Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conflict, Consistency and Truth-Dependencies in Graph Representations of Answer Set Logic Programs

  • Conference paper
Graph Structures for Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7205))

  • 649 Accesses

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a formalization of the features that a graph representation of logic programs under the answers set semantics should in our opinion exhibit in order to be a satisfactory and useful representation formalism. We introduce a concept of isomorphism (or structural equivalence) between a program and its corresponding graph. We argue that isomorphic representations can be a good software engineering tool for understanding program behavior, for checking consistency, for being able to create, debug and combine good programs, and for developing program analysis techniques.

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. Anger, C., Schaub, T., Truszczyński, M.: ASPARAGUS – the Dagstuhl Initiative. ALP Newsletter 17(3) (2004), http://asparagus.cs.uni-potsdam.de

  2. Anger, C., Konczak, K., Linke, T.: NoMoRe: A System for Non-Monotonic Reasoning under Answer Set Semantics. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2173, pp. 406–410. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Apt, K.R., Bol, R.N.: Logic programming and negation: A survey. J. of Logic Programming 19/20, 9–72 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baral, C.: Knowledge representation, reasoning and declarative problem solving. Cambridge University Press (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berge, G.: Graphs and Hypergraphs. North Holland, Amsterdam (1973)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Brignoli, G., Costantini, S., D’Antona, O., Provetti, A.: Characterizing and computing stable models of logic programs: the non–stratified case. In: Proc. of Conference on Information Technology, Bhubaneswar, India (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bruynooghe, M.: A practical framework for the abstract interpretation of logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming 10(2), 91 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruynooghe, M., Janssens, G.: Propagation: A New Operation in a Framework for Abstract Interpretation of Logic Programs. In: Pettorossi, A. (ed.) META 1992. LNCS, vol. 649, pp. 294–307. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Costantini, S.: Contributions to the stable model semantics of logic programs with negation. Theoretical Computer Science 149 (1995) (prelim. version in Proc. of LPNMR 1993)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Costantini, S.: Comparing different graph representations of logic programs under the answer set semantics, technical Report, University of L’ Aquila (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Costantini, S.: On the existence of stable models of non-stratified logic programs. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 6(1-2) (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Costantini, S., Intrigila, B., Provetti, A.: Coherence of updates in answer set programming. In: Brewka, G., Peppas, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the IJCAI 2003 Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Action and Change, NRAC 2003 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Costantini, S., Provetti, A.: Normal forms for answer sets programming. J. on Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 5(6) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Costantini, S., Provetti, A.: Normal forms for Answer Sets Programming. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 5(6), 747–760 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Delgrande, J.P., Faber, W. (eds.): LPNMR 2011. LNCS, vol. 6645. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Dimopoulos, Y., Torres, A.: Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories. Theoretical Computer Science 170, 209–244 (1996)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Febbraro, O., Reale, K., Ricca, F.: Aspide: Integrated development environment for answer set programming. In: Delgrande, Faber [15], pp. 317–330

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gebser, M., Schaub, T.: Loops: Relevant or Redundant? In: Baral, C., Greco, G., Leone, N., Terracina, G. (eds.) LPNMR 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3662, pp. 53–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Kowalski, R., Bowen, K. (eds.) Proc. of the 5th Intl. Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pp. 1070–1080. The MIT Press (1988)

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gelfond, M.: Answer sets. In: Handbook of Knowledge Representation, ch. 7. Elsevier (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hermenegildo, M.V., Puebla, G., Marriott, K., Stuckey, P.J.: Incremental analysis of constraint logic programs. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 22(2), 187–223 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Konczak, K., Schaub, T., Linke, T.: Graphs and colorings for answer set programming: Abridged report. In: Vos, M.D., Provetti, A. (eds.) Answer Set Programming: Advances in Theory and Implementation, ASP 2003. The CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 78 (2003), http://eur-ws.org/Vol-78/

  24. Leone, N.: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning: From Theory to Systems and Applications. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4483, p. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Lifschitz, V.: Answer set planning. In: Proc. of the 16th Intl. Conference on Logic Programming, pp. 23–37 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lifschitz, V., Razborov, A.: Why are there so many loop formulas? ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 7 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lin, F., Zhao, X.: On odd and even cycles in normal logic programs. In: McGuinness, D.L., Ferguson, G. (eds.) AAAI, pp. 80–85. AAAI Press/The MIT Press (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Linke, T.: Graph theoretical characterization and computation of answer sets. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2001 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Marek, V.W., Truszczyński, M.: Autoepistemic logic. Journal of the ACM 38(3), 587–618 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Marek, V.W., Truszczyński, M.: Stable logic programming - an alternative logic programming paradigm, pp. 375–398. Springer, Berlin (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Oetsch, J., Pührer, J., Seidl, M., Tompits, H., Zwickl, P.: Videas: A development tool for answer-set programs based on model-driven engineering technology. In: Delgrande, Faber [15], pp. 382–387

    Google Scholar 

  33. Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.C.: Semantic issues in deductive databases and logic programs (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Tip, F.: A survey of program slicing techniques. Journal of Programming Languages 3(3), 121–189 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Truszczyński, M.: Logic Programming for Knowledge Representation. In: Dahl, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) ICLP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4670, pp. 76–88. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. VanGelder, A., Ross, K.A., Schlipf, J.: The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. Journal of the ACM 38(3), 620–650 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dip. d’Informatica, Università di L’Aquila, Italy

    Stefania Costantini

  2. Dip. di Fisica, Sez. d’Informatica, Università di Messina, Italy

    Alessandro Provetti

Authors
  1. Stefania Costantini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandro Provetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University Montpellier II, 161 rue Ada, 34095, Montpellier, France

    Madalina Croitoru

  2. Karlsruhe Institue of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Sebastian Rudolph

  3. 4C Computater Science, University College Cork, Western Road, Cork, Ireland

    Nic Wilson

  4. School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, University of Brighton, Lewes Road, BN2 4GJ, Brighton, UK

    John Howse

  5. INRIA, 2004 route des Lucioles, 6902, Sophia Antipolis, France

    Olivier Corby

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Costantini, S., Provetti, A. (2012). Conflict, Consistency and Truth-Dependencies in Graph Representations of Answer Set Logic Programs. In: Croitoru, M., Rudolph, S., Wilson, N., Howse, J., Corby, O. (eds) Graph Structures for Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7205. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29449-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29449-5_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29448-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29449-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation