1,555 research outputs found

    SCL: Clause Learning from Simple Models

    Get PDF
    International audienceSeveral decision procedures for the Bernays-Schoenfinkel (BS) fragment of first-order logic rely on explicit model assumptions. In particular, the procedures differ in their respective model representation formalisms. We introduce a new decision procedure SCL deciding the BS fragment. SCL stands for clause learning from simple models. Simple models are solely built on ground literals. Nevertheless, we show that SCL can learn exactly the clauses other procedures learn with respect to more complex model representation formalisms. Therefore, the overhead of complex model representation formalisms is not always needed. SCL is sound and complete for full first-order logic without equality

    {SCL(EQ)}: {SCL} for First-Order Logic with Equality

    Get PDF
    International audienceAbstract We propose a new calculus SCL(EQ) for first-order logic with equality that only learns non-redundant clauses. Following the idea of CDCL (Conflict Driven Clause Learning) and SCL (Clause Learning from Simple Models) a ground literal model assumption is used to guide inferences that are then guaranteed to be non-redundant. Redundancy is defined with respect to a dynamically changing ordering derived from the ground literal model assumption. We prove SCL(EQ) sound and complete and provide examples where our calculus improves on superposition

    SCL(EQ): SCL for First-Order Logic with Equality

    Get PDF
    We propose a new calculus SCL(EQ) for first-order logic with equality thatonly learns non-redundant clauses. Following the idea of CDCL (Conflict DrivenClause Learning) and SCL (Clause Learning from Simple Models) a ground literalmodel assumption is used to guide inferences that are then guaranteed to benon-redundant. Redundancy is defined with respect to a dynamically changingordering derived from the ground literal model assumption. We prove SCL(EQ)sound and complete and provide examples where our calculus improves onsuperposition.<br

    The Challenge of Unifying Semantic and Syntactic Inference Restrictions

    No full text
    While syntactic inference restrictions don't play an important role for SAT, they are an essential reasoning technique for more expressive logics, such as first-order logic, or fragments thereof. In particular, they can result in short proofs or model representations. On the other hand, semantically guided inference systems enjoy important properties, such as the generation of solely non-redundant clauses. I discuss to what extend the two paradigms may be unifiable

    Exploring Partial Models with {SCL}

    Get PDF

    {SCL} with Theory Constraints

    Get PDF
    We lift the SCL calculus for first-order logic without equality to the SCL(T) calculus for first-order logic without equality modulo a background theory. In a nutshell, the SCL(T) calculus describes a new way to guide hierarchic resolution inferences by a partial model assumption instead of an a priori fixed order as done for instance in hierarchic superposition. The model representation consists of ground background theory literals and ground foreground first-order literals. One major advantage of the model guided approach is that clauses generated by SCL(T) enjoy a non-redundancy property that makes expensive testing for tautologies and forward subsumption completely obsolete. SCL(T) is a semi-decision procedure for pure clause sets that are clause sets without first-order function symbols ranging into the background theory sorts. Moreover, SCL(T) can be turned into a decision procedure if the considered combination of a first-order logic modulo a background theory enjoys an abstract finite model property

    SCL with Theory Constraints

    Get PDF
    We lift the SCL calculus for first-order logic without equality to the SCL(T) calculus for first-order logic without equality modulo a background theory. In a nutshell, the SCL(T) calculus describes a new way to guide hierarchic resolution inferences by a partial model assumption instead of an a priori fixed order as done for instance in hierarchic superposition. The model representation consists of ground background theory literals and ground foreground first-order literals. One major advantage of the model guided approach is that clauses generated by SCL(T) enjoy a non-redundancy property that makes expensive testing for tautologies and forward subsumption completely obsolete. SCL(T) is a semi-decision procedure for pure clause sets that are clause sets without first-order function symbols ranging into the background theory sorts. Moreover, SCL(T) can be turned into a decision procedure if the considered combination of a first-order logic modulo a background theory enjoys an abstract finite model property.Comment: 22 page

    The Logic of Joint Ability in Two-Player Tacit Games

    Get PDF
    Logics of joint strategic ability have recently received attention, with arguably the most influential being those in a family that includes Coalition Logic (CL) and Alternating-time Temporal Logic (ATL). Notably, both CL and ATL bypass the epistemic issues that underpin Schelling-type coordination problems, by apparently relying on the meta-level assumption of (perfectly reliable) communication between cooperating rational agents. Yet such epistemic issues arise naturally in settings relevant to ATL and CL: these logics are standardly interpreted on structures where agents move simultaneously, opening the possibility that an agent cannot foresee the concurrent choices of other agents. In this paper we introduce a variant of CL we call Two-Player Strategic Coordination Logic (SCL2). The key novelty of this framework is an operator for capturing coalitional ability when the cooperating agents cannot share strategic information. We identify significant differences in the expressive power and validities of SCL2 and CL2, and present a sound and complete axiomatization for SCL2. We briefly address conceptual challenges when shifting attention to games with more than two players and stronger notions of rationality

    Logic Programs as Declarative and Procedural Bias in Inductive Logic Programming

    Get PDF
    Machine Learning is necessary for the development of Artificial Intelligence, as pointed out by Turing in his 1950 article ``Computing Machinery and Intelligence''. It is in the same article that Turing suggested the use of computational logic and background knowledge for learning. This thesis follows a logic-based machine learning approach called Inductive Logic Programming (ILP), which is advantageous over other machine learning approaches in terms of relational learning and utilising background knowledge. ILP uses logic programs as a uniform representation for hypothesis, background knowledge and examples, but its declarative bias is usually encoded using metalogical statements. This thesis advocates the use of logic programs to represent declarative and procedural bias, which results in a framework of single-language representation. We show in this thesis that using a logic program called the top theory as declarative bias leads to a sound and complete multi-clause learning system MC-TopLog. It overcomes the entailment-incompleteness of Progol, thus outperforms Progol in terms of predictive accuracies on learning grammars and strategies for playing Nim game. MC-TopLog has been applied to two real-world applications funded by Syngenta, which is an agriculture company. A higher-order extension on top theories results in meta-interpreters, which allow the introduction of new predicate symbols. Thus the resulting ILP system Metagol can do predicate invention, which is an intrinsically higher-order logic operation. Metagol also leverages the procedural semantic of Prolog to encode procedural bias, so that it can outperform both its ASP version and ILP systems without an equivalent procedural bias in terms of efficiency and accuracy. This is demonstrated by the experiments on learning Regular, Context-free and Natural grammars. Metagol is also applied to non-grammar learning tasks involving recursion and predicate invention, such as learning a definition of staircases and robot strategy learning. Both MC-TopLog and Metagol are based on a \top-directed framework, which is different from other multi-clause learning systems based on Inverse Entailment, such as CF-Induction, XHAIL and IMPARO. Compared to another \top-directed multi-clause learning system TAL, Metagol allows the explicit form of higher-order assumption to be encoded in the form of meta-rules.Open Acces
    corecore