Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Problems and Promises of Computational Logic

  • Conference paper
Computational Logic

Part of the book series: ESPRIT Basic Research Series ((ESPRIT BASIC))

Abstract

The ultimate goal of the Basic Research Action, Compulog, is to develop the use of logic for all aspects of computation. This includes not only the development of a single logic for representing programs, program specifications, databases, and knowledge representations in artificial intelligence, but also the development of logic-based management tools. I shall argue that, for these purposes, two major extensions of logic programming are needed — abduction and metalevel reasoning. I shall also argue that extensions of full first-order logic may not be necessary.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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. Aiello, L. C., Nardi, D. and Schaerf, M. [1988]: €Reasoning about Knowledge and Ignorance„, Proceedings of the FGCS, pp. 618–627.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Apt, K. R., and Bezem, M. [1990]: €Acyclic programs„, Proc. of the Seventh International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp. 579–597.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bench-Capon, T.J.M. [1987]: €Support for policy makers: formulating legislation with the aid of logical models„, Proc. of the First International Conference on AI and Law, ACM Press, pp. 181–189.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boolos, G. [1979]: The Unprovability of Consistency, Cambridge University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bowen, K. A. and Kowalski, R. A. [1982]: €Amalgamating Language and Metalanguage in Logic Programming„, in Logic Programming (Clark, K.L. and Tärnlund, S.-Å., editors), Academic Press, pp. 153–173.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brogi, A., Mancarella, P., Pedreschi, D., Turini, F. [1990]: €Composition operators for logic theories„, Proc. Symposium on Computational Logic, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bry, F., “Intensional updates: abduction via deduction”. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp. 561–575.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Burt, A. D., Hill, P. M. and Lloyd, J. W. [1990]: €Preliminary Report on the Logic Programming Language Gödel. University of Bristol, TR-90-02.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Clark, K. L. [1978]: “negation by failure”, in “Logic and databases”, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J. [eds], Plenum Press, pp. 293–322.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Console, L., Theseider Dupré, D., and Torasso, P. [1990]: “A completion semantics for object-level deduction”, Proc. AAAI Symposium on Automated Abduction, Stanford, March 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Costantini, S. and Lanzarone, G. A. [1989]: “A metalogic programming language”, Proc. Sixth International Conference on Logic Programming, pp.218–233.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cox, P. T. and Pietrzykowski, T. [1986]: “Causes for Events: Their Computation and Applications”, in Proceedings CADE-86, pp 608–621.

    Google Scholar 

  13. des Rivières, J. and Levesque, H. J. [1986]: “The Consistency of Syntactical Treatments of Knowledge”, in Proceedings of the 1986 Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge, (Halpern, J. editor), pp. 115–130.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Eshghi, K. and Kowalski, R. A. [1989]: “Abduction compared with negation by failure”, Proceedings of the Sixth International Logic Programming Conference, MIT Press, pp. 234–255.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Evans, C. [1989]: “Negation-as-failure as an approach to the Hanks and McDermott problem”, Proc. Second International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Monterrey, Mexico, 23–27 October 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Finger, J. J. and Genesereth, M.R. [1985]: “RESIDUE: A Deductive Approach to Design Synthesis”, Stanford University Report No. CS-85–1035.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. [1988]: “The stable model semantics for logic programs”, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, (Kowalski, R. A. and Bowen, K. A. editors), volume 2, pp. 1070–1080.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. [1990]: “Logic programs with classical negation”, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp. 579–597.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hanks, S. and McDermott, D. [1986]: “Default reasoning, non-monotonic logics, and the frame problem”, Proc. AAAI, Morgan and Kaufman, pp. 328–333.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hill, P. M. and Lloyd, J. W. [1989]: €Analysis of metaprograms„, In Metaprogramming in Logic Programming”, (H.D. Abramson and M.H. Rogers, editors), MIT Press, pp. 23–52.

    Google Scholar 

  21. H.M.S.O. [1981]: “British Nationality Act 1981”, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kakas, A. C. and Mancarella, P. [1989], “Anomalous models and Abduction”, in Proceedings of 2nd International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Monterrey, Mexico, 23–27 October 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kakas, A. C. and Mancarella, P. [1990], “Generalised stable models: a semantics for abduction”, Proceedings of ECAI 90, pp. 385–391.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kakas, A. C. and Mancarella, P. [1990], “Database updates through abduction”. Proceedings of VLDB 90.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kim, J.-S., and Kowalski, R. A. [1990], “An application of amalgamated logic to multi-agent belief”, Proceedings of Meta 90, Leuven University.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Konolige, K. [1982]: “A first order formalization of knowledge and action for a multiagent planning system”, in Machine Intelligence 10, (Hayes, J.E., Michie, D., Pao, Y. H., editors), Ellis Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Konolige, K. [1982]: “Circumscriptive Ignorance”, Proc. AAAI-82, pp. 202–204.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Konolige, K. [1985]: “Belief and Incompleteness”, in Formal Theories of the Commonsense World, (Hobbs, J. and Moore, R. C. editors), Ablex Pub. Corp., pp. 359–403.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Konolige, K. [1986]: “A Deduction Model of Belief”, Pitman Research Notes in Artificial Intelligence.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kowalski, R. A. and Sergot, M. J. [1986]: “A logic-based calculus of events”, New Generation Computing, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 67–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kowalski, R. A. [1989]: “The treatment of negation in logic programs for representing legislation”, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 11–15.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kowalski, R. A. and Sadri, F. [1990], “Logic programs with exceptions”, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Logic Programming, MIT Press, pp. 598–613.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kowalski, R. A., Sergot, M. J. [1990]: “The use of logical models in legal problem solving”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 201–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lloyd, J. W. and Topor, R. W. [1984]: “Making Prolog more expressive”, Journal of Logic Programming, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 225–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lloyd J. W. [1987]: “Foundations of logic programming”, second extended edition, Springer-Verlag.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. McCarthy, J. [1980]: “Circumscription — a form of nonmonotonic reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 89–116.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Manthey, R. and Bry, F. [1988]: “SATCHMO: A theorem prover implemented in Prolog”, Proc. Nineth Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction (CADE).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Montague, R. [1963]: “Syntactical Treatments of Modality, with Corollaries on Reflection Principles and Finite Axiomatizability”, Acta Philosophic Fennica 16, pp. 153–167.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Moore, R.C. [1985]: €Semantical Considerations on Nonmonotonic Logic in Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Intelligence 25, (1985), pp. 75–94.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Pereira, L. M. and Aparicio, J. N. [1990]: “Default reasoning as abduction”, Technical report, AI Centre/Uninova, 2825 Monte da Caparica, Portugal.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Perlis, D. [1988]: “Language with Self-Reference II: Knowledge, Belief and Modality”, Artificial Intelligence 34, pp. 179–212.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Poole, D. [1988]: “A logical framework for default reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence 36, pp. 27–47.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Reiter, R. [1980]: “A logic for default reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2), pp. 81–132.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Reiter, R. [1990]: “On asking what a database knows”, Proc. Symposium on Computational Logic, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sadri, F. and Kowalski, R. A. [1987]: “A theorem proving approach to database integrity”, In Foundations of deductive databases and logic programming (J. Minker, editor), Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 313–362.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sergot, M. J., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R. A., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P. and Cory, H. T. [1986]: “The British Nationality Act as a logic program”, CACM, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 370–386.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Smorynski, C. [1985], “Self-Reference and Modal Logic”, Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Tarski, A. [1936]: €Der Wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisierten Sprachen„, Studia Philosophia, Vol. 1, pp. 261–405. English translation “The concept of truth in formalised languages” in A. Tarski “Logic, Semantics, and Metamathematics, Clarendon, Oxford, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Thomason, Richmond H., [1980]: “A note on syntactic treatments of modality”, Synthese, Vol. 44, pp. 391–395.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Weyhrauch, R. W. [1980]: “Prolegomena to a Theory of Mechanized Formal Reasoning”, Artificial Intelligence 13, pp. 133–170.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Charniak, E. and McDermott, D. [1985]: “Introduction to Artificial Intelligence”, Addison-Wesley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computing, Imperial College, 180 Queen’s Gate, London, SW7 2BZ, UK

    Robert A. Kowalski

Authors
  1. Robert A. Kowalski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Bristol, Queen’s Building, University Walk, BS8 1TR, Bristol, UK

    John W. Lloyd

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 ECSC — EEC — EAEC, Brussels — Luxembourg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kowalski, R.A. (1990). Problems and Promises of Computational Logic. In: Lloyd, J.W. (eds) Computational Logic. ESPRIT Basic Research Series. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-76274-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-76274-1_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-76276-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-76274-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation