Game-Theoretic Semantics for Alternating-Time Temporal Logic

We introduce versions of game-theoretic semantics (GTS) for Alternating-Time Temporal Logic (ATL). In GTS, truth is defined in terms of existence of a winning strategy in a semantic evaluation game, and thus the game-theoretic perspective appears in the framework of ATL on two semantic levels: on the object level in the standard semantics of the strategic operators, and on the meta-level where game-theoretic logical semantics is applied to ATL. We unify these two perspectives into semantic evaluation games specially designed for ATL. The game-theoretic perspective enables us to identify new variants of the semantics of ATL based on limiting the time resources available to the verifier and falsifier in the semantic evaluation game. We introduce and analyse an unbounded and (ordinal) bounded GTS and prove these to be equivalent to the standard (Tarski-style) compositional semantics. We show that in these both versions of GTS, truth of ATL formulae can always be determined in finite time, i.e., without constructing infinite paths. We also introduce a non-equivalent finitely bounded semantics and argue that it is natural from both logical and game-theoretic perspectives.Comment: Preprint of a paper published in ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 19(3): 17:1-17:38, 201

Propositional logic with short-circuit evaluation: a non-commutative and a commutative variant

Short-circuit evaluation denotes the semantics of propositional connectives in which the second argument is evaluated only if the first argument does not suffice to determine the value of the expression. Short-circuit evaluation is widely used in programming, with sequential conjunction and disjunction as primitive connectives. We study the question which logical laws axiomatize short-circuit evaluation under the following assumptions: compound statements are evaluated from left to right, each atom (propositional variable) evaluates to either true or false, and atomic evaluations can cause a side effect. The answer to this question depends on the kind of atomic side effects that can occur and leads to different "short-circuit logics". The basic case is FSCL (free short-circuit logic), which characterizes the setting in which each atomic evaluation can cause a side effect. We recall some main results and then relate FSCL to MSCL (memorizing short-circuit logic), where in the evaluation of a compound statement, the first evaluation result of each atom is memorized. MSCL can be seen as a sequential variant of propositional logic: atomic evaluations cannot cause a side effect and the sequential connectives are not commutative. Then we relate MSCL to SSCL (static short-circuit logic), the variant of propositional logic that prescribes short-circuit evaluation with commutative sequential connectives. We present evaluation trees as an intuitive semantics for short-circuit evaluation, and simple equational axiomatizations for the short-circuit logics mentioned that use negation and the sequential connectives only.Comment: 34 pages, 6 tables. Considerable parts of the text below stem from arXiv:1206.1936, arXiv:1010.3674, and arXiv:1707.05718. Together with arXiv:1707.05718, this paper subsumes most of arXiv:1010.367

SLT-Resolution for the Well-Founded Semantics

Global SLS-resolution and SLG-resolution are two representative mechanisms for top-down evaluation of the well-founded semantics of general logic programs. Global SLS-resolution is linear for query evaluation but suffers from infinite loops and redundant computations. In contrast, SLG-resolution resolves infinite loops and redundant computations by means of tabling, but it is not linear. The principal disadvantage of a non-linear approach is that it cannot be implemented using a simple, efficient stack-based memory structure nor can it be easily extended to handle some strictly sequential operators such as cuts in Prolog. In this paper, we present a linear tabling method, called SLT-resolution, for top-down evaluation of the well-founded semantics. SLT-resolution is a substantial extension of SLDNF-resolution with tabling. Its main features include: (1) It resolves infinite loops and redundant computations while preserving the linearity. (2) It is terminating, and sound and complete w.r.t. the well-founded semantics for programs with the bounded-term-size property with non-floundering queries. Its time complexity is comparable with SLG-resolution and polynomial for function-free logic programs. (3) Because of its linearity for query evaluation, SLT-resolution bridges the gap between the well-founded semantics and standard Prolog implementation techniques. It can be implemented by an extension to any existing Prolog abstract machines such as WAM or ATOAM.Comment: Slight modificatio

An independent axiomatisation for free short-circuit logic

Short-circuit evaluation denotes the semantics of propositional connectives in which the second argument is evaluated only if the first argument does not suffice to determine the value of the expression. Free short-circuit logic is the equational logic in which compound statements are evaluated from left to right, while atomic evaluations are not memorised throughout the evaluation, i.e., evaluations of distinct occurrences of an atom in a compound statement may yield different truth values. We provide a simple semantics for free SCL and an independent axiomatisation. Finally, we discuss evaluation strategies, some other SCLs, and side effects.Comment: 36 pages, 4 tables. Differences with v2: Section 2.1: theorem Thm.2.1.5 and further are renumbered; corrections: p.23, line -7, p.24, lines 3 and 7. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1010.367

Abduction in Well-Founded Semantics and Generalized Stable Models

Abductive logic programming offers a formalism to declaratively express and solve problems in areas such as diagnosis, planning, belief revision and hypothetical reasoning. Tabled logic programming offers a computational mechanism that provides a level of declarativity superior to that of Prolog, and which has supported successful applications in fields such as parsing, program analysis, and model checking. In this paper we show how to use tabled logic programming to evaluate queries to abductive frameworks with integrity constraints when these frameworks contain both default and explicit negation. The result is the ability to compute abduction over well-founded semantics with explicit negation and answer sets. Our approach consists of a transformation and an evaluation method. The transformation adjoins to each objective literal $O$ in a program, an objective literal $not(O)$ along with rules that ensure that $not(O)$ will be true if and only if $O$ is false. We call the resulting program a {\em dual} program. The evaluation method, \wfsmeth, then operates on the dual program. \wfsmeth{} is sound and complete for evaluating queries to abductive frameworks whose entailment method is based on either the well-founded semantics with explicit negation, or on answer sets. Further, \wfsmeth{} is asymptotically as efficient as any known method for either class of problems. In addition, when abduction is not desired, \wfsmeth{} operating on a dual program provides a novel tabling method for evaluating queries to ground extended programs whose complexity and termination properties are similar to those of the best tabling methods for the well-founded semantics. A publicly available meta-interpreter has been developed for \wfsmeth{} using the XSB system.Comment: 48 pages; To appear in Theory and Practice in Logic Programmin

A Declarative Foundation of λProlog with Equality

We build general model-theoretic semantics for higher-order logic programming languages. Usual semantics for first-order logic is two-level: i.e., at a lower level we define a domain of individuals, and then, we define satisfaction of formulas with respect to this domain. In a higher-order logic which includes the propositional type in its primitive set of types, the definition of satisfaction of formulas is mutually recursive with the process of evaluation of terms. As result of this in higher-order logic it is extremely difficult to define an effective semantics. For example to define T p operator for logic program P, we need a fixed domain without regard to interpretations. In usual semantics for higher-order logic, domain is dependent on interpretations. We overcome this problem and argue that our semantics provides a more suitable declarative basis for higher-order logic programming than the usual general model semantics. We develop a fix point semantics based on our model. We also show that a quotient of the domain of our model can be the domain of a model for higher-order logic programs with equality