scholarly journals On the Equivalence between Assumption-Based Argumentation and Logic Programming (Extended Abstract)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Caminada ◽  
Claudia Schulz
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
General Idea ◽  
Full Paper ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
Normal Logic Program

In this work, we explain how Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) is subsumed by Logic Programming (LP). The translation from ABA to LP (with a few restrictions on the ABA framework) results in a normal logic program whose semantics coincide with the semantics of the underlying ABA framework. Although the precise technicalities are beyond the current extended abstract (these can be found in the associated full paper) we provide a number of examples to illustrate the general idea.

Reasoning about Dynamic Preferences in Circumscriptive Theory by Logic Programming

1997 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiko Wakaki ◽  
◽  
Ken Satoh ◽  
Katsumi Nitta ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Preference Information ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
Object Level ◽  
Normal Logic Program ◽  
Dynamic Preferences

To treat dynamic preferences correctly is inevitably required in legal reasoning. In this paper, we present a method which enables us to handle some class of dynamic preferences in the framework of circumscription and to consistently compute its metalevel and object-level reasoning by expressing them in an extended logic program. This is achieved on the basis of policy axioms and priority axioms which permit as to describe circumscription policy by axioms and play a role in intervening between metalevel and object-level reasoning. Not only the preference information among rules and metarules but also relations between dynamic preferences and priority axioms in circumscription are represented by a normal logic program. Thus, priorities can be derived from the preferences dynamically, which allows us to compute objectlevel circumscriptive theory using logic programming based on Wakaki and Satoh’s method.

Stable and Supported Semantics in Continuous Vector Spaces

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaniv Aspis ◽  
Krysia Broda ◽  
Alessandra Russo ◽  
Jorge Lobo
Keyword(s):  
Logic Program ◽  
Matrix Multiplication ◽  
Vector Spaces ◽  
Continuous Space ◽  
Continuous Vector ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Gradient Based ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
Parameter Values ◽  
Normal Logic Program

We introduce a novel approach for the computation of stable and supported models of normal logic programs in continuous vector spaces by a gradient-based search method. Specifically, the application of the immediate consequence operator of a program reduct can be computed in a vector space. To do this, Herbrand interpretations of a propositional program are embedded as 0-1 vectors in $\mathbb{R}^N$ and program reducts are represented as matrices in $\mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$. Using these representations we prove that the underlying semantics of a normal logic program is captured through matrix multiplication and a differentiable operation. As supported and stable models of a normal logic program can now be seen as fixed points in a continuous space, non-monotonic deduction can be performed using an optimisation process such as Newton's method. We report the results of several experiments using synthetically generated programs that demonstrate the feasibility of the approach and highlight how different parameter values can affect the behaviour of the system.

scholarly journals On the Equivalence Between Abstract Dialectical Frameworks and Logic Programs

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 941-956
Author(s):  
JOÃO ALCÂNTARA ◽  
SAMY SÁ ◽  
JUAN ACOSTA-GUADARRAMA
Keyword(s):  
Logic Program ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Stable Semantics ◽  
Acceptance Condition ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
Normal Logic Program ◽  
Stable Models

AbstractAbstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) are argumentation frameworks where each node is associated with an acceptance condition. This allows us to model different types of dependencies as supports and attacks. Previous studies provided a translation from Normal Logic Programs (NLPs) to ADFs and proved the stable models semantics for a normal logic program has an equivalent semantics to that of the corresponding ADF. However, these studies failed in identifying a semantics for ADFs equivalent to a three-valued semantics (as partial stable models and well-founded models) for NLPs. In this work, we focus on a fragment of ADFs, called Attacking Dialectical Frameworks (ADF+s), and provide a translation from NLPs to ADF+s robust enough to guarantee the equivalence between partial stable models, well-founded models, regular models, stable models semantics for NLPs and respectively complete models, grounded models, preferred models, stable models for ADFs. In addition, we define a new semantics for ADF+s, called L-stable, and show it is equivalent to the L-stable semantics for NLPs.

scholarly journals On the Equivalence between Assumption-Based Argumentation and Logic Programming

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 ◽  
pp. 779-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Caminada ◽  
Claudia Schulz
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
The Other ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Special Cases ◽  
Reverse Translation ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
The Relationship

Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) has been shown to subsume various other non-monotonic reasoning formalisms, among them normal logic programming (LP). We re-examine the relationship between ABA and LP and show that normal LP also subsumes (flat) ABA. More precisely, we specify a procedure that given a (flat) ABA framework yields an associated logic program with almost the same syntax whose semantics coincide with those of the ABA framework. That is, the 3-valued stable (respectively well-founded, regular, 2-valued stable, and ideal) models of the associated logic program coincide with the complete (respectively grounded, preferred, stable, and ideal) assumption labellings and extensions of the ABA framework. Moreover, we show how our results on the translation from ABA to LP can be reapplied for a reverse translation from LP to ABA, and observe that some of the existing results in the literature are in fact special cases of our work. Overall, we show that (flat) ABA frameworks can be seen as normal logic programs with a slightly different syntax. This implies that methods developed for one of these formalisms can be equivalently applied to the other by simply modifying the syntax.

scholarly journals Answer Sets for Logic Programs with Arbitrary Abstract Constraint Atoms

2007 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 353-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. C. Son ◽  
E. Pontelli ◽  
P. H. Tu
Keyword(s):  
Logic Program ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
Alternative Approaches ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Answer Sets ◽  
Semantics Of Logic Programs ◽  
Normal Logic Program ◽  
Answer Set

In this paper, we present two alternative approaches to defining answer sets for logic programs with arbitrary types of abstract constraint atoms (c-atoms). These approaches generalize the fixpoint-based and the level mapping based answer set semantics of normal logic programs to the case of logic programs with arbitrary types of c-atoms. The results are four different answer set definitions which are equivalent when applied to normal logic programs. The standard fixpoint-based semantics of logic programs is generalized in two directions, called answer set by reduct and answer set by complement. These definitions, which differ from each other in the treatment of negation-as-failure (naf) atoms, make use of an immediate consequence operator to perform answer set checking, whose definition relies on the notion of conditional satisfaction of c-atoms w.r.t. a pair of interpretations. The other two definitions, called strongly and weakly well-supported models, are generalizations of the notion of well-supported models of normal logic programs to the case of programs with c-atoms. As for the case of fixpoint-based semantics, the difference between these two definitions is rooted in the treatment of naf atoms. We prove that answer sets by reduct (resp. by complement) are equivalent to weakly (resp. strongly) well-supported models of a program, thus generalizing the theorem on the correspondence between stable models and well-supported models of a normal logic program to the class of programs with c-atoms. We show that the newly defined semantics coincide with previously introduced semantics for logic programs with monotone c-atoms, and they extend the original answer set semantics of normal logic programs. We also study some properties of answer sets of programs with c-atoms, and relate our definitions to several semantics for logic programs with aggregates presented in the literature.

LOGIC PROGRAMMING AND DEFAULT LOGIC

1994 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 367-373
Author(s):  
GRIGORIS ANTONIOU
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Operational Semantics ◽  
Main Property ◽  
Default Logic ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Default Theory ◽  
Normal Logic ◽  
Direct Use

We present several ideas of increasing complexity how to translate default theories to normal logic programs that make direct use of the deductive capacity of logic programming. We show the limitations of simple, ad hoc approaches, and arrive at a more general construction; its main property is that the answer substitutions computed by the logic program via its standard operational semantics correspond exactly to the extensions of the default theory.

A Roadmap on Updates

2009 ◽  
pp. 2261-2267
Author(s):  
Fernando Zacarías Flores ◽  
Dionicio Zacarías Flores ◽  
Rosalba Cuapa Canto ◽  
Luis Miguel Guzmán Muñoz
Keyword(s):  
Standard Model ◽  
Logic Programming ◽  
Structural Properties ◽  
Relational Databases ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Answer Set Programming ◽  
Central Issue ◽  
The Standard Model ◽  
Answer Set

Updates, is a central issue in relational databases and knowledge databases. In the last years, it has been well studied in the non-monotonic reasoning paradigm. Several semantics for logic program updates have been proposed (Brewka, Dix, & Knonolige 1997), (De Schreye, Hermenegildo, & Pereira, 1999) (Katsumo & Mendelzon, 1991). However, recently a set of proposals has been characterized to propose mechanisms of updates based on logic and logic programming. All these mechanisms are built on semantics based on structural properties (Eiter, Fink, Sabattini & Thompits, 2000) (Leite, 2002) (Banti, Alferes & Brogi, 2003) (Zacarias, 2005). Furthermore, all these semantic ones coincide in considering the AGM proposal as the standard model in the update theory, for their wealth in properties. The AGM approach, introduced in (Alchourron, Gardenfors & Makinson, 1985) is the dominating paradigm in the area, but in the context of monotonic logic. All these proposals analyze and reinterpret the AGM postulates under the Answer Set Programming (ASP) such as (Eiter, Fink, Sabattini & Thompits, 2000). However, the majority of the adapted AGM and update postulates are violated by update programs, as shown in(De Schreye, Hermenegildo, & Pereira, 1999).

A Logic Programming Perspective on Rules

2010 ◽  
pp. 195-213
Author(s):  
Leon Sterling ◽  
Kuldar Taveter
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Modelling And Simulation ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Hybrid Computing ◽  
Rule Languages ◽  
The Web

Logic programming emerged from the realization that expressing knowledge in an appropriate clausal form in logic was akin to programming. The basic construct of a logic program can be viewed as a rule. This chapter will review rules from a logic programming perspective with an eye to developments within modern rule languages. It mentions rule interpreters, hybrid computing, interaction with the Web, and agents. An extended example is given concerning rule-based modelling and simulation of traffic at airports.

scholarly journals Interdefinability of defeasible logic and logic programming under the well-founded semantics

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
FREDERICK MAIER
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Stable Model ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Defeasible Logic ◽  
Normal Logic

AbstractWe provide a method of translating theories of Nute's defeasible logic into logic programs, and a corresponding translation in the opposite direction. Under certain natural restrictions, the conclusions of defeasible theories under the ambiguity propagating defeasible logic ADL correspond to those of the well-founded semantics for normal logic programs, and so it turns out that the two formalisms are closely related. Using the same translation of logic programs into defeasible theories, the semantics for the ambiguity blocking defeasible logic NDL can be seen as indirectly providing an ambiguity blocking semantics for logic programs. We also provide antimonotone operators for both ADL and NDL, each based on the Gelfond–Lifschitz (GL) operator for logic programs. For defeasible theories without defeaters or priorities on rules, the operator for ADL corresponds to the GL operator and so can be seen as partially capturing the consequences according to ADL. Similarly, the operator for NDL captures the consequences according to NDL, though in this case no restrictions on theories apply. Both operators can be used to define stable model semantics for defeasible theories.

scholarly journals Paracoherent Answer Set Semantics meets Argumentation Frameworks

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
GIOVANNI AMENDOLA ◽  
FRANCESCO RICCA
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Great Success ◽  
Argumentation Framework ◽  
Computational Costs ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Answer Sets ◽  
Answer Set

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document