Skip to main content

Forgetting in ASP: The Forgotten Properties

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10021))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 686 Accesses

Abstract

Many approaches for forgetting in Answer Set Programming (ASP) have been proposed in recent years, in the form of specific operators, or classes of operators, following different principles and obeying different properties. A recently published comprehensive overview of existing operators and properties provided a uniform picture of the landscape, including many novel (even surprising) results on relations between properties and operators. Yet, this overview largely missed an additional set properties for forgetting, proposed by Wong, and this paper aims to close this gap. It turns out that, while some of these properties are closely related to the properties previously studied, four of them are distinct providing novel results and insights, further strengthening established relations between existing operators.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    We use the term postulate to follow [13] and easily distinguish them from the properties discussed in [19]. However, their role is the same as the role of other properties.

  2. 2.

    \(\models \) is the standard consequence relation from classical logic.

  3. 3.

    Extended logic programs [21] are actually more expressive, but this form is sufficient here.

  4. 4.

    As mentioned before, we use the term postulate to follow [13] and ease readability. Technically, they are treated as every other property.

References

  1. Lin, F., Reiter, R.: How to progress a database. Artif. Intell. 92(1–2), 131–167 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Rajaratnam, D., Levesque, H.J., Pagnucco, M., Thielscher, M.: Forgetting in action. In: Baral, C., Giacomo, G.D., Eiter, T. (eds.) Proceedings of KR. AAAI Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lang, J., Liberatore, P., Marquis, P.: Propositional independence: formula-variable independence and forgetting. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 18, 391–443 (2003)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Zhang, Y., Foo, N.Y.: Solving logic program conflict through strong and weak forgettings. Artif. Intell. 170(8–9), 739–778 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Eiter, T., Wang, K.: Semantic forgetting in answer set programming. Artif. Intell. 172(14), 1644–1672 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Kontchakov, R., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Logic-based ontology comparison and module extraction, with an application to DL-Lite. Artif. Intell. 174(15), 1093–1141 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Model-theoretic inseparability and modularity of description logic ontologies. Artif. Intell. 203, 66–103 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Larrosa, J., Morancho, E., Niso, D.: On the practical use of variable elimination in constraint optimization problems: ‘still-life’ as a case study. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 23, 421–440 (2005)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Alferes, J., Leite, J., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.: Dynamic updates of non-monotonic knowledge bases. J. Log. Program. 45(1–3), 43–70 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Sabbatini, G., Tompits, H.: On properties of update sequences based on causal rejection. Theor. Pract. Log. Program. (TPLP) 2(6), 721–777 (2002)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Leite, J.A.: Evolving Knowledge Bases. Frontiers of Artificial Intelligence and Applications, xviii + 307 p. Hardcover, vol. 81. IOS Press (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Slota, M., Leite, J.: A unifying perspective on knowledge updates. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds.) JELIA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7519, pp. 372–384. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Wong, K.S.: Forgetting in Logic Programs, Ph.D. thesis. The University of New South Wales (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wang, Y., Wang, K., Zhang, M.: Forgetting for answer set programs revisited. In: Rossi, F. (ed.) Proceedings of IJCAI. IJCAI/AAAI (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Knorr, M., Alferes, J.J.: Preserving strong equivalence while forgetting. In: Fermé, E., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8761, pp. 412–425. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhou, Y., Zhang, M.: Knowledge forgetting in answer set programming. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 50, 31–70 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Delgrande, J.P., Wang, K.: A syntax-independent approach to forgetting in disjunctive logic programs. In: Bonet, B., Koenig, S. (eds.) Proceedings of AAAI, pp. 1482–1488. AAAI Press (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang, Y., Zhou, Y.: Knowledge forgetting: properties and applications. Artif. Intell. 173(16–17), 1525–1537 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Gonçalves, R., Knorr, M., Leite, J.: The ultimate guide to forgetting in ASP. In: Baral, C., Delgrande, J.P., Wolter, F. (eds.) Proceedings of KR, pp. 135–144. AAAI Press (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D., Valverde, A.: Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 2(4), 526–541 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Lifschitz, V., Tang, L.R., Turner, H.: Nested expressions in logic programs. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 25(3–4), 369–389 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Cabalar, P., Ferraris, P.: Propositional theories are strongly equivalent to logic programs. TPLP 7(6), 745–759 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Gonçalves, R., Knorr, M., Leite, J.: You can’t always forget what you want: on the limits of forgetting in answer set programming. In: Fox, M.S., Kaminka, G.A. (eds.) Proceedings of ECAI. IOS Press (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Truszczynski, M.: Reducts of propositional theories, satisfiability relations, and generalizations of semantics of logic programs. Artif. Intell. 174(16–17), 1285–1306 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Alferes, J.J., Knorr, M., Wang, K.: Forgetting under the well-founded semantics. In: Cabalar, P., Son, T.C. (eds.) LPNMR 2013. LNCS, vol. 8148, pp. 36–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Knorr, M., Alferes, J.J., Hitzler, P.: Local closed world reasoning with description logics under the well-founded semantics. Artif. Intell. 175(9–10), 1528–1554 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Gonçalves, R., Alferes, J.J.: Parametrized logic programming. In: Janhunen, T., Niemelä, I. (eds.) JELIA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6341, pp. 182–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Slota, M., Leite, J., Swift, T.: On updates of hybrid knowledge bases composed of ontologies and rules. Artif. Intell. 229, 33–104 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Gonçalves, R., Knorr, M., Leite, J.: Evolving multi-context systems. In: Schaub, T., Friedrich, G., O’Sullivan, B. (eds.) Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 375–380. IOS Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Brewka, G., Ellmauthaler, S., Pührer, J.: Multi-context systems for reactive reasoning in dynamic environments. In: Schaub, T., Friedrich, G., O’Sullivan, B. (eds.) Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 159–164. IOS Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., Kaminski, R., Ostrowski, M., Schaub, T., Schneider, M.T.: Potassco: the potsdam answer set solving collection. AI Commun. 24(2), 107–124 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Ivanov, V., Knorr, M., Leite, J.: A query tool for \(\cal EL\) with non-monotonic rules. In: Alani, H., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8218, pp. 216–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41335-3_14

    Google Scholar 

  33. Costa, N., Knorr, M., Leite, J.: Next step for NoHR: OWL 2 QL. In: Arenas, M., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9366, pp. 569–586. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25007-6_33

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

All authors were partially supported by FCT under strategic project NOVA LINCS (UID/CEC/04516/2013). R. Gonçalves was partially supported by FCT grant SFRH/BPD/100906/2014 and M. Knorr by FCT grant SFRH/BPD/86970/2012.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Knorr .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gonçalves, R., Knorr, M., Leite, J. (2016). Forgetting in ASP: The Forgotten Properties. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_37

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_37

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48757-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48758-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics