21 research outputs found

    Query Evaluation in Deductive Databases

    Get PDF
    It is desirable to answer queries posed to deductive databases by computing fixpoints because such computations are directly amenable to set-oriented fact processing. However, the classical fixpoint procedures based on bottom-up processing — the naive and semi-naive methods — are rather primitive and often inefficient. In this article, we rely on bottom-up meta-interpretation for formalizing a new fixpoint procedure that performs a different kind of reasoning: We specify a top-down query answering method, which we call the Backward Fixpoint Procedure. Then, we reconsider query evaluation methods for recursive databases. First, we show that the methods based on rewriting on the one hand, and the methods based on resolution on the other hand, implement the Backward Fixpoint Procedure. Second, we interpret the rewritings of the Alexander and Magic Set methods as specializations of the Backward Fixpoint Procedure. Finally, we argue that such a rewriting is also needed in a database context for implementing efficiently the resolution-based methods. Thus, the methods based on rewriting and the methods based on resolution implement the same top-down evaluation of the original database rules by means of auxiliary rules processed bottom-up

    Query Evaluation in Recursive Databases

    Get PDF

    Effectiveness of global analysis in strict independence-based automatic program parallelization

    Full text link
    This paper presents a study of the effectiveness of global analysis in the parallelization of logic programs using strict independence. A number of well-known approximation domains are selected and tlieir usefulness for the application in hand is explained. Also, methods for using the information provided by such domains to improve parallelization are proposed. Local and global analyses are built using these domains and such analyses are embedded in a complete parallelizing compiler. Then, the performance of the domains (and the system in general) is assessed for this application through a number of experiments. We argüe that the results offer significant insight into the characteristics of these domains, the demands of the application, and the tradeoffs involved

    Super Logic Programs

    Full text link
    The Autoepistemic Logic of Knowledge and Belief (AELB) is a powerful nonmonotic formalism introduced by Teodor Przymusinski in 1994. In this paper, we specialize it to a class of theories called `super logic programs'. We argue that these programs form a natural generalization of standard logic programs. In particular, they allow disjunctions and default negation of arbibrary positive objective formulas. Our main results are two new and powerful characterizations of the static semant ics of these programs, one syntactic, and one model-theoretic. The syntactic fixed point characterization is much simpler than the fixed point construction of the static semantics for arbitrary AELB theories. The model-theoretic characterization via Kripke models allows one to construct finite representations of the inherently infinite static expansions. Both characterizations can be used as the basis of algorithms for query answering under the static semantics. We describe a query-answering interpreter for super programs which we developed based on the model-theoretic characterization and which is available on the web.Comment: 47 pages, revised version of the paper submitted 10/200

    A generic, collaborative framework for internal constraint solving

    Get PDF
    Esta tesis propone un esquema genérico y cooperativo para CLP(Interval(X)) donde X es cualquier dominio de computación con estructura de retículo. El esquema, que está basado en la teoría de retículos, es un enfoque general para la satisfacción y op-timización de restricciones de intervalo así como para la cooperación de resolutores de intervalo definidos sobre dominios de computación con estructura de retículos, independientemente de la cardinalidad de estos. Nuestra propuesta asegura un enfoque transparente sobre el cual las restricciones, los dominios de computación y los mecanismos de propagación y cooperación, definidos entre las variables restringidas, pueden ser fácilmente especificados a nivel del usuario. La parte principal de la tesis presenta una especificación formal de este esquema.Los principales resultados conseguidos en esta tesis son los siguientes:Una comparativa global de la eficiencia y algunos aspectos de la expresividad de ocho sistemas de restricciones. Esta comparativa, realizada sobre el dominio finito y el dominio Booleano, muestra diferencias principales entre los sistemas de restricciones existentes.Para formalizar el marco de satisfacción de restricciones para CLP(Interval(X))hemos descrito el proceso global de resolución de restricciones de intervalo sobre cualquier retículo, separando claramente los procesos de propagación y división (ramificación) de intervalos. Una de las ventajas de nuestra propuesta es que la monótona de las restricciones esta implícitamente definida en la teoría. Además, declaramos un conjunto de propiedades interesantes que, bajo ciertas condiciones, son satisfechas por cualquier instancia del esquema genérico. Mas aún, mostramos que muchos sistemas de restricciones actualmente existentes satisfacen estas condiciones y, además, proporcionamos indicaciones sobre como extender el sistema mediante la especificación de otras instancias interesantes y novedosas. Nuestro esquema para CLP(Interval(X)) permite la cooperación de resolutores de manera que la información puede ⁰uir entre diferentes dominios de computación.Además, es posible combinar distintas instancias del esquema: por ejemplo, instancias bien conocidas tales como CLP(Interval(<)), CLP(Interval(Integer)),CLP(Interval(Set)), CLP(Interval(Bool)), y otras novedosas que son el resultado de la generación de nuevos dominios de computación definidos por el usuario, o incluso que surgen de la combinación de dominios ya existentes como puede ser CLP(Interval(X1 £ : : : £ Xn)). Por lo tanto, X puede ser instanciado a cualquier conjunto de dominios de computación con estructura de retículo de forma que su correspondiente instancia CLP(Interval(X)) permite una amplia flexibilidad en la definición de dominios en X (probablemente definidos por el usuario) y en la interaccion entre estos dominios.Mediante la implementacion de un prototipo, demostramos que un unico sistema,que este basado en nuestro esquema para CLP(Interval(X)), puede proporcionarsoporte para la satisfaccion y la optimizacion de restricciones as como para la cooperacion de resolutores sobre un conjunto conteniendo multiples dominios decomputacion. Ademas, el sistema sigue un novedoso enfoque transparente sujeto a una doble perspectiva ya que el usuario puede definir no solo nuevas restricciones y su mecanismo de propagacion, sino tambien nuevos dominios sobre los cuales nuevas restricciones pueden ser resueltas as como el mecanismo de cooperacion entre todos los dominios de computación (ya sean definidos por el usuario o predefinidos por el sistema).En nuestra opinión, esta tesis apunta nuevas y potenciales direcciones de investigación dentro de la comunidad de las restricciones de intervalo.Para alcanzar los resultados expuestos, hemos seguido los siguientes pasos (1) la elección de un enfoque adecuado sobre el cual construir los fundamentos teóricos de nuestro esquema genérico; (2) la construcción de un marco teórico genérico (que llamaremos el marco básico) para la propagación de restricciones de intervalo sobre cualquier retículo; (3) la integración, en el marco básico, de una técnica novedosa que facilita la cooperación de resolutores y que surge de la definición, sobre múltiples dominios, de operadores de restricciones y (4) la extensión del marco resultante para la resolución y optimización completa de las restricciones de intervalo.Finalmente presentamos clp(L), un lenguaje de programación lógica de restricciones de intervalo que posibilita la resolución de restricciones sobre cualquier conjunto de retículos y que esta implementado a partir de las ideas formalizadas en el marco teórico. Describimos una primera implementación de este lenguaje y desarrollamos algunos ejemplos de como usarla. Este prototipo demuestra que nuestro esquema para CLP(Interval(X)) puede ser implementado en un sistema único que, como consecuencia, proporciona, bajo un enfoque transparente sobre dominios y restricciones, cooperación de resolutores así como satisfacción y optimización completa de restricciones sobre diferentes dominios de computación

    Towards Closed World Reasoning in Dynamic Open Worlds (Extended Version)

    Full text link
    The need for integration of ontologies with nonmonotonic rules has been gaining importance in a number of areas, such as the Semantic Web. A number of researchers addressed this problem by proposing a unified semantics for hybrid knowledge bases composed of both an ontology (expressed in a fragment of first-order logic) and nonmonotonic rules. These semantics have matured over the years, but only provide solutions for the static case when knowledge does not need to evolve. In this paper we take a first step towards addressing the dynamics of hybrid knowledge bases. We focus on knowledge updates and, considering the state of the art of belief update, ontology update and rule update, we show that current solutions are only partial and difficult to combine. Then we extend the existing work on ABox updates with rules, provide a semantics for such evolving hybrid knowledge bases and study its basic properties. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that an update operator is proposed for hybrid knowledge bases.Comment: 40 pages; an extended version of the article published in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 10 (4-6): 547 - 564, July. Copyright 2010 Cambridge University Pres

    A Brief History of Updates of Answer-Set Programs

    Get PDF
    Funding Information: The authors would like to thank José Alferes, Martin Baláz, Federico Banti, Antonio Brogi, Martin Homola, Luís Moniz Pereira, Halina Przymusinska, Teodor C. Przymusinski, and Theresa Swift, with whom they worked on the topic of this paper over the years, as well as Ricardo Gonçalves and Matthias Knorr for valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper. The authors would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions, which greatly helped us improve this paper. The authors were partially supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia through projects FORGET (PTDC/CCI-INF/32219/2017) and RIVER (PTDC/CCI-COM/30952/2017), and strategic project NOVA LINCS (UIDB/04516/2020). Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press.Over the last couple of decades, there has been a considerable effort devoted to the problem of updating logic programs under the stable model semantics (a.k.a. answer-set programs) or, in other words, the problem of characterising the result of bringing up-to-date a logic program when the world it describes changes. Whereas the state-of-the-art approaches are guided by the same basic intuitions and aspirations as belief updates in the context of classical logic, they build upon fundamentally different principles and methods, which have prevented a unifying framework that could embrace both belief and rule updates. In this paper, we will overview some of the main approaches and results related to answer-set programming updates, while pointing out some of the main challenges that research in this topic has faced.publishersversionpublishe

    Every normal logic program has a 2-valued semantics: theory, extensions, applications, implementations

    Get PDF
    Trabalho apresentado no âmbito do Doutoramento em Informática, como requisito parcial para obtenção do grau de Doutor em InformáticaAfter a very brief introduction to the general subject of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning with Logic Programs we analyse the syntactic structure of a logic program and how it can influence the semantics. We outline the important properties of a 2-valued semantics for Normal Logic Programs, proceed to define the new Minimal Hypotheses semantics with those properties and explore how it can be used to benefit some knowledge representation and reasoning mechanisms. The main original contributions of this work, whose connections will be detailed in the sequel, are: • The Layering for generic graphs which we then apply to NLPs yielding the Rule Layering and Atom Layering — a generalization of the stratification notion; • The Full shifting transformation of Disjunctive Logic Programs into (highly nonstratified)NLPs; • The Layer Support — a generalization of the classical notion of support; • The Brave Relevance and Brave Cautious Monotony properties of a 2-valued semantics; • The notions of Relevant Partial Knowledge Answer to a Query and Locally Consistent Relevant Partial Knowledge Answer to a Query; • The Layer-Decomposable Semantics family — the family of semantics that reflect the above mentioned Layerings; • The Approved Models argumentation approach to semantics; • The Minimal Hypotheses 2-valued semantics for NLP — a member of the Layer-Decomposable Semantics family rooted on a minimization of positive hypotheses assumption approach; • The definition and implementation of the Answer Completion mechanism in XSB Prolog — an essential component to ensure XSB’s WAM full compliance with the Well-Founded Semantics; • The definition of the Inspection Points mechanism for Abductive Logic Programs;• An implementation of the Inspection Points workings within the Abdual system [21] We recommend reading the chapters in this thesis in the sequence they appear. However, if the reader is not interested in all the subjects, or is more keen on some topics rather than others, we provide alternative reading paths as shown below. 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-12 Definition of the Layer-Decomposable Semantics family and the Minimal Hypotheses semantics (1 and 2 are optional) 3-6-7-8-10-11-12 All main contributions – assumes the reader is familiarized with logic programming topics 3-4-5-10-11-12 Focus on abductive reasoning and applications.FCT-MCTES (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia do Ministério da Ciência,Tecnologia e Ensino Superior)- (no. SFRH/BD/28761/2006
    corecore