Stable and Supported Semantics in Continuous Vector Spaces

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.

On the Equivalence Between Abstract Dialectical Frameworks and Logic Programs

Abstract 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.

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

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.

Answer Sets for Logic Programs with Arbitrary Abstract Constraint Atoms

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.

Reasoning about Dynamic Preferences in Circumscriptive Theory by Logic Programming

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.