Skip to main content

Nonmonotonic reasoning with quantified boolean constraints

  • Regular Papers
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Logic Programming And Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1265))

Abstract

In this paper, we define and investigate the complexity of several nonmonotonic logics with quantified Boolean formulas as constraints. We give quantified constraint versions of the constraint programming formalism of Marek, Nerode, and Remmel [15] and of the natural extension of their theory to default logic. We also introduce a new formalism which adds constraints to circumscription. We show that standard complexity results for each of these formalisms generalize in the quantified constraint case. Gogic, Kautz, Papadimitriou, and Selman [8] have introduced a new method for measuring the strengths of reasoning formalisms based on succinctness of model representation. We show a natural hierarchy based on this measure exists between our versions of logic programming, circumscription, and default logic. Finally, we discuss some results about the relative succinctness of our reasoning formalisms versus any formalism for which model checking can be done somewhere in the polynomial time hierarchy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. T. Baker, J. Gill, and R. Solovay. “Relativizations of the P=? NP question”. SIAM Journal of Computing., 1993. 431–442.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Cadoli and M. Schaerf. ‘A survey on complexity results for non-monotoniclogic” Journal of Logic Progrmming., Nov. 1993, vol. 17,(no.2–4):127–60.

    Google Scholar 

  3. W.F. Dowling and J.H. Gallier. “Linear-time algorithms for testing the satisfiability of propositional Horn formulae”. Journal of Logic Programming, 3:267–284, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  4. T. Eiter and G. Gottlob. “Propositional circumscription and extended closed-world reasoning are Π 2complete”. Theoretical Computer Science, 114:231–245, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T. Eiter and J. Lu and V.S.Subrahmanian. “Computing non-ground representations of stable models”. In: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, LPNMR'97 This volume

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Furst and J.B. Saxe and M. Sipser. “Parity, circuits and the polynomial hierarchy”. Math Systems Theory, 17:13–27, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. R. Garey and D. S. Johnson. Computers and Intractibility: A Guide to the theory of NP-completeness. W.H. Freeman and Company, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Gogic, H. Kautz, C. Papadimitriou, and B. Selman. “The comparative linguistics of knowledge representation”. In Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-95. Springer Lecture notes in Artificial Intelligence; 1042. pages 862–869, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. G. Gogic. Complexity Aspects of Knowledge Representation. Ph.D. Thesis. Computer Science Department, U.C. San Diego. 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Goldsmith and D. Joseph. Three results on the polynomial isomorphism of complete sets. In Foundations of Computer Science, volume 27, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  11. G. Gottlob. “Complexity results for nonmonotonic logics”. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2:397–425, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. Jaffar and J.-L. Lassez. Constraint Logic Programming. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 111–119, Münich, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Jaffar and M. Maher Constraint Logic Programming: A Survey. Journal of Logic Programming 19–20, pages 503–581. 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  14. V.W. Marek and M. Truszczyński. Nonmonotonic Logic. Springer Verlag. 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  15. V.W. Marek, A. Nerode and J.B. Remmel. “On logical constraints in Logic Programming”. In: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, LPNMR'95, Springer Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 928, pages 43–56, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A.R. Meyer and L. J. Stockmeyer. “The equivalence problem for regular expressions with squaring requires exponential time”. In Proceedings of the 13th annual symposium on switching and automata theory, pages 125–129. New York, NY: IEEE Computer Society, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C.H. Papadimitriou. “The complexity of knowledge representation”. In Proceedingsof the 11th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 244–248. IEEE Computer Society, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. U. Schöning. “A note on complete sets for the polynomial hierarchy”. ACM SIGACT News 13 pages 30–34. 1981

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey B. Remmel .

Editor information

Jürgen Dix Ulrich Furbach Anil Nerode

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pollett, C., Remmel, J.B. (1997). Nonmonotonic reasoning with quantified boolean constraints. In: Dix, J., Furbach, U., Nerode, A. (eds) Logic Programming And Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1265. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63255-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63255-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63255-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69249-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics