On the Relative Expressiveness of Argumentation Frameworks, Normal Logic Programs and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks

We analyse the expressiveness of the two-valued semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks, normal logic programs and abstract dialectical frameworks. By expressiveness we mean the ability to encode a desired set of two-valued interpretations over a given propositional signature using only atoms from that signature. While the computational complexity of the two-valued model existence problem for all these languages is (almost) the same, we show that the languages form a neat hierarchy with respect to their expressiveness.Comment: Proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2014

Three-valued completion for abductive logic programs

AbstractIn this paper, we propose a three-valued completion semantics for abductive logic programs, which solves some problems associated with the Console et al. two-valued completion semantics. The semantics is a generalization of Kunen's completion semantics for general logic programs, which is known to correspond very well to a class of effective proof procedures for general logic programs. Secondly, we propose a proof procedure for abductive logic programs, which is a generalization of a proof procedure for general logic programs based on constructive negation. This proof procedure is sound and complete with respect to the proposed semantics. By generalizing a number of results on general logic programs to the class of abductive logic programs, we present further evidence for the idea that limited forms of abduction can be added quite naturally to general logic programs

Combining explicit negation and negation by failure via Belnap's logic

AbstractThis paper deals with logic programs containing two kinds of negation: negation as failure and explicit negation. This allows two different forms of reasoning in the presence of incomplete information. Such programs have been introduced by Gelfond and Lifschitz and called extended programs. We provide them with a logical semantics in the style of Kunen, based on Belnap's four-valued logic, and an answer sets' semantics that is shown to be equivalent to that of Gelfond and Lifschitz.The proofs rely on a translation into normal programs, and on a variant of Fitting's extension of logic programming to bilattices

A Program-Level Approach to Revising Logic Programs under the Answer Set Semantics

An approach to the revision of logic programs under the answer set semantics is presented. For programs P and Q, the goal is to determine the answer sets that correspond to the revision of P by Q, denoted P * Q. A fundamental principle of classical (AGM) revision, and the one that guides the approach here, is the success postulate. In AGM revision, this stipulates that A is in K * A. By analogy with the success postulate, for programs P and Q, this means that the answer sets of Q will in some sense be contained in those of P * Q. The essential idea is that for P * Q, a three-valued answer set for Q, consisting of positive and negative literals, is first determined. The positive literals constitute a regular answer set, while the negated literals make up a minimal set of naf literals required to produce the answer set from Q. These literals are propagated to the program P, along with those rules of Q that are not decided by these literals. The approach differs from work in update logic programs in two main respects. First, we ensure that the revising logic program has higher priority, and so we satisfy the success postulate; second, for the preference implicit in a revision P * Q, the program Q as a whole takes precedence over P, unlike update logic programs, since answer sets of Q are propagated to P. We show that a core group of the AGM postulates are satisfied, as are the postulates that have been proposed for update logic programs

Reconciling Well-Founded Semantics of DL-Programs and Aggregate Programs

Logic programs with aggregates and description logic programs (dl-programs) are two recent extensions to logic programming. In this paper, we study the relationships between these two classes of logic programs, under the well-founded semantics. The main result is that, under a satisfaction-preserving mapping from dl-atoms to aggregates, the well-founded semantics of dl-programs by Eiter et al., coincides with the well-founded semantics of aggregate programs, defined by Pelov et al. as the least fixpoint of a 3-valued immediate consequence operator under the ultimate approximating aggregate. This result enables an alternative definition of the same well-founded semantics for aggregate programs, in terms of the first principle of unfounded sets. Furthermore, the result can be applied, in a uniform manner, to define the well-founded semantics for dl-programs with aggregates, which agrees with the existing semantics when either dl-atoms or aggregates are absent

Dynamic Quantum Logic for Quantum Programs

We present a way to apply quantum logic to the study of quantum programs. This is made possible by using an extension of the usual propositional language in order to make transformations performed on the system appear explicitly. This way, the evolution of the system becomes part of the logical study. We show how both unitary operations and two-valued measurements can be included in this formalism and can thus be handled logically.Comment: Submitted to the International Journal of Quantum Informatio