggregates, disjunction, and negation. While the addition of aggregates does not affect the complexity of the full DLP language, it turns out that their presence does increase the complexity of normal (i.e., non-disjunctive) ASP programs up to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. However, we show that there are large classes of aggregates the addition of which does not cause any complexity gap even for normal programs, including the fragment allowing for arbitrary monotone, arbitrary antimonotone, and stratified (i.e., non-recursive) nonmonotone aggregates. The analysis provides some useful indications on the possibility to implement aggregates in existing reasoning engines.     

An introduction to fuzzy answer set programming

In this paper we show how the concepts of answer set programming and fuzzy logic can be successfully combined into the single framework of fuzzy answer set programming (FASP). The framework offers the best of both worlds: from the answer set semantics, it inherits the truly declarative non-monotonic reasoning capabilities while, on the other hand, the notions from fuzzy logic in the framework allow it to step away from the sharp principles used in classical logic, e.g., that something is either completely true or completely false. As fuzzy logic gives the user great flexibility regarding the choice for the interpretation of the notions of negation, conjunction, disjunction and implication, the FASP framework is highly configurable and can, e.g., be tailored to any specific area of application. Finally, the presented framework turns out to be a proper extension of classical answer set programming, as we show, in contrast to other proposals in the literature, that there are only minor restrictions one has to demand on the fuzzy operations used, in order to be able to retrieve the classical semantics using FASP.     

A procedural semantics for stratified database updates

This paper investigates efficient evaluation of database updates and presents a procedural semantics for stratified update programs that extend stratified logic programs with bulk updates and hypothetical reasoning. Bulk rules with universal quantification in the body allow an arbitrary update to be applied simultaneously for every answer of an arbitrary query. Hypothetical reasoning is supported by testing the success or failure of an update. The procedural semantics offers efficient goal-oriented tabled evaluation of database updates. It guarantees termination for function-free stratified update programs and avoids repeated computation of identical subgoals. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.