We study properties of programs with monotone and convex constraints. We extend to these formalisms concepts and results from normal logic programming. They include the notions of strong and uniform equivalence with their characterizations, tight programs and Fages Lemma, program completion and loop formulas. Our results provide an abstract account of properties of some recent extensions of logic programming with aggregates, especially the formalism of lparse programs. They imply a method to compute stable models of lparse programs by means of off-the-shelf solvers of pseudo-boolean constraints, which is often much faster than the smodels system.
flp04 developed the theory of disjunctive logic programs with aggregates. Similarly as p04 and pdb06 , flp04 do not allow for aggregates to appear in the heads of program clauses. This is one of the differences between that approach and programs with monotone (convex) constraints we studied here. The other major difference is related to the postulate of the minimality of stable models (called answer sets in the context of the formalism considered by flp04 ). In keeping with the spirit of the original answer-set semantics @cite_24 , answer sets of disjunctive programs with aggregates, as defined by flp04 , are minimal models. Stable models of programs with abstract constraints do not have this property. However, for the class of programs with abstract monotone constraints with the heads of rules of the form @math the semantics of answer sets defined by flp04 coincides with the semantics of stable models by mt04 and mnt03,mnt06 .
@cite_24
2076698873
The addition of aggregates has been one of the most relevant enhancements to the language of answer set programming (ASP). They strengthen the modelling power of ASP in terms of natural and concise problem representations. Previous semantic definitions typically agree in the case of non-recursive aggregates, but the picture is less clear for aggregates involved in recursion. Some proposals explicitly avoid recursive aggregates, most others differ, and many of them do not satisfy desirable criteria, such as minimality or coincidence with answer sets in the aggregate-free case. In this paper we define a semantics for programs with arbitrary aggregates (including monotone, antimonotone, and nonmonotone aggregates) in the full ASP language allowing also for disjunction in the head (disjunctive logic programming - DLP). This semantics is a genuine generalization of the answer set semantics for DLP, it is defined by a natural variant of the Gelfond-Lifschitz transformation, and treats aggregate and non-aggregate literals in a uniform way. This novel transformation is interesting per se also in the aggregate-free case, since it is simpler than the original transformation and does not need to differentiate between positive and negative literals. We prove that our semantics guarantees the minimality (and therefore the incomparability) of answer sets, and we demonstrate that it coincides with the standard answer set semantics on aggregate-free programs. Moreover, we carry out an in-depth study of the computational complexity of the language. The analysis pays particular attention to the impact of syntactical restrictions on programs in the form of limited use of aggregates, disjunction, and negation. While the addition of aggregates does not affect the complexity of the full DLP language, it turns out that their presence does increase the complexity of normal (i.e., non-disjunctive) ASP programs up to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. However, we show that there are large classes of aggregates the addition of which does not cause any complexity gap even for normal programs, including the fragment allowing for arbitrary monotone, arbitrary antimonotone, and stratified (i.e., non-recursive) nonmonotone aggregates. The analysis provides some useful indications on the possibility to implement aggregates in existing reasoning engines. In recent years, Answer Set Programming ASP, logic programming under the stable model or answer set semantics, has seen several extensions by generalizing the notion of an atom in these programs: be it aggregate atoms, HEX atoms, generalized quantifiers, or abstract constraints, the idea is to have more complicated satisfaction patterns in the lattice of Herbrand interpretations than traditional, simple atoms. In this paper we refer to any of these constructs as generalized atoms. It is known that programs with generalized atoms that have monotonic or antimonotonic satisfaction patterns do not increase complexity with respect to programs with simple atoms if satisfaction of the generalized atoms can be decided in polynomial time under most semantics. It is also known that generalized atoms that are nonmonotonic being neither monotonic nor antimonotonic can, but need not, increase the complexity by one level in the polynomial hierarchy if non-disjunctive programs under the FLP semantics are considered. In this paper we provide the precise boundary of this complexity gap: programs with convex generalized atom never increase complexity, while allowing a single non-convex generalized atom under reasonable conditions always does. We also discuss several implications of this result in practice. Aggregates are functions that take sets as arguments. Examples are the function that maps a set to the number of its elements or the function which maps a set to its minimal element. Aggregates are frequently used in relational databases and have many applications in combinatorial search problems and knowledge representation. Aggregates are of particular importance for several extensions of logic programming which are used for declarative programming like Answer Set Programming, Abductive Logic Programming, and the logic of inductive definitions (ID-Logic). Aggregate atoms not only allow a broader class of problems to be represented in a natural way but also allow a more compact representation of problems which often leads to faster solving times. Extensions of specific semantics of logic programs with, in many cases, specific aggregate relations have been proposed before. The main contributions of this thesis are: (i) we extend all major semantics of logic programs: the least model semantics of definite logic programs, the standard model semantics of stratified programs, the Clark completion semantics, the well-founded semantics, the stable models semantics, and the three-valued stable semantics; (ii) our framework admits arbitrary aggregate relations in the bodies of rules. We follow a denotational approach in which a semantics is defined as a (set of) fixpoint(s) of an operator associated with a program. The main tool of this work is Approximation Theory. This is an algebraic theory which defines different types of fixpoints of an approximating operator associated with a logic program. All major semantics of a logic program correspond to specific types of fixpoints of an approximating operator introduced by Fitting. We study different approximating operators for aggregate programs and investigate the precision and complexity of the semantics generated by them. We study in detail one specific operator which extends the Fitting operator and whose semantics extends the three-valued stable semantics of logic programs without aggregates. We look at algorithms, complexity, transformations of aggregate atoms and programs, and an implementation in XSB Prolog. This paper addresses complexity issues for important problems arising with disjunctive logic programming. In particular, the complexity of deciding whether a disjunctive logic program is consistent is investigated for a variety of well-known semantics, as well as the complexity of deciding whether a propositional formula is satisfied by all models according to a given semantics. We concentrate on finite propositional disjunctive programs with as well as without integrity constraints, i.e., clauses with empty heads; the problems are located in appropriate slots of the polynomial hierarchy. In particular, we show that the consistency check is Σ 2 p -complete for the disjunctive stable model semantics (in the total as well as partial version), the iterated closed world assumption, and the perfect model semantics, and we show that the inference problem for these semantics is Π 2 p -complete; analogous results are derived for the answer sets semantics of extended disjunctive logic programs. Besides, we generalize previously derived complexity results for the generalized closed world assumption and other more sophisticated variants of the closed world assumption. Furthermore, we use the close ties between the logic programming framework and other nonmonotonic formalisms to provide new complexity results for disjunctive default theories and disjunctive autoepistemic literal theories. We investigate mca-programs, that is, logic programs with clauses built of monotone cardinality atoms of the form kX, where k is a non-negative integer and X is a finite set of propositional atoms. We develop a theory of mca-programs. We demonstrate that the operational concept of the one-step provability operator generalizes to mca-programs, but the generalization involves nondeterminism. Our main results show that the formalism of mca-programs is a common generalization of (1) normal logic programming with its semantics of models, supported models and stable models, (2) logic programming with cardinality atoms and with the semantics of stable models, as defined by Niemela, Simons and Soininen, and (3) of disjunctive logic programming with the possible-model semantics of Sakama and Inoue. Equilibrium logic, introduced by David Pearce, extends the concept of an answer set from logic programs to arbitrary sets of formulas. Logic programs correspond to the special case in which every formula is a “rule” — an implication that has no implications in the antecedent (body) and consequent (head). The semantics of equilibrium logic looks very different from the usual definitions of an answer set in logic programming, as it is based on Kripke models. In this paper we propose a new definition of equilibrium logic which uses the concept of a reduct, as in the standard definition of an answer set. Second, we apply the generalized concept of an answer set to the problem of defining the semantics of aggregates in answer set programming. We propose, in particular, a semantics for weight constraints that covers the problematic case of negative weights. Our semantics of aggregates is an extension of the approach due to Faber, Leone, and Pfeifer to a language with choice rules and, more generally, arbitrary rules with nested expressions. We introduce the stable model semantics fordisjunctive logic programs and deductive databases, which generalizes the stable model semantics, defined earlier for normal (i.e., non-disjunctive) programs. Depending on whether only total (2-valued) or all partial (3-valued) models are used we obtain thedisjunctive stable semantics or thepartial disjunctive stable semantics, respectively. The proposed semantics are shown to have the following properties: • For normal programs, the disjunctive (respectively, partial disjunctive) stable semantics coincides with thestable (respectively,partial stable) semantics. • For normal programs, the partial disjunctive stable semantics also coincides with thewell-founded semantics. • For locally stratified disjunctive programs both (total and partial) disjunctive stable semantics coincide with theperfect model semantics. • The partial disjunctive stable semantics can be generalized to the class ofall disjunctive logic programs. • Both (total and partial) disjunctive stable semantics can be naturally extended to a broader class of disjunctive programs that permit the use ofclassical negation. • After translation of the programP into a suitable autoepistemic theory ( P ) the disjunctive (respectively, partial disjunctive) stable semantics ofP coincides with the autoepistemic (respectively, 3-valued autoepistemic) semantics of ( P ) . Logic programs with ordered disjunction (LPODs) combine ideas underlying Qualitative Choice Logic (Brewka, Benferhat, & Le Berre 2002) and answer set programming. Logic programming under answer set semantics is extended with a new connective called ordered disjunction. The new connective allows us to represent alternative, ranked options for problem solutions in the heads of rules: A × B intuitively means: if possible A, but if A is not possible then at least B. The semantics of logic programs with ordered disjunction is based on a preference relation on answer sets. LPODs are useful for applications in design and configuration and can serve as a basis for qualitative decision making. We propose and study extensions of logic programming with constraints represented as generalized atoms of the form C(X), where X is a finite set of atoms and C is an abstract constraint (formally, a collection of sets of atoms). Atoms C(X) are satisfied by an interpretation (set of atoms) M, if M ∩ X ∈ C. We focus here on monotone constraints, that is, those collections C that are closed under the superset. They include, in particular, weight (or pseudo-boolean) constraints studied both by the logic programming and SAT communities. We show that key concepts of the theory of normal logic programs such as the one-step provability operator, the semantics of supported and stable models, as well as several of their properties including complexity results, can be lifted to such case. Answer set programming (ASP) with disjunction offers a powerful tool for declaratively representing and solving hard problems. Many NP-complete problems can be encoded in the answer set semantics of logic programs in a very concise and intuitive way, where the encoding reflects the typical “guess and check” nature of NP problems: The property is encoded in a way such that polynomial size certificates for it correspond to stable models of a program. However, the problem-solving capacity of full disjunctive logic programs (DLPs) is beyond NP, and captures a class of problems at the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. While these problems also have a clear “guess and check” structure, finding an encoding in a DLP reflecting this structure may sometimes be a non-obvious task, in particular if the “check” itself is a co-NP-complete problem; usually, such problems are solved by interleaving separate guess and check programs, where the check is expressed by inconsistency of the check program. In this paper, we present general transformations of head-cycle free (extended) disjunctive logic programs into stratified and positive (extended) disjunctive logic programs based on meta-interpretation techniques. The answer sets of the original and the transformed program are in simple correspondence, and, moreover, inconsistency of the original program is indicated by a designated answer set of the transformed program. Our transformations facilitate the integration of separate “guess” and “check” programs, which are often easy to obtain, automatically into a single disjunctive logic program. Our results complement recent results on meta-interpretation in ASP, and extend methods and techniques for a declarative “guess and check” problem solving paradigm through ASP. A novel logic program like language, weight constraint rules, is developed for answer set programming purposes. It generalizes normal logic programs by allowing weight constraints in place of literals to represent, e.g., cardinality and resource constraints and by providing optimization capabilities. A declarative semantics is developed which extends the stable model semantics of normal programs. The computational complexity of the language is shown to be similar to that of normal programs under the stable model semantics. A simple embedding of general weight constraint rules to a small subclass of the language called basic constraint rules is devised. An implementation of the language, the SMODELS system, is developed based on this embedding. It uses a two level architecture consisting of a front-end and a kernel language implementation. The front-end allows restricted use of variables and functions and compiles general weight constraint rules to basic constraint rules. A major part of the work is the development of an efficient search procedure for computing stable models for this kernel language. The procedure is compared with and empirically tested against satisfiability checkers and an implementation of the stable model semantics. It offers a competitive implementation of the stable model semantics for normal programs and attractive performance for problems where the new types of rules provide a compact representation. In this paper, we propose an extension of the well-founded and stable model semantics for logic programs with aggregates. Our approach uses Approximation Theory, a fixpoint theory of stable and well-founded fixpoints of non-monotone operators in a complete lattice. We define the syntax of logic programs with aggregates and define the immediate consequence operator of such programs. We investigate the well-founded and stable semantics generated by Approximation Theory. We show that our approach extends logic programs with stratified aggregation and that it correctly deals with well-known benchmark problems such as the shortest path program and the company control problem. Answer set programming (ASP) is a logic programming paradigm that can be used to solve complex combinatorial search problems. Aggregates are an ASP construct that plays an important role in many applications. Defining a satisfactory semantics of aggregates turned out to be a difficult problem, and in this article we propose a new approach, based on an analogy between aggregates and propositional connectives. First we extend the definition of an answer set stable model to cover arbitrary propositional theories; then we define aggregates on top of them both as primitive constructs and as abbreviations for formulas. Our definition of an aggregate combines expressiveness and simplicity, and it inherits many theorems about programs with nested expressions, such as theorems about strong equivalence and splitting. Current literature offers a number of different approaches to what could generally be called “probabilistic logic programming”. These are usually based on Horn clauses. Here, we introduce a new formalism, Logic Programs with Annotated Disjunctions, based on disjunctive logic programs. In this formalism, each of the disjuncts in the head of a clause is annotated with a probability. Viewing such a set of probabilistic disjunctive clauses as a probabilistic disjunction of normal logic programs allows us to derive a possible world semantics, more precisely, a probability distribution on the set of all Herbrand interpretations. We demonstrate the strength of this formalism by some examples and compare it to related work. Among others, (1998) presented an approach for updating logic programs with sets of rules based on dynamic logic programs. We syntactically redefine dynamic logic programs and investigate their semantical properties, looking at them from perspectives such as a belief revision and abstract consequence relation view. Since the approach does not respect minimality of change, we refine its stable model semantics and present minimal stable models and strict stable models. We also compare the update approach to related work, and find that is equivalent to a class of inheritance programs independently defined by (1999). In this work we propose a semantically well-founded extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with aggregates, which relies on the integration between answer set solvers and constraint logic programming systems. The resulting system is efficient, flexible, and supports form of aggregation more general than those previously proposed in the literature. The system is developed as an instance of a general framework for the embedding of arbitrary constraint theories within ASP. Recently, enabling modularity aspects in Answer Set Programming (ASP) has gained increasing interest to ease the composition of program parts to an overall program. In this paper, we focus on modular nonmonotonic logic programs (MLP) under the answer set semantics, whose modules may have contextually dependent input provided by other modules. Moreover, (mutually) recursive module calls are allowed. We define a model-theoretic semantics for this extended setting, show that many desired properties of ordinary logic programming generalize to our modular ASP, and determine the computational complexity of the new formalism. We investigate the relationship of modular programs to disjunctive logic programs with well-defined input output interface (DLP-functions) and show that they can be embedded into MLPs. This technical note describes a monotone and continuous fixpoint operator to compute the answer sets of programs with aggregates. The fixpoint operator relies on the notion of aggregate solution. Under certain conditions, this operator behaves identically to the three-valued immediate consequence operator PaggrP for aggregate programs, independently proposed in Pelov (2004) and (2004). This operator allows us to closely tie the computational complexity of the answer set checking and answer sets existence problems to the cost of checking a solution of the aggregates in the program. Finally, we relate the semantics described by the operator to other proposals for logic programming with aggregates. We investigate a generalization of weight-constraint programs with stable semantics, as implemented in the ASP solver smodels. Our programs admit atoms of the form ( X, F ) where X is a finite set of propositional atoms and ( F ) is an arbitrary family of subsets of X. We call such atoms set constaints and show that the concept of stable model can be generalized to programs admitting set constraints both in the bodies and the heads of clauses. Natural tools to investigate the fixpoint semantics for such programs are nondeterministic operators in complete lattices. We prove two fixpoint theorems for such operators. This paper introduces active integrity constraints (AICs), an extension of integrity constraints for consistent database maintenance. An active integrity constraint is a special constraint whose body contains a conjunction of literals which must be false and whose head contains a disjunction of update actions representing actions (insertions and deletions of tuples) to be performed if the constraint is not satisfied (that is its body is true). The AICs work in a domino-like manner as the satisfaction of one AIC may trigger the violation and therefore the activation of another one. The paper also introduces founded repairs, which are minimal sets of update actions that make the database consistent, and are specified and ldquosupportedrdquo by active integrity constraints. The paper presents: 1) a formal declarative semantics allowing the computation of founded repairs and 2) a characterization of this semantics obtained by rewriting active integrity constraints into disjunctive logic rules, so that founded repairs can be derived from the answer sets of the derived logic program. Finally, the paper studies the computational complexity of computing founded repairs.