Skip to main content

Complexity results for abductive logic programming

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR 1995)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 928))

Abstract

In this paper, we argue that logic programming semantics can be more meaningful for abductive reasoning than classical inference by providing examples from the area of knowledge representation and reasoning. The main part of the paper addresses the issue of the computational complexity of the principal decisional problems in abductive reasoning, which are: Given an instance of an abduction problem (i) does the problem have solution (i.e., an explanation); (ii) does a given hypothesis belong to some explanation; and (iii) does a given hypothesis belong to all explanations. These problems are investigated here for the stable model semantics of normal logic programs.

This author was partially supported by the Italian National Research Council under grant 224.07.4/24.07.12; the main part of his work has been carried out while he was visiting the Christian Doppler Lab for Expert System.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. K. Apt, H. Blair, and A. Walker. Towards a Theory of Declarative Knowledge. In J. Minker, editor, Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pages 89–148. Morgan Kaufman, Washington DC, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Baral and M. Gelfond. Logic Programming and Knowledge Representation Journal of Logic Programming, 19–20:72–144, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  3. N. Bidoit and C. Froidevaux. General Logic Databases and Programs: Default Semantics and Stratification. Information and Computation, 19:15–54, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. Console, D. Theseider Dupré, and P. Torasso. On the Relationship Between Abduction and Deduction. Journal of Logic and Computation, 1(5):661–690, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Denecker and D. De Schreye. SLDNFA: an abductive procedure for normal abductive logic programs. In Proc. JICSLP-92, pp. 686–700, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Denecker and D. De Schreye. Representing incomplete knowledge in abductive logic programming. In Proc. ILPS-93, pp. 147–163, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  7. P. Dung. Negation as Hypotheses: An Abductive Foundation for Logic Programming. In Proc. ICLP-91. MIT Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  8. T. Eiter and G. Gottlob. The Complexity of Logic-Based Abduction. JACM, 1995. Extended abstract Proc. STACS-93, LNCS 665, 70–79.

    Google Scholar 

  9. T. Eiter, G. Gottlob and N. Leone. Abduction from Logic Programs: Semantics and Complexity. TR 94-72 Christian Doppler Lab for Expert Systems, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. K. Eshghi and R. Kowalski. Abduction Compared with Negation as Failure. In Proc. ICLP-89, pp. 234–254. MIT Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  11. K. Eshghi. A Tractable Class of Abduction Problems. In Proc. IJCA1-93, pp. 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming. In Proc. Fifth Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, B. Kowalski and R. Bowen (eds), pp. 1070–1080, Cambridge Mass., 1988. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. K. Inoue. Extended logic programs with default assumptions. In Proc. ICLP-91, pp. 490–504.

    Google Scholar 

  14. K. Inoue. Studies on Abductive and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. PhD thesis, Kyoto University, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. N. Iwayama and K. Satoh. Computing abduction using the TMS. In Proc. ICLP-91, pp. 505–518, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. Josephson, B. Chandrasekaran, J. J. W. Smith, and M. Tanner. A Mechanism for Forming Composite Explanatory Hypotheses. IEEE TSMC17:445–454, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Kakas and R. Kowalski and F. Toni. Abductive logic programming. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2(6):719–771, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. A. Kakas and P. Mancarella. Generalized Stable Models: a Semantics for Abduction. In Proc. ECAI-90, pp. 385–391, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  19. A. Kakas and P. Mancarella. Stable theories for logic programs. In Proc. ISLP-91, pp. 88–100, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  20. K. Konolige. Abduction versus closure in causal theories. Artificial Intelligence, 53:255–272, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. Lloyd. Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer, Berlin, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  22. J. Lobo, J. Minker, and A. Rajasekar. Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming. MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  23. W. Marek and M. Truszczyński. Autoepistemic Logic. JACM, 38:588–619, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  24. W. Marek and M. Truszczyński. Computing Intersection of Autoepistemic Expansions. In A. Nerode, W. Marek, and V. Subrahmanian, editors, Proc. LPNMR-91, pp. 37–50, Washington DC, July 1991. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. Minker. On Indefinite Data Bases and the Closed World Assumption. In Proc. of the 6th Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-82), pp. 292–308, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  26. C. H. Papadimitriou. Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Y. Peng and J. Reggia. Abductive Inference Models for Diagnostic Problem Solving. Springer, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  28. T. Przymusinski. Stable Semantics for Disjunctive Programs. New Generation Computing, 9:401–424, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  29. D. Saccà. The Expressive Power of Stable Models for DATALOG Queries with Negation. H. Blair, W. Marek, A. Nerode, and J. Remmel (eds), Proc. of the Second Workshop on Structural Complexity and Recursion-Theoretic Methods in Logic Programming, pp. 150–162. Cornell University, Math. Sciences Institute, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  30. J. Schlipf. The Expressive Powers of Logic Programming Semantics. Proc. ACM PODS-90, pp. 196–204. Extended version to appear in JCSS.

    Google Scholar 

  31. C. Sakama and K. Inoue. On the Equivalence between Disjunctive and Abductive Logic Programs. In Proc. ICLP-94, pp. 88–100, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  32. B. Selman and H. J. Levesque. Abductive and Default Reasoning: A Computational Core. In Proc. AAAI-90, pp. 343–348, July 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  33. A. Van Gelder, K. Ross, and J. Schlipf. The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. Journal of ACM, 38(3):620–650, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

V. Wiktor Marek Anil Nerode M. Truszczyński

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Leone, N. (1995). Complexity results for abductive logic programming. In: Marek, V.W., Nerode, A., Truszczyński, M. (eds) Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 928. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-59487-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-59487-6_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-59487-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49282-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics