Deductive and Analogical Reasoning on a Semantically Embedded Knowledge Graph

Representing knowledge as high-dimensional vectors in a continuous semantic vector space can help overcome the brittleness and incompleteness of traditional knowledge bases. We present a method for performing deductive reasoning directly in such a vector space, combining analogy, association, and deduction in a straightforward way at each step in a chain of reasoning, drawing on knowledge from diverse sources and ontologies.Comment: AGI 201

A New Rational Algorithm for View Updating in Relational Databases

The dynamics of belief and knowledge is one of the major components of any autonomous system that should be able to incorporate new pieces of information. In order to apply the rationality result of belief dynamics theory to various practical problems, it should be generalized in two respects: first it should allow a certain part of belief to be declared as immutable; and second, the belief state need not be deductively closed. Such a generalization of belief dynamics, referred to as base dynamics, is presented in this paper, along with the concept of a generalized revision algorithm for knowledge bases (Horn or Horn logic with stratified negation). We show that knowledge base dynamics has an interesting connection with kernel change via hitting set and abduction. In this paper, we show how techniques from disjunctive logic programming can be used for efficient (deductive) database updates. The key idea is to transform the given database together with the update request into a disjunctive (datalog) logic program and apply disjunctive techniques (such as minimal model reasoning) to solve the original update problem. The approach extends and integrates standard techniques for efficient query answering and integrity checking. The generation of a hitting set is carried out through a hyper tableaux calculus and magic set that is focused on the goal of minimality.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1301.515

Perspectives in deductive databases

AbstractI discuss my experiences, some of the work that I have done, and related work that influenced me, concerning deductive databases, over the last 30 years. I divide this time period into three roughly equal parts: 1957–1968, 1969–1978, 1979–present. For the first I describe how my interest started in deductive databases in 1957, at a time when the field of databases did not even exist. I describe work in the beginning years, leading to the start of deductive databases about 1968 with the work of Cordell Green and Bertram Raphael. The second period saw a great deal of work in theorem providing as well as the introduction of logic programming. The existence and importance of deductive databases as a formal and viable discipline received its impetus at a workshop held in Toulouse, France, in 1977, which culminated in the book Logic and Data Bases. The relationship of deductive databases and logic programming was recognized at that time. During the third period we have seen formal theories of databases come about as an outgrowth of that work, and the recognition that artificial intelligence and deductive databases are closely related, at least through the so-called expert database systems. I expect that the relationships between techniques from formal logic, databases, logic programming, and artificial intelligence will continue to be explored and the field of deductive databases will become a more prominent area of computer science in coming years

Query Evaluation in Deductive Databases

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