Towards the implementation of a preference-and uncertain-aware solver using answer set programming

Logic programs with possibilistic ordered disjunction (or LPPODs) are a recently defined logic-programming framework based on logic programs with ordered disjunction and possibilistic logic. The framework inherits the properties of such formalisms and merging them, it supports a reasoning which is nonmonotonic, preference-and uncertain-aware. The LPPODs syntax allows to specify 1) preferences in a qualitative way, and 2) necessity values about the certainty of program clauses. As a result at semantic level, preferences and necessity values can be used to specify an order among program solutions. This class of program therefore fits well in the representation of decision problems where a best option has to be chosen taking into account both preferences and necessity measures about information. In this paper we study the computation and the complexity of the LPPODs semantics and we describe the algorithm for its implementation following on Answer Set Programming approach. We describe some decision scenarios where the solver can be used to choose the best solutions by checking whether an outcome is possibilistically preferred over another considering preferences and uncertainty at the same time.Postprint (published version

Towards possibilistic fuzzy answer set programming

Fuzzy answer set programming (FASP) is a generalization of answer set programming to continuous domains. As it can not readily take uncertainty into account, however, FASP is not suitable as a basis for approximate reasoning and cannot easily be used to derive conclusions from imprecise information. To cope with this, we propose an extension of FASP based on possibility theory. The resulting framework allows us to reason about uncertain information in continuous domains, and thus also about information that is imprecise or vague. We propose a syntactic procedure, based on an immediate consequence operator, and provide a characterization in terms of minimal models, which allows us to straightforwardly implement our framework using existing FASP solvers

The PITA System: Tabling and Answer Subsumption for Reasoning under Uncertainty

Many real world domains require the representation of a measure of uncertainty. The most common such representation is probability, and the combination of probability with logic programs has given rise to the field of Probabilistic Logic Programming (PLP), leading to languages such as the Independent Choice Logic, Logic Programs with Annotated Disjunctions (LPADs), Problog, PRISM and others. These languages share a similar distribution semantics, and methods have been devised to translate programs between these languages. The complexity of computing the probability of queries to these general PLP programs is very high due to the need to combine the probabilities of explanations that may not be exclusive. As one alternative, the PRISM system reduces the complexity of query answering by restricting the form of programs it can evaluate. As an entirely different alternative, Possibilistic Logic Programs adopt a simpler metric of uncertainty than probability. Each of these approaches -- general PLP, restricted PLP, and Possibilistic Logic Programming -- can be useful in different domains depending on the form of uncertainty to be represented, on the form of programs needed to model problems, and on the scale of the problems to be solved. In this paper, we show how the PITA system, which originally supported the general PLP language of LPADs, can also efficiently support restricted PLP and Possibilistic Logic Programs. PITA relies on tabling with answer subsumption and consists of a transformation along with an API for library functions that interface with answer subsumption

Induction of Interpretable Possibilistic Logic Theories from Relational Data

The field of Statistical Relational Learning (SRL) is concerned with learning probabilistic models from relational data. Learned SRL models are typically represented using some kind of weighted logical formulas, which make them considerably more interpretable than those obtained by e.g. neural networks. In practice, however, these models are often still difficult to interpret correctly, as they can contain many formulas that interact in non-trivial ways and weights do not always have an intuitive meaning. To address this, we propose a new SRL method which uses possibilistic logic to encode relational models. Learned models are then essentially stratified classical theories, which explicitly encode what can be derived with a given level of certainty. Compared to Markov Logic Networks (MLNs), our method is faster and produces considerably more interpretable models.Comment: Longer version of a paper appearing in IJCAI 201

Characterizing and Extending Answer Set Semantics using Possibility Theory

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a popular framework for modeling combinatorial problems. However, ASP cannot easily be used for reasoning about uncertain information. Possibilistic ASP (PASP) is an extension of ASP that combines possibilistic logic and ASP. In PASP a weight is associated with each rule, where this weight is interpreted as the certainty with which the conclusion can be established when the body is known to hold. As such, it allows us to model and reason about uncertain information in an intuitive way. In this paper we present new semantics for PASP, in which rules are interpreted as constraints on possibility distributions. Special models of these constraints are then identified as possibilistic answer sets. In addition, since ASP is a special case of PASP in which all the rules are entirely certain, we obtain a new characterization of ASP in terms of constraints on possibility distributions. This allows us to uncover a new form of disjunction, called weak disjunction, that has not been previously considered in the literature. In addition to introducing and motivating the semantics of weak disjunction, we also pinpoint its computational complexity. In particular, while the complexity of most reasoning tasks coincides with standard disjunctive ASP, we find that brave reasoning for programs with weak disjunctions is easier.Comment: 39 pages and 16 pages appendix with proofs. This article has been accepted for publication in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, Copyright Cambridge University Pres