106,136 research outputs found

    Computing only minimal answers in disjunctive deductive databases

    Full text link
    A method is presented for computing minimal answers in disjunctive deductive databases under the disjunctive stable model semantics. Such answers are constructed by repeatedly extending partial answers. Our method is complete (in that every minimal answer can be computed) and does not admit redundancy (in the sense that every partial answer generated can be extended to a minimal answer), whence no non-minimal answer is generated. For stratified databases, the method does not (necessarily) require the computation of models of the database in their entirety. Compilation is proposed as a tool by which problems relating to computational efficiency and the non-existence of disjunctive stable models can be overcome. The extension of our method to other semantics is also considered.Comment: 48 page

    Extremal problems in logic programming and stable model computation

    Get PDF
    We study the following problem: given a class of logic programs C, determine the maximum number of stable models of a program from C. We establish the maximum for the class of all logic programs with at most n clauses, and for the class of all logic programs of size at most n. We also characterize the programs for which the maxima are attained. We obtain similar results for the class of all disjunctive logic programs with at most n clauses, each of length at most m, and for the class of all disjunctive logic programs of size at most n. Our results on logic programs have direct implication for the design of algorithms to compute stable models. Several such algorithms, similar in spirit to the Davis-Putnam procedure, are described in the paper. Our results imply that there is an algorithm that finds all stable models of a program with n clauses after considering the search space of size O(3^{n/3}) in the worst case. Our results also provide some insights into the question of representability of families of sets as families of stable models of logic programs

    Answer Sets for Logic Programs with Arbitrary Abstract Constraint Atoms

    Full text link
    In this paper, we present two alternative approaches to defining answer sets for logic programs with arbitrary types of abstract constraint atoms (c-atoms). These approaches generalize the fixpoint-based and the level mapping based answer set semantics of normal logic programs to the case of logic programs with arbitrary types of c-atoms. The results are four different answer set definitions which are equivalent when applied to normal logic programs. The standard fixpoint-based semantics of logic programs is generalized in two directions, called answer set by reduct and answer set by complement. These definitions, which differ from each other in the treatment of negation-as-failure (naf) atoms, make use of an immediate consequence operator to perform answer set checking, whose definition relies on the notion of conditional satisfaction of c-atoms w.r.t. a pair of interpretations. The other two definitions, called strongly and weakly well-supported models, are generalizations of the notion of well-supported models of normal logic programs to the case of programs with c-atoms. As for the case of fixpoint-based semantics, the difference between these two definitions is rooted in the treatment of naf atoms. We prove that answer sets by reduct (resp. by complement) are equivalent to weakly (resp. strongly) well-supported models of a program, thus generalizing the theorem on the correspondence between stable models and well-supported models of a normal logic program to the class of programs with c-atoms. We show that the newly defined semantics coincide with previously introduced semantics for logic programs with monotone c-atoms, and they extend the original answer set semantics of normal logic programs. We also study some properties of answer sets of programs with c-atoms, and relate our definitions to several semantics for logic programs with aggregates presented in the literature

    Answer Sets for Consistent Query Answering in Inconsistent Databases

    Full text link
    A relational database is inconsistent if it does not satisfy a given set of integrity constraints. Nevertheless, it is likely that most of the data in it is consistent with the constraints. In this paper we apply logic programming based on answer sets to the problem of retrieving consistent information from a possibly inconsistent database. Since consistent information persists from the original database to every of its minimal repairs, the approach is based on a specification of database repairs using disjunctive logic programs with exceptions, whose answer set semantics can be represented and computed by systems that implement stable model semantics. These programs allow us to declare persistence by defaults and repairing changes by exceptions. We concentrate mainly on logic programs for binary integrity constraints, among which we find most of the integrity constraints found in practice.Comment: 34 page

    Relating Weight Constraint and Aggregate Programs: Semantics and Representation

    Full text link
    Weight constraint and aggregate programs are among the most widely used logic programs with constraints. In this paper, we relate the semantics of these two classes of programs, namely the stable model semantics for weight constraint programs and the answer set semantics based on conditional satisfaction for aggregate programs. Both classes of programs are instances of logic programs with constraints, and in particular, the answer set semantics for aggregate programs can be applied to weight constraint programs. We show that the two semantics are closely related. First, we show that for a broad class of weight constraint programs, called strongly satisfiable programs, the two semantics coincide. When they disagree, a stable model admitted by the stable model semantics may be circularly justified. We show that the gap between the two semantics can be closed by transforming a weight constraint program to a strongly satisfiable one, so that no circular models may be generated under the current implementation of the stable model semantics. We further demonstrate the close relationship between the two semantics by formulating a transformation from weight constraint programs to logic programs with nested expressions which preserves the answer set semantics. Our study on the semantics leads to an investigation of a methodological issue, namely the possibility of compact representation of aggregate programs by weight constraint programs. We show that almost all standard aggregates can be encoded by weight constraints compactly. This makes it possible to compute the answer sets of aggregate programs using the ASP solvers for weight constraint programs. This approach is compared experimentally with the ones where aggregates are handled more explicitly, which show that the weight constraint encoding of aggregates enables a competitive approach to answer set computation for aggregate programs.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), 2011. 30 page

    A QBF-based Formalization of Abstract Argumentation Semantics

    Get PDF
    Supported by the National Research Fund, Luxembourg (LAAMI project) and by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC, UK), grant ref. EP/J012084/1 (SAsSY project).Peer reviewedPostprin

    Abduction in Well-Founded Semantics and Generalized Stable Models

    Full text link
    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 OO in a program, an objective literal not(O)not(O) along with rules that ensure that not(O)not(O) will be true if and only if OO 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
    • ā€¦
    corecore