Computing Preferred Answer Sets in Answer Set Programming

Prioritized logic programs (PLPs) have a mechanism of representing priority knowledge in logic programs. The declarative semantics of a PLP is given as preferred answer sets which are used for representing nonmonotonic reasoning as well as preference abduction. From the computational viewpoint, however, its implementation issues have little been studied and no sound procedure is known for computing preferred answer sets of PLPs. In this paper, we present a sound and complete procedure to compute all preferred answer sets of a PLP in answer set programming. The procedure is based on a program transformation from a PLP to a logic program and is realized on top of any procedure for answer set programming. The proposed technique also extends PLPs to handle dynamic preference and we address its application to legal reasoning.

[1]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Prioritized logic programming and its application to commonsense reasoning , 2000, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Vladimir Lifschitz,et al.  Computing Circumscription , 1985, IJCAI.

[3]  Thomas F. Gordon,et al.  The pleadings game: formalizing procedural justice , 1993, ICAIL '93.

[4]  David Poole,et al.  A Logical Framework for Default Reasoning , 1988, Artif. Intell..

[5]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Automated Deduction—CADE-11 , 1992, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  John McCarthy,et al.  Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge , 1987, NMR.

[7]  Thomas Eiter,et al.  Preferred Answer Sets for Extended Logic Programs , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Ilkka Niemelä,et al.  Smodels - An Implementation of the Stable Model and Well-Founded Semantics for Normal LP , 1997, LPNMR.

[9]  Hans Tompits,et al.  A framework for compiling preferences in logic programs , 2002, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[10]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  Embedding Negation as Failure into a Model Generation Theorem Prover , 1992, CADE.

[11]  Gerhard Brewka.  Well-Founded Semantics for Extended Logic Programs with Dynamic Preferences , 1996, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[12]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Abducing Priorities to Derive Intended Conclusions , 1999, IJCAI.

[13]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  On Positive Occurrences of Negation as Failure , 1994, KR.

[14]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Representing Priorities in Logic Programs , 1996, JICSLP.

[15]  Torsten Schaub,et al.  Expressing preferences in default logic , 2000, Artif. Intell..

[16]  Frank Wolter,et al.  Semi-qualitative Reasoning about Distances: A Preliminary Report , 2000, JELIA.

[17]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Compiling Circumscriptive Theories into Logic Programs , 1989, NMR.

[18]  Ilkka Niemelä,et al.  Implementing Ordered Disjunction Using Answer Set Solvers for Normal Programs , 2002, JELIA.