Skip to main content

Clausal Deductive Databases and a General Framework for Semantics in Disjunctive Deductive Databases

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems (FoIKS 2000)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1762))

Abstract

In this paper we will investigate the novel concept of clausal deductive databases (cd-databases), which are special normal deductive databases — i.e. deductive databases which may contain default negation in rule bodies — over a meta-language \( \mathcal{L}^{{\text{cd}}} \) with a fixed set of predicate symbols, namely dis, con, and some built-in predicate symbols. The arguments of the literals in \( \mathcal{L}^{{\text{cd}}} \) are given by disjunctive and conjunctive clauses of a basic first-order language \( \mathcal{L} \) (which are considered as terms in \( \mathcal{L}^{{\text{cd}}} \)). On the other hand, disjunctive deductive databases (dd-databases) extend normal deductive databases by allowing for disjunctions (rather than just single atoms or literals) in rule heads — next to default negation in rule bodies.

We will present an embedding of dd-databases into cd-databases: a dd-database \( \mathcal{D} \) is transformed into a cd-database \( \mathcal{D}^{{\text{cd}}} \), which talks about the clauses of \( \mathcal{D} \) — rather than just the literals. Thus, cd-databases provide a flexible framework for declaratively specifying the semantics of dd-databases. We can fix a standard control strategy, e.g. stable model or well-founded semantics, and vary the logical description \( \mathcal{D}^{{\text{cd}}} \) for specifying different semantics. The transformed database \( \mathcal{D}^{{\text{cd}}} \) usually consists of a part \( \mathcal{D}^ \otimes \) which naturally expresses the rules of \( \mathcal{D} \), and two generic parts which are independent of \( \mathcal{D}{\text{: }}\mathcal{D}^{logic} \) specifies logical inference rules like resolution and subsumption, and \( \mathcal{D}^{cwa} \) specifies non-monotonic inference rules like closed-world-assumptions.

In particular we will show that the hyperresolution consequence operator \( \mathcal{T}_\mathcal{D}^s \) for dd-databases without default negation can be expressed as a standard consequence operator \( \mathcal{T}_{\mathcal{D}^{cd} } \), for a suitable transformed database \( \mathcal{D}^{cd} \), where \( \mathcal{D}^{logic} = \mathcal{D}^{cwa} = 0/ \). For dd-databases with default negation we can show that the semantics of stable models can be characterized by adding suitable sets \( \mathcal{D}^{logic} \) and \( \mathcal{D}^{cwa} \). Moreover, we will define a new semantics for dd-databases which we will call stable state semantics; it is based on Herbrand states rather than Herbrand interpretations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. S. Brass, J. Dix: A Disjunctive Semantics Based on Unfolding and Bottom-Up Evaluation, GI-Jahrestagung / IFIP World Computer Congress 1994: Fachgespräch “Disjunktive logische Programmierung und disjunktive Datenbanken”, Springer, 1994, pp. 83–91.

    Google Scholar 

  2. S. Ceri, G. Gottlob, L. Tanca: Logic Programming and Databases, Springer, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  3. P.M. Dung: Declarative Semantics of Hypothetical Logic Programming with Negation as Failure, Proc. Workshop on Extensions of Logic Programming 1992 (ELP’92), 1992, pp. 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  4. T. Eiter, N. Leone, C. Mateis, G. Pfeifer, F. Scarcello: A Deductive System for Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Proc. Fourth Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming and Non-Monotonic Reasoning 1997 (LPNMR’97), Springer LNAI 1265, 1997, pp. 363–374.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T. Eiter, N. Leone, D. Sacca: On the Partial Semantics for Disjunctive Deductive Databases, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 17(1/2), 1997, pp. 59–96.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. J.A. Fernández, J. Lobo, J. Minker, V.S. Subrahmanian: Disjunctive LP + Integrity Constrains = Stable Model Semantics, Annals of Math. and AI, vol. 8(3–4), 1993, pp. 449–474.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. J.A. Fernández and J. Minker: Bottom-up computation of perfect models for disjunctive theories, Journal of Logic Programming, vol. 25(1), 1995, pp. 33–51.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. M. Gelfond, V. Lifschitz: The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming, Proc. Fifth Intl. Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming 1988 (ICSLP’ 88), MIT Press, 1988, pp. 1070–1080.

    Google Scholar 

  9. G. Köstler, W. Kießling, H. Thöne, U. Güntzer: The differential fixpoint operator with subsumption, Proc. Intl. Conference on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases 1993 (DOOD’93), Springer LNCS 760, 1993, pp. 35–48.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J.W. Lloyd: Foundations of Logic Programming, second edition, Springer, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Lobo, J. Minker, A. Rajasekar: Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming, MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  12. V.W. Marek, M. Truszczyński: Nonmonotonic Logic — Context-Dependent Reasoning, Springer, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Minker, A. Rajasekar: A Fixpoint Semantics for Disjunctive Logic Programs, Journal of Logic Programming, vol. 9(1), 1990, pp. 45–74.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. J. Minker, C. Ruiz: On Extended Disjunctive Logic Programs, Proc. Intl. Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems 1993 (ISMIS’93), Springer LNAI 689, 1993, pp. 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  15. I. Niemelä, P. Simons: Effcient Implementation of the Well-founded and Stable Model Semantics, Technical Report 7/96, Univ. Koblenz — Landau, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  16. T.C. Przymusinski: Stable Semantics for Disjunctive Programs, New Generation Computing, vol. 9, 1991, pp. 401–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. R. Ramakrishnan: Database Management Systems, McGraw-Hill, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  18. R. Reiter: A Logic for Default Reasoning, Artificial Intelligence, vol. 13, 1980, pp. 81–132.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. K. Sagonas, T. Swift, D. Warren: XSB as an Effcient Deductive Database Engine, Proc. ACM SIGMOD Intl. Conf. on the Management of Data 1994 (SIGMOD’94), pp. 442–453.

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Seipel, J. Minker, C. Ruiz: Model Generation and State Generation for Disjunctive Logic Programs, Journal of Logic Programming, vol. 32(1), 1997, pp. 48–69.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. D. Seipel, J. Minker, C. Ruiz: A Characterization of Partial Stable Models for Disjunctive Deductive Databases, Proc. Intl. Logic Programming Symposium 1997 (ILPS’97), MIT Press, 1997, pp. 245–259.

    Google Scholar 

  22. D. Seipel: Partial Evidential Stable Models For Disjunctive Databases, Proc. Workshop on Logic Programming and Knowledge Representation (LPKR’97) at the International Symposium on Logic Programming 1997 (ILPS’97), Springer LNAI 1471, 1998, pp. 66–84.

    Google Scholar 

  23. D. Seipel: DisLog — A Disjunctive Deductive Database Prototype, Proc. Twelfth Workshop on Logic Programming (WLP’97), 1997, pp. 136–143. DisLog is available at “http://www-info1.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/databases/DisLog”.

  24. A. Van Gelder, K.A. Ross, J.S. Schlipf:, Unfounded Sets and Well-Founded Semantics for General Logic Programs, Proc. Seventh ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1988 (PODS’88), pp. 221–230.

    Google Scholar 

  25. C. Zaniolo, S. Ceri, C. Faloutsos, R.T. Snodgrass, V.S. Subrahmanian, R. Zicari: Advanced Database Systems, Morgan Kaufmann, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  26. U. Zukowski, S. Brass, B. Freitag: Improving the Alternating Fixpoint: The Transformation Approach, Proc. 4th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming an Non-Monotonic Reasoning 1997 (LPNMR’97), Springer LNAI 1265, 1997, pp. 40–59.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Seipel, D. (2000). Clausal Deductive Databases and a General Framework for Semantics in Disjunctive Deductive Databases. In: Schewe, KD., Thalheim, B. (eds) Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems. FoIKS 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1762. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46564-2_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46564-2_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67100-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46564-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics