Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Abduction, argumentation and bi-disjunctive logic programs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic Programming and Knowledge Representation (LPKR 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1471))

Abstract

We study the relationship between argumentation (abduction) and disjunctive logic programming. Based on the paradigm of argumentation, an abductive semantic framework for disjunctive logic programming is presented, in which the disjunctions of negative literals are taken as possible assumptions rather than only negative literals as the case of non-disjunctive logic programming. In our framework, three semantics PDH, CDH and WFDH are defined by three kinds of acceptable hypotheses to represent credulous reasoning, moderate reasoning and skeptical reasoning in AI, respectively. On the other hand, our semantic framework could be established in a broader class than that of disjunctive programs (called bi-disjunctive logic programs) and, hence, the corresponding abductive framework is abbreviated as BDAS (Bi-Disjunctive Argumentation-theoretic Semantics). Besides its rich expressive power and nondeterminism, BDAS integrates and naturally extends many key semantics, such as the minimal models, EGCWA, the well-founded model, and the stable models. In particular, a novel and interesting argumentation-theoretic characterization of EGCWA is shown. Thus the framework in this paper does not only provides a new way of performing argumentation (abduction) in disjunctive logic programming, but also is a simple, intuitive and unifying semantic framework for disjunctive logic programming.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Apt,K., Blair,H., and Walker,A., “ Towards a theory of declarative knowledge”, in Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, pp.89–148, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alfereira,J. and Pereira,L., “An argumentation theoretic semantics based on nonrefutable falsity.”, in Proceedings of International Workshop on Nonmonotonic Extensions of Logic Programming (LNCS), 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aravindan,C., “An abductive framework for negation in disjunctive logic programming,” Tech. report, University of Koblenz-Landau, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baral,C., Lobo,J., and Minker,J., “Generalized disjunctive well-founded semantics for logic programs.” Annals of Math and AI, 5, pp.89–132, 1992

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonatti,P., “Autoepistemic logics as a unifying framework for the semantics of logic programs”, in Proceedings of the Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp.69–86, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bondarenko,A., Toni,F. and Kowalski,R., “An assumption-based framework for non-monotonic reasoning,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on LNMR, MIT Press, pp.171–189, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brass, S. and Dix J. Semantics of disjunctive logic programs based on partial evaluation. Journal of Logic Programming (to appear), 1998. Extended abstract appeared in Disjunctive semantics based upon partial and bottom-up evaluation. In Proceedings of the 12th International Logic Programming Conference, MIT Press, pp.199–213, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brass,S. and Dix J. Characterizations of the disjunctive stable semantics by partial evaluation. Journal of Logic Programming, 32(3), pp.207–228, 1997. Extended abstract appeared in: Characterizations of the stable semantics by partial evaluation, in LPNMR, Proceedings of the Third International Conference (LNCS928), Springer, pp.85–98, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Brass,S. and Dix J. Characterizations of the disjunctive well-founded semantics: confluent calculi and iterated GCWA. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 20(1), pp.143–165, 1998. Extended abstract appeared in: Characterizing DWFS: Confluence and Iterated GCWA, in Logics in Artificial Intelligence, JELIA '96 (LNCS 1126), Springer, pp. 268–283, 1996.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Brass, S., Dix, J. and Przymusinki,T., “Super logic programs,” in Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference (KR '96), (L. C. Aiello and J. Doyle and S. C. Shapiro, editors), Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 529–541, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brewka,G., “An abductive framework for generalized logic programs,” in Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (Marek, W. and Subrahmanian,V. eds.), MIT Press, pp. 266–282, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bry, F., “Negation in logic programming: A formalization in constructive logic,” in Information Systems and Artificial Intelligence: Integration Aspects (Karagiannis D. ed.), Springer, pp.30–46, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dung, P., Kanchansut K., “A fixpoint approach to declarative semantics of logic programs,” in Proceedings of North American Conference (Lusk E. and Overbeek R. eds.), MIT Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dung,P., “Negation as hypothesis: an abductive foundation to logic programming,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp.3–17, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dung,P., “An argumentation-theoretic foundation for logic programming,” J. Logic Programming, 24, pp.151–177, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dung,P., “On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental roles in nonmonotonic reasoning and n-person games”, Artificial Intelligence, 77, pp.321–357, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Eshghi,K. and Kowalski,R., “Abduction compared with negation by failure,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp.234–255, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gelfond,M. and Lifschitz,J., “The stable model semantics for logic programming,” in Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp.1070–1080, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  19. van Gelder,A., Ross,K. and Schlipf,J., “Unfounded sets and well-founded semantics for general logic programs,” in Proceedings of the 7th ACM Symposium on Principles Of Database Systems, pp.221–230, 1988. Full version in J. ACM, 38, pp.620–650, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kakas,A., Kowalski,R. and Toni,F., “Abductive logic programming,” J. Logic and Computation, 2, pp.719–770, 1992.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Kakas,A. and Mancarella,P., “Generalized stable models: a semantics for abduction,” in Proceedings of the 9th European Conference Artificial Intelligence, pp.385–391, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kakas,A. and Mancarella,P., “Negation as stable hypotheses,” in Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (Marek, W. and Subrahmanian,V. eds.), MIT Press, pp.275–288, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lifschitz,V. and Turner,H., “From disjunctive programs to abduction,” in Proceedings of the Workshop on Nonmonotonic Extensions of Logic Programming, (Dix, J., Pereira, L. and Przymunski, T. eds.), pp.111–125, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lobo,J., Minker,J. and Rajasekar,A., Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming, MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Minker,J., “On indefinite databases and the closed world assumption”, in LNCS 138, Springer, pp.292–308, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Minker,J., “Overview of disjunctive logic programming,” Ann. Math. AI., 12, pp.1–24, 1994.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Minker,J. and Rajasekar,A., A fixed point semantics for disjunctive logic programs,” J. Logic Programming, 9, 45–74, 1990.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Przymunski,T., “Stable semantics for disjunctive programs,” New Generation Computing, 9, pp.401–424, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Przymunski,T., “Stationary semantics for disjunctive logic programs and deductive databases,” in Proceedings of the North American Conference on Logic Programming (Debray, S. and Hemenegildo, M. eds.), MIT Press, pp.42–59, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Przymunski,T., “Static semantics of logic programs,” Ann. Math. AI., 14, 323–357, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rajasekar,A., Lobo,J., and Minker,J., “Weak Generalized Closed World assumption”, Journal of Automated Reasoning, 5, pp.293–307, 1989.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Ross,K. “Well-founded semantics for disjunctive logic programming.” Proceedings of the first Conference on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, pp.337–351, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sakama,C., “Possible model semantics for disjunctive databases”, in Proc. the First Int'l Conf. on Deductive and Object Oriented Databases, pp.1055–1060, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sakama,C. and Inoue,K., “On the equivalence between disjunctive and abductive logic programming,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Logic Programming (Van Hentenryck ed.), MIT Press, pp.489–503, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tarski,A., “A lattice-theoretic fixpoint theorem and its applications,” Pacific J. Math., 5, pp.285–309, 1955.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Torres,A., “Negation as failure to support,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (Marek, W. and Subrahmanian, V. eds.), MIT Press, pp.223–243, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Torres,A., “A nondeterministic semantics,” J. Math. AI., 14, pp.37–73, 1995.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Wang,K., “Abduction and Disjunctive Logic Programming,” Ph. D. Thesis (in Chinese, Abstract in English), Nankai University, March 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wang,K., “An argumentation-based semantic framework for bi-disjunctive logic programs,” Tech. report NUDT97-14, Changsha Institute of Technology, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wang,K., Chen,H. and Wu,Q., “The least fixpoint transformation for disjunctive logic programs,” Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 13(3), pp.193–201.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Yahya,A. and Henschen,L., “Deduction in non-Horn databases,” J. Automated Reasoning, 1, pp.141–160, 1985.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer, Changsha Institute of Technology, 410073, P.R. China

    Kewen Wang & Huowang Chen

Authors
  1. Kewen Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huowang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Jürgen Dix Luís Moniz Pereira Teodor C. Przymusinski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wang, K., Chen, H. (1998). Abduction, argumentation and bi-disjunctive logic programs. In: Dix, J., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinski, T.C. (eds) Logic Programming and Knowledge Representation. LPKR 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1471. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0054794

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0054794

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-64958-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49872-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation