Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Relationship Between Two Modular Action Languages: A Translation from MAD into \(\mathcal {ALM}\)

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 9345))

Abstract

Modular action languages MAD and \(\mathcal {ALM}\) share the goal of providing means for the reuse of knowledge in order to facilitate the creation of libraries of knowledge. They differ substantially in their underlying assumptions (Causality Principle for MAD, Inertia Axiom for \(\mathcal {ALM}\)) and in the constructs that enable the reuse of knowledge, especially the mechanisms used to declare actions in terms of already described actions. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between the two action languages by providing a translation from MAD into \(\mathcal {ALM}\). We specify a condition that ensures that, for a specific class of MAD action descriptions, our translation produces a transition diagram isomorphic to the original one, modulo the common vocabulary.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Recall the difference in the capitalization of identifiers between \(\mathcal {ALM}\) and MAD.

References

  1. Balduccini, M.: ASP with non-Herbrand partial functions: a language and system for practical use. TPLP 13(4–5), 547–561 (2013)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Erdoǧan, S., Lifschitz, V.: Actions as special cases. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 377–387. AAAI Press (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Erdoǧan, S.T.: A library of general-purpose action descriptions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gelfond, M., Inclezan, D.: Yet Another Modular Action Language. In: Proceedings of SEA 2009, pp. 64–78. University of Bath Opus: Online Publications Store (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Gener. Comput. 9(3/4), 365–386 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Action languages. Electron. Trans. AI 3(16), 193–210 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The common core of action languages B and C. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2012) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Giunchiglia, E., Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., McCain, N., Turner, H.: Nonmonotonic causal theories. Artif. Intell. 153(1–2), 105–140 (2004)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Giunchiglia, E., Lifschitz, V.: An Action language based on causal explanation: preliminary report. In: Proceedings of National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 623–630. AAAI Press (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Inclezan, D., Gelfond, M.: Representing biological processes in modular action language ALM. In: Proceedings of the 2011 AAAI Spring Symposium on Formalizing Commonsense, pp. 49–55. AAAI Press (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Inclezan, D., Gelfond, M.: Modular action language ALM - accepted for publication in TPLP (2015) http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.05022

  12. Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., Yang, F.: Action language BC: preliminary report. In: The 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2013) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lifschitz, V., Ren, W.: A Modular action description language. In: Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 853–859 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Turner, H.: Representing actions in logic programs and default theories: a situation calculus approach. J. Logic Program. 31(1–3), 245–298 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Miami University, Oxford, OH, 45056, USA

    Daniela Inclezan

Authors
  1. Daniela Inclezan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela Inclezan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Francesco Calimeri

  2. University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Giovambattista Ianni

  3. University of Kentucky Dept. Computer Science, Lexington, Kentucky, USA

    Miroslaw Truszczynski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Inclezan, D. (2015). On the Relationship Between Two Modular Action Languages: A Translation from MAD into \(\mathcal {ALM}\) . In: Calimeri, F., Ianni, G., Truszczynski, M. (eds) Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9345. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23264-5_34

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23264-5_34

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23263-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23264-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation