32,407 research outputs found
Relating Weight Constraint and Aggregate Programs: Semantics and Representation
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
Hybrid Rules with Well-Founded Semantics
A general framework is proposed for integration of rules and external first
order theories. It is based on the well-founded semantics of normal logic
programs and inspired by ideas of Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) and
constructive negation for logic programs. Hybrid rules are normal clauses
extended with constraints in the bodies; constraints are certain formulae in
the language of the external theory. A hybrid program is a pair of a set of
hybrid rules and an external theory. Instances of the framework are obtained by
specifying the class of external theories, and the class of constraints. An
example instance is integration of (non-disjunctive) Datalog with ontologies
formalized as description logics.
The paper defines a declarative semantics of hybrid programs and a
goal-driven formal operational semantics. The latter can be seen as a
generalization of SLS-resolution. It provides a basis for hybrid
implementations combining Prolog with constraint solvers. Soundness of the
operational semantics is proven. Sufficient conditions for decidability of the
declarative semantics, and for completeness of the operational semantics are
given
Linear-Logic Based Analysis of Constraint Handling Rules with Disjunction
Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is a declarative committed-choice programming
language with a strong relationship to linear logic. Its generalization CHR
with Disjunction (CHRv) is a multi-paradigm declarative programming language
that allows the embedding of horn programs. We analyse the assets and the
limitations of the classical declarative semantics of CHR before we motivate
and develop a linear-logic declarative semantics for CHR and CHRv. We show how
to apply the linear-logic semantics to decide program properties and to prove
operational equivalence of CHRv programs across the boundaries of language
paradigms
Answer Sets for Logic Programs with Arbitrary Abstract Constraint Atoms
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
Negation by default and unstratifiable logic programs
AbstractThe default approach to the theory of logic programs (and deductive databases) is based on the interpretation of negation by default rules. Default logic is a well-suited formalism to express the Closed World Assumption and to define the declarative semantics of stratifiable logic programs. The case of disjunctive consequences in rules is treated. General logic programs may not have a meaning with respect to default semantics. The contribution of the paper is to exhibit an interesting class of programs having a default semantics, called effectively stratifiable programs. This time, disjunctive consequences are not considered. Effective stratification is a weaker constraint than stratification, local stratification and weak stratification. Besides enlarging the class of stratifiable logic programs, the paper contributes to provide a constructive definition of well-founded models of logic programs. The class of effectively stratifiable logic programs matches the class of programs having a total well-founded model and in general, the default semantics extends the well-founded semantics
- …