The Size of a Revised Knowledge Base

Abstract In this paper we address a specific computational aspect of belief revision: the size of the propositional formula obtained by means of the revision of a formula with a new one. In particular, we focus on the size of the smallest formula which is logically equivalent to the revised knowledge base. The main result of this paper is that not all formalizations of belief revision are equal from this point of view. For some of them we show that the revised knowledge base can be represented by a polynomial-size formula (we call these results “compactability” results). On the other hand, for other ones the revised knowledge base does not always admit a polynomial-space representation, unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses at a sufficiently low level (“non-compactability” results). We also show that the time complexity of query answering for the revised knowledge base has definitely an impact on being able to represent the result of the revision compactly. Nevertheless, formalisms with the same complexity may have different compactability properties. We also study compactability properties for a weaker form of equivalence, called query equivalence, which allows to introduce new propositional symbols. Moreover, we extend our analysis to the special case in which the new formula has constant size and to the case of sequences of revisions (i.e., iterated belief revision). A complete analysis along these four coordinates is shown.

[1]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming (vol. 1) , 1993 .

[2]  David S. Johnson,et al.  A Catalog of Complexity Classes , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume A: Algorithms and Complexity.

[3]  Ken Satoh Nonmonotonic Reasoning by Minimal Belief Revision , 1988, FGCS.

[4]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  The Complexity of Model Checking for Belief Revision and Update , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 1.

[5]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  On the semantics of updates in databases , 1983, PODS.

[6]  Hirofumi Katsuno,et al.  On the Difference between Updating a Knowledge Base and Revising It , 1991, KR.

[7]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  The Complexity of Nested Counterfactuals and Iterated Knowledge Base Revisions , 1993, IJCAI.

[8]  Bart Selman,et al.  Forming Concepts for Fast Inference , 1992, AAAI.

[9]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Belief Revision , 1995 .

[10]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[11]  Jr. Henry E. Kyburg Uncertainty logics , 1994 .

[12]  Marianne Winslett,et al.  Updating logical databases , 1990, Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science.

[13]  Nicolas Spyratos,et al.  Update semantics of relational views , 1981, TODS.

[14]  Marianne Winslett,et al.  Epistemic aspects of databases , 1995 .

[15]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  The size of a revised knowledge base , 1995, PODS '95.

[16]  Kenneth D. Forbus Introducing Actions into Qualitative Simulation , 1989, IJCAI.

[17]  Alexander Borgida,et al.  Language features for flexible handling of exceptions in information systems , 1985, TODS.

[18]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[19]  Ravi B. Boppana,et al.  The Complexity of Finite Functions , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume A: Algorithms and Complexity.

[20]  Peter Buneman,et al.  Semistructured data , 1997, PODS.

[21]  Mukesh Dalal,et al.  Investigations into a Theory of Knowledge Base Revision , 1988, AAAI.

[22]  Andreas Weber,et al.  Updating Propositional Formulas , 1986, Expert Database Conf..

[23]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  On the Complexity of Propositional Knowledge Base Revision, Updates, and Counterfactuals , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[24]  Jan van Leeuwen,et al.  Handbook Of Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. A , 1990 .

[25]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  On Compact Representations of Propositional Circumscription , 1995, STACS.

[26]  Chee-Keng Yap,et al.  Some Consequences of Non-Uniform Conditions on Uniform Classes , 1983, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[27]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Base Revision Operations and Schemes: Semantics, Representation and Complexity , 1994, ECAI.

[28]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Belief Revision and Default Reasoning: Syntax-Based Approaches , 1991, KR.

[29]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Incremental Recompilation of Knowledge , 1994, AAAI.