FO(FD): Extending classical logic with rule-based fixpoint definitions

We introduce fixpoint definitions, a rule-based reformulation of fixpoint constructs. The logic FO(FD), an extension of classical logic with fixpoint definitions, is defined. We illustrate the relation between FO(FD) and FO(ID), which is developed as an integration of two knowledge representation paradigms. The satisfiability problem for FO(FD) is investigated by first reducing FO(FD) to difference logic and then using solvers for difference logic. These reductions are evaluated in the computation of models for FO(FD) theories representing fairness conditions and we provide potential applications of FO(FD).Comment: Presented at ICLP 2010. 16 pages, 1 figur

Complexity of Non-Monotonic Logics

Over the past few decades, non-monotonic reasoning has developed to be one of the most important topics in computational logic and artificial intelligence. Different ways to introduce non-monotonic aspects to classical logic have been considered, e.g., extension with default rules, extension with modal belief operators, or modification of the semantics. In this survey we consider a logical formalism from each of the above possibilities, namely Reiter's default logic, Moore's autoepistemic logic and McCarthy's circumscription. Additionally, we consider abduction, where one is not interested in inferences from a given knowledge base but in computing possible explanations for an observation with respect to a given knowledge base. Complexity results for different reasoning tasks for propositional variants of these logics have been studied already in the nineties. In recent years, however, a renewed interest in complexity issues can be observed. One current focal approach is to consider parameterized problems and identify reasonable parameters that allow for FPT algorithms. In another approach, the emphasis lies on identifying fragments, i.e., restriction of the logical language, that allow more efficient algorithms for the most important reasoning tasks. In this survey we focus on this second aspect. We describe complexity results for fragments of logical languages obtained by either restricting the allowed set of operators (e.g., forbidding negations one might consider only monotone formulae) or by considering only formulae in conjunctive normal form but with generalized clause types. The algorithmic problems we consider are suitable variants of satisfiability and implication in each of the logics, but also counting problems, where one is not only interested in the existence of certain objects (e.g., models of a formula) but asks for their number.Comment: To appear in Bulletin of the EATC

Cohesive avoidance and arithmetical sets

An open question in reverse mathematics is whether the cohesive principle, \COH, is implied by the stable form of Ramsey's theorem for pairs, \SRT^2_2, in $\omega$-models of \RCA. One typical way of establishing this implication would be to show that for every sequence $\vec{R}$ of subsets of $\omega$, there is a set $A$ that is $\Delta^0_2$ in $\vec{R}$ such that every infinite subset of $A$ or $\bar{A}$ computes an $\vec{R}$-cohesive set. In this article, this is shown to be false, even under far less stringent assumptions: for all natural numbers $n \geq 2$ and $m < 2^n$, there is a sequence \vec{R} = \sequence{R_0,...,R_{n-1}} of subsets of $\omega$ such that for any partition $A_0,...,A_{m-1}$ of $\omega$ arithmetical in $\vec{R}$, there is an infinite subset of some $A_j$ that computes no set cohesive for $\vec{R}$. This complements a number of previous results in computability theory on the computational feebleness of infinite sets of numbers with prescribed combinatorial properties. The proof is a forcing argument using an adaptation of the method of Seetapun showing that every finite coloring of pairs of integers has an infinite homogeneous set not computing a given non-computable set

Backdoors to Normality for Disjunctive Logic Programs

Over the last two decades, propositional satisfiability (SAT) has become one of the most successful and widely applied techniques for the solution of NP-complete problems. The aim of this paper is to investigate theoretically how Sat can be utilized for the efficient solution of problems that are harder than NP or co-NP. In particular, we consider the fundamental reasoning problems in propositional disjunctive answer set programming (ASP), Brave Reasoning and Skeptical Reasoning, which ask whether a given atom is contained in at least one or in all answer sets, respectively. Both problems are located at the second level of the Polynomial Hierarchy and thus assumed to be harder than NP or co-NP. One cannot transform these two reasoning problems into SAT in polynomial time, unless the Polynomial Hierarchy collapses. We show that certain structural aspects of disjunctive logic programs can be utilized to break through this complexity barrier, using new techniques from Parameterized Complexity. In particular, we exhibit transformations from Brave and Skeptical Reasoning to SAT that run in time O(2^k n^2) where k is a structural parameter of the instance and n the input size. In other words, the reduction is fixed-parameter tractable for parameter k. As the parameter k we take the size of a smallest backdoor with respect to the class of normal (i.e., disjunction-free) programs. Such a backdoor is a set of atoms that when deleted makes the program normal. In consequence, the combinatorial explosion, which is expected when transforming a problem from the second level of the Polynomial Hierarchy to the first level, can now be confined to the parameter k, while the running time of the reduction is polynomial in the input size n, where the order of the polynomial is independent of k.Comment: A short version will appear in the Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 27th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'13). A preliminary version of the paper was presented on the workshop Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms (ASPOCP 2012), 5th International Workshop, September 4, 2012, Budapest, Hungar

The Multi-engine ASP Solver ME-ASP: Progress Report

MEASP is a multi-engine solver for ground ASP programs. It exploits algorithm selection techniques based on classification to select one among a set of out-of-the-box heterogeneous ASP solvers used as black-box engines. In this paper we report on (i) a new optimized implementation of MEASP; and (ii) an attempt of applying algorithm selection to non-ground programs. An experimental analysis reported in the paper shows that (i) the new implementation of \measp is substantially faster than the previous version; and (ii) the multi-engine recipe can be applied to the evaluation of non-ground programs with some benefits

Knowledge Compilation of Logic Programs Using Approximation Fixpoint Theory

To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), Proceedings of ICLP 2015 Recent advances in knowledge compilation introduced techniques to compile \emph{positive} logic programs into propositional logic, essentially exploiting the constructive nature of the least fixpoint computation. This approach has several advantages over existing approaches: it maintains logical equivalence, does not require (expensive) loop-breaking preprocessing or the introduction of auxiliary variables, and significantly outperforms existing algorithms. Unfortunately, this technique is limited to \emph{negation-free} programs. In this paper, we show how to extend it to general logic programs under the well-founded semantics. We develop our work in approximation fixpoint theory, an algebraical framework that unifies semantics of different logics. As such, our algebraical results are also applicable to autoepistemic logic, default logic and abstract dialectical frameworks