Dealing with explicit preferences and uncertainty in answer set programming

In this paper, we show how the formalism of Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction (LPODs) and Possibilistic Answer Set Programming (PASP) can be merged into the single framework of Logic Programs with Possibilistic Ordered Disjunction (LPPODs). The LPPODs framework embeds in a unified way several aspects of common-sense reasoning, nonmonotonocity, preferences, and uncertainty, where each part is underpinned by a well established formalism. On one hand, from LPODs it inherits the distinctive feature of expressing context-dependent qualitative preferences among different alternatives (modeled as the atoms of a logic program). On the other hand, PASP allows for qualitative certainty statements about the rules themselves (modeled as necessity values according to possibilistic logic) to be captured. In this way, the LPPODs framework supports a reasoning which is nonmonotonic, preference- and uncertainty-aware. The LPPODs syntax allows for the specification of (1) preferences among the exceptions to default rules, and (2)?necessity values about the certainty of program rules. As a result, preferences and uncertainty can be used to select the preferred uncertain default rules of an LPPOD and, consequently, to order its possibilistic answer sets. Furthermore, we describe the implementation of an ASP-based solver able to compute the LPPODs semantics.     

Set based logic programming

In a previous paper (Blair et al. 2001), the authors showed that the mechanism underlying Logic Programming can be extended to handle the situation where the atoms are interpreted as subsets of a given space X. The view of a logic program as a one-step consequence operator along with the concepts of supported and stable model can be transferred to such situations. In this paper, we show that we can further extend this paradigm by creating a new one-step consequence operator by composing the old one-step consequence operator with a monotonic idempotent operator (miop) in the space of all subsets of X, 2 ^X . We call this extension set based logic programming. We show that such a set based formalism for logic programming naturally supports a variety of options. For example, if the underlying space has a topology, one can insist that the new one-step consequence operator always produces a closed set or always produces an open set. The flexibility inherent in the semantics of set based logic programs is due to both the range of natural choices available for specifying the semantics of negation, as well as the role of monotonic idempotent operators (miops) as parameters in the semantics. This leads to a natural type of polymorphism for logic programming, i.e. the same logic program can produce a variety of outcomes depending on the miop associated with the semantics. We develop a general framework for set based programming involving miops. Among the applications, we obtain integer-based representations of real continuous functions as stable models of a set based logic program.      

Stable models and difference logic

The paper studies the relationship between logic programs with the stable model semantics and difference logic recently considered in the Satisfiability Modulo Theories framework. Characterizations of stable models in terms of level rankings are developed building on simple linear integer constraints allowed in difference logic. Based on the characterizations translations are devised which map normal programs to difference logic formulas capturing stable models of a program as satisfying valuations of the resulting formula. The translations make it possible to use a solver for difference logic to compute stable models of logic programs.     

Bottom-up Evaluation of Datalog with Negation

Declarative semantics gives the meaning of a logic program in terms of properties,while the procedural semantics gives the meaning in terms of the execution or evaluation of the program.From the database point of view,the procedural semantics of the program is equally important.This paper focuses on the study of the bottom-up evaluation of the WFM semantics of datalog‘ programs.To compute the WFM,first,the stability transformation is revisited,and a new operator Op and its fixpoint are defined. Based on this,a fixpoint semantics,called oscillating fixpoint model semantics,is defined.Then,it is shown that for any datalog‘ program the oscillating fixpoint model is identical to its WFM.So,the oscillating fixpoint model can be viewed as an alternative (constructive) definition of WFM.The underlying operation (or transformation) for reaching the oscillating fixpoint provides a potential of bottom-up evaluation.For the sake of computational feasibility,the strongly range-restricted program is considered,and an algorithm used to compute the oscillating fixpoint is described.     

The Least Fixpoint Transformation for Disjunctive Logic Programs

The paradigm of disjunctive logic programming(DLP)enhances greatly the expressive power of normal logic programming(NLP)and many(declarative)semantics have been defined for DLP to cope with various problems of knowledge representation in artificial intelligence.However,the expressive ability of the semantics and the soundness of program transformations for DLP have been rarely explored.This paper defines an immediate consequence operatro T^GP for each disjunctive program and shows that T^GP has the least and computable fixpoint Lft(P),Lft is,in fact,a program transformation for DLP,which transforms all disjunctive programs into negative programs.It is shown that Lft preserves many key semantics,including the disjunctive stable models,well-founded model,disjunctive argunent semantics DAS,three-valued models,ect.Thic means that every disjunctive program P has a unique canonical form Lft(P)with respect to these semantics.As a result,the work in this paper provides a unifying framework for studying the expressive ability of various semantics for DLP On the other hand,the computing of the above semantics for negative programs is ust a trivial task,therefore,Lft(P)is also an optimization method for DLP.Another application of Lft is to derive some interesting semantic results for DLP.     

Disjunctive LP+integrity constraints= stable model semantics

We show that stable models of logic programs may be viewed as minimal models of programs that satisfy certain additional constraints. To do so, we transform the normal programs into disjunctive logic programs and sets of integrity constraints. We show that the stable models of the normal program coincide with the minimal models of the disjunctive program thatsatisfy the integrity constraints. As a consequence, the stable model semantics can be characterized using theextended generalized closed world assumption for disjunctive logic programs. Using this result, we develop a bottomup algorithm for function-free logic programs to find all stable models of a normal program by computing the perfect models of a disjunctive stratified logic program and checking them for consistency with the integrity constraints. The integrity constraints provide a rationale as to why some normal logic programs have no stable models.     

WFS + branch and bound = stable models

Though the semantics of nonmonotonic logic programming has been studied extensively, relatively little work has been done on operational aspects of these semantics. In this paper, we develop techniques to compute the well-founded model of a logic program. We describe a prototype implementation and show, based on experimental results, that our technique is more efficient than the standard alternating fixpoint computation. Subsequently, we develop techniques to compute the set of all stable models of a deductive database. These techniques first compute the well-founded semantics and then use an intelligent branch and bound strategy to compute the stable models. We report on our implementation, as well as on experiments that we have conducted on the efficiency of our approach     

Comparison of Semantics of Disjunctive Logic Programs Based on Model-Equivalent Reduction

In this paper, it is shown that stable model semantics, perfect model semantics, and partial stable model semantics of disjunctive logic programs have the same expressive power with respect to the polynomial-time model-equivalent reduction. That is, taking perfect model semantics and stable model semantic as an example, any logic program P can be transformed in polynomial time to another logic program P＇ such that perfect models （resp. stable models） of P i-i correspond to stable models （resp. perfect models） of P＇, and the correspondence can be computed also in polynomial time. However, the minimal model semantics has weaker expressiveness than other mentioned semantics, otherwise, the polynomial hierarchy would collapse to NP.     

淋巴细胞的时间语义逻辑模型及其演化策略

数字序列抗原内部存在许多语义特征,针对抗原进行语义识别可以提高系统检测的准确性。基于抗原的相对时序关系,该文采用了一阶逻辑作为抗原和淋巴细胞的基本描述语言,以扩展逻辑程序构造淋巴细胞的时间语义逻辑模型,给出了淋巴细胞的逻辑表示形式。基于逻辑程序的稳定模型语义学,用稳定模型语义计算作为新的淋巴细胞的匹配算法。借鉴遗传归纳逻辑程序GILP的基本思想,给出了新的淋巴细胞的演化算法。     

Optimal models of disjunctive logic programs: semantics, complexity, and computation

Almost all semantics for logic programs with negation identify a set, SEM(P), of models of program P, as the intended semantics of P, and any model M in this class is considered a possible meaning of P with regard to the semantics the user has in mind. Thus, for example, in the case of stable models [M. Gelfond et al., (1988)], choice models [D. Sacca et al., (1990)], answer sets [M. Gelfond et al., (1991)], etc., different possible models correspond to different ways of "completing" the incomplete information in the logic program. However, different end-users may have different ideas on which of these different models in SEM(P) is a reasonable one from their point of view. For instance, given SEM(P), user U/sub 1/ may prefer model M/sub 1//spl isin/SEM(P) to model M/sub 2//spl isin/SEM(P) based on some evaluation criterion that she has. We develop a logic program semantics based on optimal models. This semantics does not add yet another semantics to the logic programming arena - it takes as input an existing semantics SEM(P) and a user-specified objective function Obj, and yields a new semantics Opt(P)_/spl sube/ SEM(P) that realizes the objective function within the framework of preferred models identified already by SEM(P). Thus, the user who may or may not know anything about logic programming has considerable flexibility in making the system reflect her own objectives by building "on top" of existing semantics known to the system. In addition to the declarative semantics, we provide a complete complexity analysis and algorithms to compute optimal models under varied conditions when SEM(P) is the stable model semantics, the minimal models semantics, and the all-models semantics.     

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     

Symmetric structure in logic programming

It is argued that some symmetric structure in logic programs could be taken into account when implementing semantics in logic programming. This may enhance the declarative ability or expressive power of the semantics. The work presented here may be seen as representative examples along this line. The focus is on the derivation of negative information and some other classic semantic issues. We first define a permutation group associated with a given logic program. Since usually the canonical models used to reflect the common sense or intended meaning are minimal or completed models of the program, we expose the relationships between minimal models and completed models of the original program and its so-called G-reduced form newly-derived via the permutation group defined. By means of this G-reduced form, we introduce a rule to assume negative information termed G-CWA, which is actually a generalization of the GCWA. We also develop the notions of G-definite, G-hierarchical and G-stratified logic programs,     

Complexity and undecidability results for logic programming

This paper surveys complexity, degree of uncomputability, and expressive power results for logic programming. Some major decision problem complexity results and other results for logic programming are also covered. It also proves several new results filling in previous gaps in the literature. The paper considers seven logic programming semantics: the van Emden-Kowalski semantics for definite (Horn) logic programs; the perfect model semantics for stratified and for locally stratified logic programs; and the two- and three-valued program completion semantics, the well-founded semantics, and the stable semantics, all for normal logic programs, under skeptical inference. The main results concern expressibility and query complexity/uncomputability in five contexts: for propositional logic programs, for first order logic programs with infinite Herbrand universes on their Herbrand universes (a closed domain assumption), for first order logic programs with infinite Herbrand universes on those universes extended with infinitely many new elements (an open domain assumption), and for logic programs without function or constant symbols evaluated over varying extensional databases (DATALOG-type results, data complexity results only) under both closed and open domain assumptions. Several of the open domain assumption results are new to this paper. Other results surveyed are (1) results about the family of all stable models of a program and (2) decision questions about when a logic program has nice properties with respect to a semantics (e.g., a unique stable model). One decision result, for well-founded semantics, is new to this paper.Work supported in part by NSF grant IRI-8905166.     

Running programs backwards: The logical inversion of imperative computation

Imperative programs can be inverted directly from their forward-directed program code with the use of logical inference. The relational semantics of imperative computations treats programs as logical relations over the observable state of the environment, which is taken to be the state of the variables in memory. Program relations denote both forward and backward computations, and the direction of the computation depends upon the instantiation pattern of arguments in the relation. This view of inversion has practical applications when the relational semantics is treated as a logic program. Depending on the logic programming inference scheme used, execution of this relational program can compute the inverse of the imperative program. A number of nontrivial imperative computations can be inverted with minimal logic programming tools.     

'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.     

Tabling for non‐monotonic programming

Non‐monotonic extensions add power to logic programs. However, the main logic programming language, Prolog, is widely recognized as inadequate to implement these extensions due to its weak termination and complexity properties. By extending Prolog’s SLD resolution with tabling, Prolog can be improved in several ways. Tabling can allow a logic programming system to compute the well‐founded semantics for programs with bounded term depth, and to do so with polynomial data complexity. By exploiting these properties, tabling allows a variety of non‐monotonic extensions to be efficiently implemented, and used to solve practical problems. In this paper we describe tabling as it is implemented in the XSB system and show how it can be used to construct meta‐interpreters (or preprocessors) for two sample formalisms: the Well‐Founded Semantics with Explicit Negation, and Generalized Annotated Logic Programs. We also describe how non‐monotonic extensions are used in practical applications such as psychiatric diagnosis, extraction of information from poorly structured textual data, and model checking. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

A layered semantics for a parallel object-oriented language

We develop a denotational semantics for POOL, a parallel object-oriented programming language. The main contribution of this semantics is an accurate mathematical model of the most important concept in object-oriented programming: the object. This is achieved by structuring the semantics in layers working at three different levels: for statements, objects and programs. For each of these levels we define a specialized mathematical domain of processes, which we use to assign a meaning to each language construct. This is done in the mathematical framework of complete metric spaces. We also define operators that translate between these domains. At the program level we give a precise definition of the observable input/output behaviour of a particular program, which could be used at a later stage to decide the issue of full abstractness. We illustrate our semantic techniques by first applying them to a toy language similar to CSP.This paper describes work done in ESPRIT Basic Research Action 3020,Integration.     

Semantic forgetting in answer set programming

The notion of forgetting, also known as variable elimination, has been investigated extensively in the context of classical logic, but less so in (nonmonotonic) logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning. The few approaches that exist are based on syntactic modifications of a program at hand. In this paper, we establish a declarative theory of forgetting for disjunctive logic programs under answer set semantics that is fully based on semantic grounds. The suitability of this theory is justified by a number of desirable properties. In particular, one of our results shows that our notion of forgetting can be entirely captured by classical forgetting. We present several algorithms for computing a representation of the result of forgetting, and provide a characterization of the computational complexity of reasoning from a logic program under forgetting. As applications of our approach, we present a fairly general framework for resolving conflicts in inconsistent knowledge bases that are represented by disjunctive logic programs, and we show how the semantics of inheritance logic programs and update logic programs from the literature can be characterized through forgetting. The basic idea of the conflict resolution framework is to weaken the preferences of each agent by forgetting certain knowledge that causes inconsistency. In particular, we show how to use the notion of forgetting to provide an elegant solution for preference elicitation in disjunctive logic programming.