1,407 research outputs found

    Classes of Terminating Logic Programs

    Full text link
    Termination of logic programs depends critically on the selection rule, i.e. the rule that determines which atom is selected in each resolution step. In this article, we classify programs (and queries) according to the selection rules for which they terminate. This is a survey and unified view on different approaches in the literature. For each class, we present a sufficient, for most classes even necessary, criterion for determining that a program is in that class. We study six classes: a program strongly terminates if it terminates for all selection rules; a program input terminates if it terminates for selection rules which only select atoms that are sufficiently instantiated in their input positions, so that these arguments do not get instantiated any further by the unification; a program local delay terminates if it terminates for local selection rules which only select atoms that are bounded w.r.t. an appropriate level mapping; a program left-terminates if it terminates for the usual left-to-right selection rule; a program exists-terminates if there exists a selection rule for which it terminates; finally, a program has bounded nondeterminism if it only has finitely many refutations. We propose a semantics-preserving transformation from programs with bounded nondeterminism into strongly terminating programs. Moreover, by unifying different formalisms and making appropriate assumptions, we are able to establish a formal hierarchy between the different classes.Comment: 50 pages. The following mistake was corrected: In figure 5, the first clause for insert was insert([],X,[X]

    Correctness and completeness of logic programs

    Full text link
    We discuss proving correctness and completeness of definite clause logic programs. We propose a method for proving completeness, while for proving correctness we employ a method which should be well known but is often neglected. Also, we show how to prove completeness and correctness in the presence of SLD-tree pruning, and point out that approximate specifications simplify specifications and proofs. We compare the proof methods to declarative diagnosis (algorithmic debugging), showing that approximate specifications eliminate a major drawback of the latter. We argue that our proof methods reflect natural declarative thinking about programs, and that they can be used, formally or informally, in every-day programming.Comment: 29 pages, 2 figures; with editorial modifications, small corrections and extensions. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1411.3015. Overlaps explained in "Related Work" (p. 21

    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

    On Redundancy Elimination Tolerant Scheduling Rules

    Full text link
    In (Ferrucci, Pacini and Sessa, 1995) an extended form of resolution, called Reduced SLD resolution (RSLD), is introduced. In essence, an RSLD derivation is an SLD derivation such that redundancy elimination from resolvents is performed after each rewriting step. It is intuitive that redundancy elimination may have positive effects on derivation process. However, undesiderable effects are also possible. In particular, as shown in this paper, program termination as well as completeness of loop checking mechanisms via a given selection rule may be lost. The study of such effects has led us to an analysis of selection rule basic concepts, so that we have found convenient to move the attention from rules of atom selection to rules of atom scheduling. A priority mechanism for atom scheduling is built, where a priority is assigned to each atom in a resolvent, and primary importance is given to the event of arrival of new atoms from the body of the applied clause at rewriting time. This new computational model proves able to address the study of redundancy elimination effects, giving at the same time interesting insights into general properties of selection rules. As a matter of fact, a class of scheduling rules, namely the specialisation independent ones, is defined in the paper by using not trivial semantic arguments. As a quite surprising result, specialisation independent scheduling rules turn out to coincide with a class of rules which have an immediate structural characterisation (named stack-queue rules). Then we prove that such scheduling rules are tolerant to redundancy elimination, in the sense that neither program termination nor completeness of equality loop check is lost passing from SLD to RSLD.Comment: 53 pages, to appear on TPL

    Hybrid Rules with Well-Founded Semantics

    Get PDF
    A general framework is proposed for integration of rules and external first order theories. It is based on the well-founded semantics of normal logic programs and inspired by ideas of Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) and constructive negation for logic programs. Hybrid rules are normal clauses extended with constraints in the bodies; constraints are certain formulae in the language of the external theory. A hybrid program is a pair of a set of hybrid rules and an external theory. Instances of the framework are obtained by specifying the class of external theories, and the class of constraints. An example instance is integration of (non-disjunctive) Datalog with ontologies formalized as description logics. The paper defines a declarative semantics of hybrid programs and a goal-driven formal operational semantics. The latter can be seen as a generalization of SLS-resolution. It provides a basis for hybrid implementations combining Prolog with constraint solvers. Soundness of the operational semantics is proven. Sufficient conditions for decidability of the declarative semantics, and for completeness of the operational semantics are given

    Bialgebraic Semantics for Logic Programming

    Get PDF
    Bialgebrae provide an abstract framework encompassing the semantics of different kinds of computational models. In this paper we propose a bialgebraic approach to the semantics of logic programming. Our methodology is to study logic programs as reactive systems and exploit abstract techniques developed in that setting. First we use saturation to model the operational semantics of logic programs as coalgebrae on presheaves. Then, we make explicit the underlying algebraic structure by using bialgebrae on presheaves. The resulting semantics turns out to be compositional with respect to conjunction and term substitution. Also, it encodes a parallel model of computation, whose soundness is guaranteed by a built-in notion of synchronisation between different threads

    Query Evaluation in Recursive Databases

    Get PDF

    Linear Tabulated Resolution Based on Prolog Control Strategy

    Full text link
    Infinite loops and redundant computations are long recognized open problems in Prolog. Two ways have been explored to resolve these problems: loop checking and tabling. Loop checking can cut infinite loops, but it cannot be both sound and complete even for function-free logic programs. Tabling seems to be an effective way to resolve infinite loops and redundant computations. However, existing tabulated resolutions, such as OLDT-resolution, SLG- resolution, and Tabulated SLS-resolution, are non-linear because they rely on the solution-lookup mode in formulating tabling. The principal disadvantage of non-linear resolutions is that they cannot be implemented using a simple stack-based memory structure like that in Prolog. Moreover, some strictly sequential operators such as cuts may not be handled as easily as in Prolog. In this paper, we propose a hybrid method to resolve infinite loops and redundant computations. We combine the ideas of loop checking and tabling to establish a linear tabulated resolution called TP-resolution. TP-resolution has two distinctive features: (1) It makes linear tabulated derivations in the same way as Prolog except that infinite loops are broken and redundant computations are reduced. It handles cuts as effectively as Prolog. (2) It is sound and complete for positive logic programs with the bounded-term-size property. The underlying algorithm can be implemented by an extension to any existing Prolog abstract machines such as WAM or ATOAM.Comment: To appear as the first accepted paper in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (http://www.cwi.nl/projects/alp/TPLP

    Proving Correctness and Completeness of Normal Programs - a Declarative Approach

    Full text link
    We advocate a declarative approach to proving properties of logic programs. Total correctness can be separated into correctness, completeness and clean termination; the latter includes non-floundering. Only clean termination depends on the operational semantics, in particular on the selection rule. We show how to deal with correctness and completeness in a declarative way, treating programs only from the logical point of view. Specifications used in this approach are interpretations (or theories). We point out that specifications for correctness may differ from those for completeness, as usually there are answers which are neither considered erroneous nor required to be computed. We present proof methods for correctness and completeness for definite programs and generalize them to normal programs. For normal programs we use the 3-valued completion semantics; this is a standard semantics corresponding to negation as finite failure. The proof methods employ solely the classical 2-valued logic. We use a 2-valued characterization of the 3-valued completion semantics which may be of separate interest. The presented methods are compared with an approach based on operational semantics. We also employ the ideas of this work to generalize a known method of proving termination of normal programs.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). 44 page
    • …
    corecore