Lian Wen
Abstract
The critical behaviors of NP-complete problems have been studied extensively, and numerous results have been obtained for Boolean formula satisfiability (SAT) and constraint satisfaction (CSP), among others. However, few results are known for the critical behaviors of NP-hard nonmonotonic reasoning problems so far; in particular, a mathematical model for phase transition in nonmonotonic reasoning is still missing. In this article, we investigate the phase transition of negative two-literal logic programs under the answer-set semantics. We choose this class of logic programs since it is the simplest class for which the consistency problem of deciding if a program has an answer set is still NP-complete. We first introduce a new model, called quadratic model for generating random logic programs in this class. We then mathematically prove that the consistency problem for this class of logic programs exhibits a phase transition. Furthermore, the phase-transition follows an easy-hard-easy pattern. Given the correspondence between answer sets for negative two-literal programs and kernels for graphs, as a corollary, our result significantly generalizes de la Vega's well-known theorem for phase transition on the existence of kernels in random graphs. We also report some experimental results. Given our mathematical results, these experimental results are not really necessary. We include them here as they suggest that our phase-transition result is more general and likely holds for more general classes of logic programs.
- D. Achlioptas. 2008. Random satisfiability. In Handbook of Satisfiability. A. Biere, M. Heule, H. Van Maaren, T. Walsh, (Eds.). IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 234--268.Google Scholar
- D. Achlioptas, L. Kirousis, E. Kranakis, D. Krizanc, M. Molloy, and Y. Stamatiou. 1997. Random constraint satisfaction: A more accurate picture. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP’97). 107--120.Google Scholar
- D. Achlioptas, A. Naor, and Y. Peres. 2005. Rigorous location of phase transitions in hard optimization problems. Nature 435, 7043, 759--764.Google Scholar
- H. Blair, F. Dushin, D. Jakel, D. Rivera, and M. Sezgin. 1999. Continuous models of computation for logic programs: Importing continuous mathematics into logic programming’s algorithmic foundations. In The Logic Programming Paradigm. 231--255.Google Scholar
- P. Cheeseman, B. Kanefsky, and W. M. Taylor. 1991. Where the really hard problems are. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’91). 331--340. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. de la Vega. 1990. Kernels in random graphs. Discrete Mathematics 82, 2, 213--217. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Franco. 2001. Results related to threshold phenomena research in satifiability: lower bounds. Theoretic Computer Science 265, 147--157. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Gebser, B. Kaufmann, and T. Schaub. 2009. The conflict-driven answer set solver clasp: Progress report. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR’09). 509--514. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, and Torsten Schaub. 2012. Conflict-driven answer set solving: From theory to practice. Artificial Intelligence 187, 52--89. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. 1988. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference and Symposium of Logic Programming (ICLP’88). 1070--1080.Google Scholar
- I. Gent and T. Walsh. 1994. The SAT phase transition. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 94). 105--109.Google Scholar
- R. Graham, D. Knuth, and O. Patashnik. 1994. Concrete Mathematics, A Foundation for Computer Science (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, New York, NY. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Huang, X. Jia, C. Liau, and J. You. 2002. Two-literal logic programs and satisfiability representation of stable models: A comparison. In Proceedings of the 15th Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 119--131. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Huberman and T. Hogg. 1987. Phase transitions in artificial intelligence systems. Artificial Intelligence 33, 2, 155--171. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Janhunen. 2006. Some (in)translatability results for normal logic programs and propositional theories. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 1--2, 35--86.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Karonski and T. Luczak. 1996. Random hypergraphs. In Combinatorics, Paul Erdos is Eighty, Vol. 2. 283--293.Google Scholar
- S. Kirkpatrick and B. Selman. 2005. Critical behavior in the satisfiability of random Boolean expressions. Science 264, 759--764.Google Scholar
- N. Leone, G. Pfeifer, W. Faber, T. Eiter, G. Gottlob, S. Perri, and F. Scarcello. 2006. The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 7, 3, 499--562. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Z. Lonc and M. Truszczynski. 2005. Computing stable models: Worst-case performance estimates. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4, 1--2, 193--231. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Marek and M. Truszczynski. 1991. Autoepistemic logic. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 38, 3, 588--619. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Marek and M. Truszczynski. 1993. Nonmonotonic Logic: Context-Dependent Reasoning. Springer, New York, NY. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Mitchell, B. Selman, and H. Levesque. 1992. Hard and easy distributions of SAT problems. In Proceedings of the 10th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’92). 459--465. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Monasson, R. Zecchina, S. Kirkpatrick, B. Selman, and L. Troyansky. 1999. 2+p-SAT: Relation of typical-case complexity to the nature of the phase transition. Random Structures and Algorithms 15, 3--4, 414--435. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Namasivayam and M. Truszczynski. 2009. Simple random logic programs. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR’09). 223--235. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Schlipf, M. Truszczynski, and D. Wong. 2005. On the distribution of programs with stable models. In 05171 Abstracts Collection - Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Answer Set Programming and Constraints.Google Scholar
- Patrik Simons, Ilkka Niemelä, and Timo Soininen. 2002. Extending and implementing the stable model semantics. Artificial Intelligence 138, 1--2, 181--234. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Syrjänen and I. Niemelä. 2001. The smodels system. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR’01). 434--438. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Wang, L. Wen, and K. Mu. 2015. Random logic programs: Linear model. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 15.Google Scholar
- Y. Zhao and F. Lin. 2003. Answer set programming phase transition: A study on randomly generated programs. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP’03). 239--253.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- A Model for Phase Transition of Random Answer-Set Programs
Recommendations
Disjunctive logic programs, answer sets, and the cut rule
AbstractIn Minker and Rajasekar (J Log Program 9(1):45–74, 1990), Minker proposed a semantics for negation-free disjunctive logic programs that offers a natural generalisation of the fixed point semantics for definite logic programs. We show that this ...
Induction from answer sets in nonmonotonic logic programs
Inductive logic programming (ILP) realizes inductive machine learning in computational logic. However, the present ILP mostly handles classical clausal programs, especially Horn logic programs, and has limited applications to learning nonmonotonic logic ...
New models for generating hard random boolean formulas and disjunctive logic programs
AbstractWe propose two models of random quantified boolean formulas and their natural random disjunctive logic program counterparts. The models extend the standard models of random k-CNF formulas and the Chen-Interian model of random 2QBFs. ...
Comments