Answer Set Semantics Research Articles

Computationally Hard Problems for Logic Programs under Answer Set Semantics

Showing that a problem is hard for a model of computation is one of the most challenging tasks in theoretical computer science, logic and mathematics. For example, it remains beyond reach to find an explicit problem that cannot be computed by polynomial size propositional formulas (PF). As a model of computation, logic programs (LP) under answer set semantics are as expressive as PF, and also \(\mathtt{NP}\) -complete for satisfiability checking. In this paper, we show that the PAR problem is hard for LP, i.e., deciding whether a binary string contains an odd number of \(1\) ’s requires exponential size logic programs. The proof idea is first to transform logic programs into equivalent boolean circuits, and then apply a probabilistic method known as random restriction to obtain an exponential lower bound. Based on the main result, we generalize a sufficient condition for identifying hard problems for LP, and give a separation map for a logic program family from a computational point of view, whose members are all equally expressive and share the same reasoning complexity.

Comparing the Reasoning Capabilities of Equilibrium Theories and Answer Set Programs

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well established logical approach in artificial intelligence that is widely used for knowledge representation and problem solving. Equilibrium logic extends answer set semantics to more general classes of programs and theories. When intertheory relations are studied in ASP, or in the more general form of equilibrium logic, they are usually understood in the form of comparisons of the answer sets or equilibrium models of theories or programs. This is the case for strong and uniform equivalence and their relativised and projective versions. However, there are many potential areas of application of ASP for which query answering is relevant and a comparison of programs in terms of what can be inferred from them may be important. We formulate and study some natural equivalence and entailment concepts for programs and theories that are couched in terms of inference and query answering. We show that, for the most part, these new intertheory relations coincide with their model-theoretic counterparts. We also extend some previous results on projective entailment for theories and for the new connective called fork.

Disjunctive logic programs, answer sets, and the cut rule

In 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 semantics can be further generalised for disjunctive logic programs with classical negation, in a constructive modal-theoretic framework where rules are built from claims and hypotheses, namely, formulas of the form Box varphi and Diamond Box varphi where varphi is a literal, respectively, yielding a “base semantics” for general disjunctive logic programs. Model-theoretically, this base semantics is expressed in terms of a classical notion of logical consequence. It has a complete proof procedure based on a general form of the cut rule. Usually, alternative semantics of logic programs amount to a particular interpretation of nonclassical negation as “failure to derive.” The counterpart in our framework is to complement the original program with a set of hypotheses required to satisfy specific conditions, and apply the base semantics to the resulting set. We demonstrate the approach for the answer set semantics. The proposed framework is purely classical in mainly three ways. First, it uses classical negation as unique form of negation. Second, it advocates the computation of logical consequences rather than of particular models. Third, it makes no reference to a notion of preferred or minimal interpretation.

FLP Semantics Without Circular Justifications for General Logic Programs

The FLP semantics presented by (Faber, Leone, and Pfeifer 2004) has been widely used to define answer sets, called FLP answer sets, for different types of logic programs such as logic programs with aggregates, description logic programs (dl-programs), Hex programs, and logic programs with first-order formulas (general logic programs). However, it was recently observed that the FLP semantics may produce unintuitive answer sets with circular justifications caused by self-supporting loops. In this paper, we address the circular justification problem for general logic programs by enhancing the FLP semantics with a level mapping formalism. In particular, we extend the Gelfond-Lifschitz three step definition of the standard answer set semantics from normal logic programs to general logic programs and define for general logic programs the first FLP semantics that is free of circular justifications. We call this FLP semantics the well-justified FLP semantics. This method naturally extends to general logic programs with additional constraints like aggregates, thus providing a unifying framework for defining the well-justified FLP semantics for various types of logic programs. When this method is applied to normal logic programs with aggregates, the well-justified FLP semantics agrees with the conditional satisfaction based semantics defined by (Son, Pontelli, and Tu 2007); and when applied to dl-programs, the semantics agrees with the strongly well-supported semantics defined by (Shen 2011).

Inductive learning of answer set programs for autonomous surgical task planning

The quality of robot-assisted surgery can be improved and the use of hospital resources can be optimized by enhancing autonomy and reliability in the robot’s operation. Logic programming is a good choice for task planning in robot-assisted surgery because it supports reliable reasoning with domain knowledge and increases transparency in the decision making. However, prior knowledge of the task and the domain is typically incomplete, and it often needs to be refined from executions of the surgical task(s) under consideration to avoid sub-optimal performance. In this paper, we investigate the applicability of inductive logic programming for learning previously unknown axioms governing domain dynamics. We do so under answer set semantics for a benchmark surgical training task, the ring transfer. We extend our previous work on learning the immediate preconditions of actions and constraints, to also learn axioms encoding arbitrary temporal delays between atoms that are effects of actions under the event calculus formalism. We propose a systematic approach for learning the specifications of a generic robotic task under the answer set semantics, allowing easy knowledge refinement with iterative learning. In the context of 1000 simulated scenarios, we demonstrate the significant improvement in performance obtained with the learned axioms compared with the hand-written ones; specifically, the learned axioms address some critical issues related to the plan computation time, which is promising for reliable real-time performance during surgery.

Beyond Uniform Equivalence between Answer-set Programs

This article deals with advanced notions of equivalence between nonmonotonic logic programs under the answer-set semantics, a topic of considerable interest, because such notions form the basis for program verification and are useful for program optimisation, debugging, and modular programming. In fact, there is extensive research in answer-set programming (ASP) dealing with different notions of equivalence between programs. Prominent among these notions is uniform equivalence , which checks whether two programs have the same semantics when joined with an arbitrary set of facts. In this article, we study a family of more fine-grained versions of uniform equivalence, viz. relativised uniform equivalence with projection , which extends standard uniform equivalence in terms of two additional parameters: one for specifying the input alphabet and one for specifying the output alphabet for programs. In particular, the second parameter is used for projecting answer sets to a set of designated output atoms. Answer-set projection, in particular, allows to compare programs that make use of different auxiliary atoms, which is important for practical programming aspects. We introduce novel semantic characterisations for the program correspondence problems under consideration and analyse their computational complexity. In the general case, deciding these problems lies on the third level of the polynomial hierarchy. Therefore, this task cannot be efficiently reduced to propositional answer-set programs itself (under the usual complexity-theoretic assumptions). However, reductions to quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs) are feasible. Indeed, we provide efficient (in fact, linear-time constructible) reductions to QBFs and discuss simplifications for certain special cases. These QBF reductions yield the basis for a prototype implementation, the system cc ⊤, for deciding correspondence problems by using off-the-shelf QBF solvers. We discuss an application of cc ⊤ for verifying the correctness of solutions by students drawn from a laboratory course on logic programming and knowledge representation at the Technische Universität Wien, employing relativised uniform equivalence with projection as the underlying program correspondence notion.

Applying Visible Strong Equivalence in Answer-Set Program Transformations

Strong equivalence is one of the basic notions of equivalence that have been proposed for logic programs subject to the answer-set semantics. In this article, we propose a new generalization of strong equivalence (SE) that takes the visibility of atoms into account and we characterize it in terms of appropriately revised SE-models. Our design resembles (relativized) strong equivalence but is substantially different due to adopting a strict one-to-one correspondence of models from the notion of visible equivalence. We additionally tailor the characterization for more convenient use with positive programs and provide formal tools to exploit the tailored version also in the case of some programs that use negation. We illustrate the use of visible strong equivalence and the characterizations in showing the correctness of program transformations that make use of atom visibility. Moreover, we present a translation that enables us to automate the task of verifying visible strong equivalence for particular fragments of answer-set programs. We experimentally study the efficiency of verification when the goal is to check whether an extended rule is visibly strongly equivalent to its normalization, i.e., a subprogram expressing the original rule in terms of normal rules only. In the process, we verify the outputs of several real implementations of normalization schemes on a considerable number of input rules.

Fixed point semantics for stream reasoning

Reasoning over streams of input data is an essential part of human intelligence. During the last decade stream reasoning has emerged as a research area within the AI-community with many potential applications. In fact, the increased availability of streaming data via services like Google and Facebook has raised the need for reasoning engines coping with data that changes at high rate. Recently, the rule-based formalism LARS for non-monotonic stream reasoning under the answer set semantics has been introduced. Syntactically, LARS programs are logic programs with negation incorporating operators for temporal reasoning, most notably window operators for selecting relevant time points. Unfortunately, by preselecting fixed intervals for the semantic evaluation of programs, the rigid semantics of LARS programs is not flexible enough to constructively cope with rapidly changing data dependencies. Moreover, we show that defining the answer set semantics of LARS in terms of FLP reducts leads to undesirable circular justifications similar to other ASP extensions. This paper fixes all of the aforementioned shortcomings of LARS. More precisely, we contribute to the foundations of stream reasoning by providing an operational fixed point semantics for a fully flexible variant of LARS and we show that our semantics is sound and constructive in the sense that answer sets are derivable bottom-up and free of circular justifications.

Towards inductive learning of surgical task knowledge: a preliminary case study of the peg transfer task

Abstract Autonomy in robotic surgery will significantly improve the quality of interventions in terms of safety and recovery time for the patient, and reduce fatigue of surgeons and hospital costs. A key requirement for such autonomy is the ability of the surgical system to encode and reason with commonsense task knowledge, and to adapt to variations introduced by the surgical scenarios and the individual patients. However, it is difficult to encode all the variability in surgical scenarios and in the anatomy of individual patients a priori, and new knowledge often needs to be acquired and merged with the existing knowledge. At the same time, it is not possible to provide a large number of labeled training examples in the robotic surgery. This paper presents a framework based on inductive logic programming and answer set semantics for incrementally learning domain knowledge from a limited number of executions of basic surgical tasks. As an illustrative example, we focus on the peg transfer task, and learn state constraints and the preconditions of actions starting from different levels of prior knowledge. We do so using a small dataset comprising human and robotic executions with the da Vinci surgical robot in a challenging simulated scenario.

Better Paracoherent Answer Sets with Less Resources

AbstractAnswer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-established formalism for logic programming. Problem solving in ASP requires to write an ASP program whose answers sets correspond to solutions. Albeit the non-existence of answer sets for some ASP programs can be considered as a modeling feature, it turns out to be a weakness in many other cases, and especially for query answering. Paracoherent answer set semantics extend the classical semantics of ASP to draw meaningful conclusions also from incoherent programs, with the result of increasing the range of applications of ASP. State of the art implementations of paracoherent ASP adopt the semi-equilibrium semantics, but cannot be lifted straightforwardly to compute efficiently the (better) split semi-equilibrium semantics that discards undesirable semi-equilibrium models. In this paper an efficient evaluation technique for computing a split semi-equilibrium model is presented. An experiment on hard benchmarks shows that better paracoherent answer sets can be computed consuming less computational resources than existing methods.

Incremental Answer Set Programming with Overgrounding

AbstractRepeated executions of reasoning tasks for varying inputs are necessary in many applicative settings, such as stream reasoning. In this context, we propose an incremental grounding approach for the answer set semantics. We focus on the possibility of generating incrementally larger ground logic programs equivalent to a given non-ground one; so calledovergrounded programscan be reused in combination with deliberately many different sets of inputs. Updating overgrounded programs requires a small effort, thus making the instantiation of logic programs considerably faster when grounding is repeated on a series of inputs similar to each other. Notably, the proposed approach works “under the hood”, relieving designers of logic programs from controlling technical aspects of grounding engines and answer set systems. In this work we present the theoretical basis of the proposed incremental grounding technique, we illustrate the consequent repeated evaluation strategy and report about our experiments.

Paracoherent Answer Set Semantics meets Argumentation Frameworks

AbstractIn the last years, abstract argumentation has met with great success in AI, since it has served to capture several non-monotonic logics for AI. Relations between argumentation framework (AF) semantics and logic programming ones are investigating more and more. In particular, great attention has been given to the well-known stable extensions of an AF, that are closely related to the answer sets of a logic program. However, if a framework admits a small incoherent part, no stable extension can be provided. To overcome this shortcoming, two semantics generalizing stable extensions have been studied, namely semi-stable and stage. In this paper, we show that another perspective is possible on incoherent AFs, called paracoherent extensions, as they have a counterpart in paracoherent answer set semantics. We compare this perspective with semi-stable and stage semantics, by showing that computational costs remain unchanged, and moreover an interesting symmetric behaviour is maintained.

Determining inference semantics for disjunctive logic programs

In a seminal paper, Gelfond and Lifschitz [34] introduced simple disjunctive logic programs, where in rule heads the disjunction operator “|” is used to express incomplete information, and defined the answer set semantics (called GL-semantics for short) based on a program transformation (called GL-reduct) and the minimal model requirement. Our observations reveal that the requirement of the GL-semantics, i.e., an answer set should be a minimal model of rules of the GL-reduct, may sometimes be too strong a condition and exclude some answer sets that would be reasonably acceptable. To address this, we present an alternative, more permissive answer set semantics, called the determining inference (DI) semantics. Specifically, we introduce a head selection function to formalize the operator | and define answer sets as follows: (i) Given an interpretation I and a selection function sel, we transform a disjunctive program Π into a normal program ΠselI, called a disjunctive program reduct; (ii) given a base answer set semantics X for normal programs, we define I to be a candidate answer set of Π w.r.t. X if I is an answer set of ΠselI under X; and (iii) we define I to be an answer set of Π w.r.t. X if I is a minimal candidate answer set. The DI-semantics is general and applicable to extend any answer set semantics X for normal programs to disjunctive programs. By replacing X with the GLnlp-semantics defined by Gelfond and Lifschitz [33], we induce a DI-semantics for simple disjunctive programs, and by replacing X with the well-justified semantics defined by Shen et al. [65], we further induce a DI-semantics for general disjunctive programs. We also establish a novel characterization of the GL-semantics in terms of a disjunctive program reduct, which reveals the essential difference of the DI-semantics from the GL-semantics and leads us to giving a satisfactory solution to the open problem presented by Hitzler and Seda [36] about characterizing split normal derivatives of a simple disjunctive program Π such that answer sets of the normal derivatives are answer sets of Π under the GL-semantics. Finally we give computational complexity results; in particular we show that in the propositional case deciding whether a simple disjunctive program Π has some DI-answer set is NP-complete. This is in contrast to the GL-semantics and equivalent formulations such as the FLP-semantics [24], where deciding whether Π has some answer set is Σ2p-complete, while brave and cautious reasoning are Σ2p- and Π2p-complete, respectively, for both GL- and DI-answer sets. For general disjunctive programs with compound formulas as building blocks, the complexity of brave and cautious reasoning increases under DI-semantics by one level of the polynomial hierarchy, which thus offers higher problem solving capacity.

Interval-based Possibilistic Description Logic Programs for the Semantic Web

Integration ontologies and rules has become a central topic in the Semantic Web. In order to deal with uncertainty and inconsistent information, possibilistic description logic program has been investigated in recent years. However, possibilistic description logic program also cannot well model a great deal of real-world problems, because the accurate degrees associated with axioms and atoms are usually difficult to provide for experts. To address this problem, we further extend possibilistic description logic programs so that they can deal with inaccurate degrees associated with axioms and atoms. Therefore, we propose tightly coupled interval-based possibilistic description logic programs under possibilistic answer set semantics, which are a tight integration of disjunctive logic programs, interval-based possibilistic logics and possibilistic description logics. First of all, we define the syntax and semantics. Then, we show some semantic properties. Furthermore, we present three reasoning problems, and present some algorithms to solve these reasoning problems.

The complexity and generality of learning answer set programs

Traditionally most of the work in the field of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) has addressed the problem of learning Prolog programs. On the other hand, Answer Set Programming is increasingly being used as a powerful language for knowledge representation and reasoning, and is also gaining increasing attention in industry. Consequently, the research activity in ILP has widened to the area of Answer Set Programming, witnessing the proposal of several new learning frameworks that have extended ILP to learning answer set programs. In this paper, we investigate the theoretical properties of these existing frameworks for learning programs under the answer set semantics. Specifically, we present a detailed analysis of the computational complexity of each of these frameworks with respect to the two decision problems of deciding whether a hypothesis is a solution of a learning task and deciding whether a learning task has any solutions. We introduce a new notion of generality of a learning framework, which enables us to define a framework to be more general than another in terms of being able to distinguish one ASP hypothesis solution from a set of incorrect ASP programs. Based on this notion, we formally prove a generality relation over the set of existing frameworks for learning programs under answer set semantics. In particular, we show that our recently proposed framework, Context-dependent Learning from Ordered Answer Sets, is more general than brave induction, induction of stable models, and cautious induction, and maintains the same complexity as cautious induction, which has the highest complexity of these frameworks.

Characterizing causal action theories and their implementations in answer set programming

We consider a simple language for writing causal action theories, and postulate several properties for the state transition models of these theories. We then consider some possible embeddings of these causal action theories in some other action formalisms, and their implementations in logic programs with answer set semantics. In particular, we propose to consider what we call permissible translations from these causal action theories to logic programs. We identify two sets of properties, and prove that for each set, there is only one permissible translation, under strong equivalence, that can satisfy all properties in the set. We also show that these two sets of conditions are minimal in that removing any condition from each of them will result in multiple permissible mappings. Furthermore, as it turns out, for one set, the unique permissible translation is essentially the same as Balduccini and Gelfond's translation from Gelfond and Lifschitz's action language B to logic programs. For the other, it is essentially the same as Lifschitz and Turner's translation from the action language C to logic programs. This work provides a new perspective on understanding, evaluating and comparing action languages by using sets of properties instead of examples. The results in this paper provide a characterization of two representative action languages B and C in terms of permissible mappings from our causal action theories to logic programs. It will be interesting to see if other action languages can be similarly characterized, and whether new action formalisms can be defined using different sets of properties.

Dynamically Constructed (PO)MDPs for Adaptive Robot Planning

To operate in human-robot coexisting environments, intelligent robots need to simultaneously reason with commonsense knowledge and plan under uncertainty. Markov decision processes (MDPs) and partially observable MDPs (POMDPs), are good at planning under uncertainty toward maximizing long-term rewards; P-LOG, a declarative programming language under Answer Set semantics, is strong in commonsense reasoning. In this paper, we present a novel algorithm called iCORPP to dynamically reason about, and construct (PO)MDPs using P-LOG. iCORPP successfully shields exogenous domain attributes from (PO)MDPs, which limits computational complexity and enables (PO)MDPs to adapt to the value changes these attributes produce. We conduct a number of experimental trials using two example problems in simulation and demonstrate iCORPP on a real robot. Results show significant improvements compared to competitive baselines.

Query answering in resource-based answer set semantics

AbstractIn recent work we defined resource-based answer set semantics, which is an extension to answer set semantics stemming from the study of its relationship with linear logic. In fact, the name of the new semantics comes from the fact that in the linear-logic formulation every literal (including negative ones) were considered as a resource. In this paper, we propose a query-answering procedure reminiscent of Prolog for answer set programs under this extended semantics as an extension of XSB-resolution for logic programs with negation.1We prove formal properties of the proposed procedure. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

Answer Sets and the Language of Answer Set Programming

Answer set programming is a declarative programming paradigm based on the answer set semantics of logic programs. This introductory article provides the mathematical background for the discussion of answer set programming in other contributions to this special issue.

A Model for Phase Transition of Random Answer-Set Programs

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.