832 research outputs found
Parameter Learning of Logic Programs for Symbolic-Statistical Modeling
We propose a logical/mathematical framework for statistical parameter
learning of parameterized logic programs, i.e. definite clause programs
containing probabilistic facts with a parameterized distribution. It extends
the traditional least Herbrand model semantics in logic programming to
distribution semantics, possible world semantics with a probability
distribution which is unconditionally applicable to arbitrary logic programs
including ones for HMMs, PCFGs and Bayesian networks. We also propose a new EM
algorithm, the graphical EM algorithm, that runs for a class of parameterized
logic programs representing sequential decision processes where each decision
is exclusive and independent. It runs on a new data structure called support
graphs describing the logical relationship between observations and their
explanations, and learns parameters by computing inside and outside probability
generalized for logic programs. The complexity analysis shows that when
combined with OLDT search for all explanations for observations, the graphical
EM algorithm, despite its generality, has the same time complexity as existing
EM algorithms, i.e. the Baum-Welch algorithm for HMMs, the Inside-Outside
algorithm for PCFGs, and the one for singly connected Bayesian networks that
have been developed independently in each research field. Learning experiments
with PCFGs using two corpora of moderate size indicate that the graphical EM
algorithm can significantly outperform the Inside-Outside algorithm
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
From Causes for Database Queries to Repairs and Model-Based Diagnosis and Back
In this work we establish and investigate connections between causes for
query answers in databases, database repairs wrt. denial constraints, and
consistency-based diagnosis. The first two are relatively new research areas in
databases, and the third one is an established subject in knowledge
representation. We show how to obtain database repairs from causes, and the
other way around. Causality problems are formulated as diagnosis problems, and
the diagnoses provide causes and their responsibilities. The vast body of
research on database repairs can be applied to the newer problems of computing
actual causes for query answers and their responsibilities. These connections,
which are interesting per se, allow us, after a transition -inspired by
consistency-based diagnosis- to computational problems on hitting sets and
vertex covers in hypergraphs, to obtain several new algorithmic and complexity
results for database causality.Comment: To appear in Theory of Computing Systems. By invitation to special
issue with extended papers from ICDT 2015 (paper arXiv:1412.4311
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
in a program, an objective literal along with rules that ensure
that will be true if and only if 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
Guarantees and Limits of Preprocessing in Constraint Satisfaction and Reasoning
We present a first theoretical analysis of the power of polynomial-time
preprocessing for important combinatorial problems from various areas in AI. We
consider problems from Constraint Satisfaction, Global Constraints,
Satisfiability, Nonmonotonic and Bayesian Reasoning under structural
restrictions. All these problems involve two tasks: (i) identifying the
structure in the input as required by the restriction, and (ii) using the
identified structure to solve the reasoning task efficiently. We show that for
most of the considered problems, task (i) admits a polynomial-time
preprocessing to a problem kernel whose size is polynomial in a structural
problem parameter of the input, in contrast to task (ii) which does not admit
such a reduction to a problem kernel of polynomial size, subject to a
complexity theoretic assumption. As a notable exception we show that the
consistency problem for the AtMost-NValue constraint admits a polynomial kernel
consisting of a quadratic number of variables and domain values. Our results
provide a firm worst-case guarantees and theoretical boundaries for the
performance of polynomial-time preprocessing algorithms for the considered
problems.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1104.2541,
arXiv:1104.556
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
Parameterized aspects of team-based formalisms and logical inference
Parameterized complexity is an interesting subfield of complexity theory that has received a lot of attention in recent years. Such an analysis characterizes the complexity of (classically) intractable problems by pinpointing the computational hardness to some structural aspects of the input. In this thesis, we study the parameterized complexity of various problems from the area of team-based formalisms as well as logical inference.
In the context of team-based formalism, we consider propositional dependence logic (PDL). The problems of interest are model checking (MC) and satisfiability (SAT). Peter Lohmann studied the classical complexity of these problems as a part of his Ph.D. thesis proving that both MC and SAT are NP-complete for PDL. This thesis addresses the parameterized complexity of these problems with respect to a wealth of different parameterizations.
Interestingly, SAT for PDL boils down to the satisfiability of propositional logic as implied by the downwards closure of PDL-formulas. We propose an interesting satisfiability variant (mSAT) asking for a satisfiable team of size m. The problem mSAT restores the ‘team semantic’ nature of satisfiability for PDL-formulas. We propose another problem (MaxSubTeam) asking for a maximal satisfiable team if a given team does not satisfy the input formula.
From the area of logical inference, we consider (logic-based) abduction and argumentation. The problem of interest in abduction (ABD) is to determine whether there is an explanation for a manifestation in a knowledge base (KB). Following Pfandler et al., we also consider two of its variants by imposing additional restrictions over the size of an explanation (ABD and ABD=). In argumentation, our focus is on the argument existence (ARG), relevance (ARG-Rel) and verification (ARG-Check) problems. The complexity of these problems have been explored already in the classical setting, and each of them is known to be complete for the second level of the polynomial hierarchy (except for ARG-Check which is DP-complete) for propositional logic. Moreover, the work by Nord and Zanuttini (resp., Creignou et al.) explores the complexity of these problems with respect to various restrictions over allowed KBs for ABD (ARG). In this thesis, we explore a two-dimensional complexity analysis for these problems. The first dimension is the restrictions over KB in Schaefer’s framework (the same direction as Nord and Zanuttini and Creignou et al.). What differentiates the work in this thesis from an existing research on these problems is that we add another dimension, the parameterization.
The results obtained in this thesis are interesting for two reasons. First (from a theoretical point of view), ideas used in our reductions can help in developing further reductions and prove (in)tractability results for related problems. Second (from a practical point of view), the obtained tractability results might help an agent designing an instance of a problem come up with the one for which the problem is tractable
- …