Abstract
We address the problem of belief revision of logic programs, i.e., how to incorporate to a logic program \(\mathcal{P}\) a new logic program \(\mathcal{Q}\). Based on the structure of SE interpretations, Delgrande et al. [5] adapted the AGM postulates to identify the rational behavior of generalized logic program (GLP) revision operators and introduced some specific operators. In this paper, a constructive characterization of all rational GLP revision operators is given in terms of an ordering among propositional interpretations with some further conditions specific to SE interpretations. It provides an intuitive, complete procedure for the construction of all rational GLP revision operators and makes easier the comprehension of their semantic properties. In particular, we show that every rational GLP revision operator is derived from a propositional revision operator satisfying the original AGM postulates. Taking advantage of our characterization, we embed the GLP revision operators into structures of Boolean lattices, that allow us to bring to light some potential weaknesses in the adapted AGM postulates. To illustrate our claim, we introduce and characterize axiomatically two specific classes of (rational) GLP revision operators which arguably have a drastic behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alchourrón, C.E., Gärdenfors, P., Makinson, D.: On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50(2), 510–530 (1985)
Alferes, J.J., Leite, J.A., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.C.: Dynamic updates of non-monotonic knowledge bases. Journal of Logic Programming 45(1-3), 43–70 (2000)
Cabalar, P., Ferraris, P.: Propositional theories are strongly equivalent to logic programs. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 7(6) (2007)
Dalal, M.: Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: Preliminary report. In: Proc. of the 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 1988, pp. 475–479 (1988)
Delgrande, J.P., Schaub, T., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Belief revision of logic programs under answer set semantics. In: Proc. of the 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2008, pp. 411–421 (2008)
Delgrande, J.P., Schaub, T., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: A general approach to belief change in answer set programming. CoRR, abs/0912.5511 (2009)
Delgrande, J., Schaub, T., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Merging logic programs under answer set semantics. In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) ICLP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5649, pp. 160–174. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Eiter, T., Fink, M., Sabbatini, G., Tompits, H.: On properties of update sequences based on causal rejection. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 2(6), 711–767 (2002)
Eiter, T., Fink, M., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: On eliminating disjunctions in stable logic programming. In: Proc. of the 9th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2004, pp. 447–458 (2003)
Eiter, T., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: On solution correspondences in answer set programming. In: Proc. of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2005, pp. 97–102 (2005)
Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Negation as failure in the head. Journal of Logic Programming 35(1), 39–78 (1998)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: A unified view of propositional knowledge base updates. In: Proc. of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 1989, pp. 1413–1419 (1989)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 1991, pp. 387–394 (1991)
Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence 52(3), 263–294 (1992)
Konieczny, S., Pino Pérez, R.: Merging information under constraints: a logical framework. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(5), 773–808 (2002)
Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D., Valverde, A.: Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2(4), 526–541 (2001)
Lifschitz, V., Woo, T.Y.C.: Answer sets in general nonmonotonic reasoning (preliminary report). In: Proc. of the 3rd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 1992, pp. 603–614 (1992)
Satoh, K.: Nonmonotonic reasoning by minimal belief revision. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems, FGCS 1988, pp. 455–462 (1988)
Turner, H.: Strong equivalence made easy: nested expressions and weight constraints. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 3(4-5), 609–622 (2003)
Zhang, Y., Foo, N.Y.: Towards generalized rule-based updates. In: Proc. of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 1997, pp. 82–88 (1997)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Schwind, N., Inoue, K. (2013). Characterization Theorems for Revision of Logic Programs. In: Cabalar, P., Son, T.C. (eds) Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8148. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40564-8_48
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40564-8_48
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40563-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40564-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)