Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Relations between Answer Set Programs

  • Chapter
Logic Programming, Knowledge Representation, and Nonmonotonic Reasoning

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 6565))

Abstract

Equivalence and generality relations over logic programs have been proposed in answer set programming to semantically compare information contents of logic programs. In this paper, we overview previous relations of answer set programs, and propose a general framework that subsumes previous relations. The proposed framework allows us to compare programs possibly having non-minimal answer sets as well as to explore new relations between programs. Such new relations include relativized variants of generality relations over logic programs. By selecting contexts for comparison, the proposed framework can represent weak, strong and uniform variants of generality, inclusion and equivalence relations. These new relations can be applied to comparison of abductive logic programs and coordination of multiple answer set programs.

This research is supported in part by the 2008-2011 JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) No.20240016.

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 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ballester, M.A., De Miguel, J.R.: Extending an order to the power set: the leximax criterion. Social Choice and Welfare 21, 63–71 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Cabalar, P., Pearce, D.J., Valverde, A.: Minimal Logic Programs. In: Dahl, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) ICLP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4670, pp. 104–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Delgrande, J., Schaub, T., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Merging Logic Programs under Answer Set Semantics. In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) ICLP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5649, pp. 160–174. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Eiter, T., Fink, M.: Uniform Equivalence of Logic Programs under the Stable Model Semantics. In: Palamidessi, C. (ed.) ICLP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2916, pp. 224–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Strong and uniform equivalence in answer-set programming: characterizations and complexity results for the non-ground case. In: Proceedings AAAI 2005, pp. 695–700 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: Combining answer set programming with description logics for the semantic web. In: Proceedings KR 2004, pp. 141–151. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Eiter, T., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: On solution correspondences in answer-set programming. In: Proceedings IJCAI 2005, pp. 97–102 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ferraris, P.: Answer Sets for Propositional Theories. In: Baral, C., Greco, G., Leone, N., Terracina, G. (eds.) LPNMR 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3662, pp. 119–131. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Proceedings ICLP 1988, pp. 1070–1080. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9, 365–385 (1991)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Gunter, C.A., Scott, D.S.: Semantic domains. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B, pp. 633–674. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Inoue, K.: Hypothetical reasoning in logic programs. J. Logic Programming 18, 191–227 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Inoue, K., Kudoh, Y.: Learning extended logic programs. In: Proceedings IJCAI 1997, pp. 176–181. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Negation as failure in the head. J. Logic Programming 35, 39–78 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Equivalence of Logic Programs Under Updates. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3229, pp. 174–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Equivalence in abductive logic. In: Proceedings IJCAI 2005, pp. 472–477 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Generality Relations in Answer Set Programming. In: Etalle, S., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) ICLP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4079, pp. 211–225. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Generality and equivalence relations in default logic. In: Proceedings AAAI 2007, pp. 434–439 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Comparing abductive theories. In: Proceedings 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 35–39 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kakas, A., Kowalski, R., Toni, F.: The role of abduction in logic programming. In: Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., Robinson, J. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 5, pp. 235–324. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D., Valverde, A.: Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2, 526–541 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D., Valverde, A.: A characterization of strong equivalence for logic programs with variables. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4483, pp. 188–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Lifschitz, V., Tang, L.R., Turner, H.: Nested expressions in logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25, 369–389 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Lifschitz, V., Woo, T.Y.C.: Answer sets in general nonmonotonic reasoning (preliminary report). In: Proceedings KR 1992, pp. 603–614. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lin, F.: Reducing strong equivalence of logic programs to entailment in classical propositional logic. In: Proceedings KR 2002, pp. 170–176 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Maher, M.J.: Equivalence of logic programs. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp. 627–658 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Marek, V.W., Niemelä, I., Truszczyński, M.: Logic programs with monotone abstract constraint atoms. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8, 167–199 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Muggleton, S., de Raedt, L.: Inductive logic programming: theory and methods. J. Logic Programming 19/20, 629–679 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Nienhuys-Cheng, S.-H., de Wolf, R.: Foundations of Inductive Logic Programming. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1228. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Oetsch, J., Tompits, H.: Program correspondence under the answer-set semantics: the non-ground case. In: Garcia de la Banda, M., Pontelli, E. (eds.) ICLP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5366, pp. 591–605. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Oetsch, J., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored: relativised uniform equivalence with answer-set projection. In: Proceedings AAAI 2007, pp. 458–464 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Otero, R.: Induction of stable models. In: Rouveirol, C., Sebag, M. (eds.) ILP 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2157, pp. 193–205. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Pearce, D., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Relativised equivalence in equilibrium logic and its applications to prediction and explanation: preliminary report. In: Proceedings LPNMR 2007 Workshop on Correspondence and Equivalence for Nonmonotonic Theories, pp. 37–48 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Plotkin, G.D.: A note on inductive generalization. In: Meltzer, B., Michie, D. (eds.) Machine Intelligence, vol. 5, pp. 153–163. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pührer, J., Tompits, H.: Casting Away Disjunction and Negation under a Generalisation of Strong Equivalence with Projection. In: Erdem, E., Lin, F., Schaub, T. (eds.) LPNMR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5753, pp. 264–276. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Reiter, R.: A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13, 81–132 (1980)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Sagiv, Y.: Optimizing datalog programs. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp. 659–668 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sakama, C.: Ordering default theories and nonmonotonic logic programs. Theoretical Computer Science 338, 127–152 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Sakama, C.: Induction from answer sets in nonmonotonic logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 6, 203–221 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Sakama, C., Inoue, K.: An alternative approach to the semantics of disjunctive logic programs and deductive databases. J. Automated Reasoning 13, 145–172 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Sakama, C., Inoue, K.: Prioritized logic programming and its application to commonsense reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 123, 185–222 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Sakama, C., Inoue, K.: Combining Answer Sets of Nonmonotonic Logic Programs. In: Toni, F., Torroni, P. (eds.) CLIMA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3900, pp. 320–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Sakama, C., Inoue, K.: Constructing Consensus Logic Programs. In: Puebla, G. (ed.) LOPSTR 2006. LNCS, vol. 4407, pp. 26–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Sakama, C., Inoue, K.: Coordination in answer set programming. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 9(2), A9 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Sakama, C., Inoue, K.: Brave induction: a logical framework for learning from incomplete information. Machine Learning 76(1), 3–35 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Simons, P., Niemelä, I., Soininen, T.: Extending and implementing the stable model semantics. Artificial Intelligence 138, 181–234 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Son, T.C., Pontelli, E., Tu, P.H.: Answer sets for logic programs with arbitrary abstract constraint atoms. J. Artificial Intelligence Research 29, 353–389 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Truszczyński, M., Woltran, S.: Hyperequivalence of logic programs with respect to supported models. In: Proceedings AAAI 2008, pp. 560–565 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Woltran, S.: Characterizations for Relativized Notions of Equivalence in Answer Set Programming. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3229, pp. 161–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  50. Woltran, S.: A common view on strong, uniform, and other notions of equivalence in answer set programming. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8, 217–234 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Wong, K.-S.: Sound and complete inference rules for SE-consequences. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 31, 205–216 (2008)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. Zhou, Y., Zhang, Y.: Rule Calculus: Semantics, Axioms and Applications. In: Hölldobler, S., Lutz, C., Wansing, H. (eds.) JELIA 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5293, pp. 416–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Informatics, 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-8430, Japan

    Katsumi Inoue

  2. Department of Computer and Communication Sciences, Wakayama University, Sakaedani, Wakayama, 640-8510, Japan

    Chiaki Sakama

Authors
  1. Katsumi Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chiaki Sakama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA

    Marcello Balduccini

  2. Department of Computer Science, New Mexico State University, 88003, Las Cruces, NM, USA

    Tran Cao Son

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Inoue, K., Sakama, C. (2011). Exploring Relations between Answer Set Programs. In: Balduccini, M., Son, T.C. (eds) Logic Programming, Knowledge Representation, and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6565. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20832-4_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20832-4_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-20831-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-20832-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation