Skip to main content

Hypothetical updates, priority and inconsistency in a logic programming language

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

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

Abstract

In this paper we propose a logic programming language which supports hypothetical updates together with integrity constraints. The language allows sequences of updates by sets of atoms and it makes use of a revision mechanism to restore consistency when an update violates some integrity constraint. The revision policy we adopt is based on the simple idea that more recent information is preferred to earlier one. This language can be used to perform several types of defeasible reasoning. We define a goal-directed proof procedure for the language and develope a logical characterization in a modal logic by introducing an abductive semantics.

This work has been partially supported by ESPRIT Basic Research Project 6471, Medlar II.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. C. Baral, S. Kraus, J. Minker, V. S. Subrahmanian. Combining knowledge bases consisting of first-order theories. J.Automated Reasoning, vol. 8, n.1, pp. 45–71, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Baldoni, L.Giordano, and A.Martelli. A multimodal logic to define modules in logic programming. In Proc. 1993 International Logic Programming Symposium, pages 473–487, Vancouver, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  3. L. Cholvy. Proving theorems in a multi-source environment. In Proc. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 66–71, Chambery, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. Cholvy. A logical approach to multi-sources reasoning. In Knowledge Representation and Reasoning under Uncertainty-LNAI 808, pages 183–196, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  5. K. Eshghi and R. Kowalski. Abduction compared with negation by failure. In Proc. 6th Int. Conference on Logic Programming, pages 234–254, Lisbon, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  6. L. Fariñas del Cerro and A. Herzig. An automated modal logic for elementary changes. In P. Smets et al., editor, Non-standard Logics for Automated Reasoning. Academic Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. M. Gabbay. NProlog: An extension of Prolog with hypothetical implications.II. J.Logic Programming, 2(4):251–283, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. Gabbay, L. Giordano, A. Martelli, and N. Olivetti. Conditional logic programming. In Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Santa Margherita Ligure, pages 272–289, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. Gabbay, L. Giordano, A. Martelli, and N. Olivetti. A language for handling hypothetical updates and inconsistency. MEDLAR II Deliverable DII.5.2P, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. M. Gabbay and N. Reyle. NProlog: An extension of Prolog with hypothetical implications.I. Journal of Logic Programming, (4):319–355, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  11. L.Giordano and N.Olivetti. Negation as failure in intuitionistic logic programming. In Proc. Joint International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pages 431–445, Washington, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A.C. Kakas, P. Mancarella, P.M. Dung. The acceptability semantics for logic programs. In Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, Santa Margherita Ligure, pages 504–519, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  13. N. Leone and P. Rullo. Ordered logic programming with sets. J. of Logic and Computation, 3(6):621–642, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. Manchanda and D.S. Warren. A logic-based language for database updates. In J. Minker, editor, Foundation of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming. Morgan-Kaufman, Los Alto, CA, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. L. T. Mc Carty. Clausal intuitionistic logic. i. fixed-point semantics. J. Logic Programming, 5(1):1–31, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  16. D. Miller. A theory of modules for logic programming. In Proc. IEEE Symp. on Logic Programming, pages 106–114, September 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  17. S. Naqvi and F. Rossi. Reasoning in inconsistent databases. In Proc. of the 1990 North American Conf. on Logic Programming, pages 255–272, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Poole A logical framework for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 36 (1988) 27–47.

    Google Scholar 

  19. L.M. Pereira, J.J. Alferes, J.N. Aparicio Contradiction Removal within the Well Founded Semantics. Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning Workshop, (1991) 105–119.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M. Winslett. Updating Logical Databases. Cambridge University Press, 1990.

    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

Gabbay, D., Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Olivetti, N. (1995). Hypothetical updates, priority and inconsistency in a logic programming language. 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_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-59487-6_15

  • 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