Bottom-up Abduction by Model Generation

We investigate two realizations of parallel abductive reasoning systems using the model generation theorem prover MGTP. The first one, called the MGTP + MGTP method, is a co-operative problem-solving architecture in which model generation and consistency checking communicate with each other. There, parallelism is exploited by checking consistencies in parallel. However, since this system consists of two different components, the possibilities for parallelization are limited. In contrast, the other method, called the Skip method, does not separate the inference engine from consistency checking, but realizes both functions in only one MGTP that is used as a generate-and-test mechanism. In this method, multiple models can be kept in distributed memories, thus a great amount of parallelism can be obtained. We also attempt the upside-down meta-interpretation approach for abduction, in which top-down reasoning is simulated by a bottom-up reasoner.

[1]  Pietro Torasso,et al.  On the Relationship between Abduction and Deduction , 1991, J. Log. Comput..

[2]  Paolo Mancarella,et al.  Generalized Stable Models: A Semantics for Abduction , 1990, ECAI.

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

[4]  François Bry,et al.  SATCHMO: A Theorem Prover Implemented in Prolog , 1988, CADE.

[5]  Kazunori Ueda,et al.  Design of the Kernel Language for the Parallel Inference Machine , 1990, Computer/law journal.

[6]  Luis Fariñas del Cerro,et al.  An Inference Rule for Hypothesis Generation , 1991, IJCAI.

[7]  Mark E. Stickel,et al.  Rationale and Methods for Abductice Reasoning in Natural-Language Interpretation , 1989, Natural Language and Logic.

[8]  Yusuke Matsunaga,et al.  co-LODEX: A Cooperative Expert System for Logic design , 1988, FGCS.

[9]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Transforming Abductive Logic Programs to Disjunctive Programs , 1993, ICLP.

[10]  François Bry,et al.  Query Evaluation in Deductive Databases: Bottom-Up and Top-Down Reconciled , 1990, Data Knowl. Eng..

[11]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  A Forward-Chaining Hypothetical Reasoner Based on Upside-Down Meta-Interpretation , 1992, FGCS.

[12]  Philip T. Cox,et al.  Causes for Events: Their Computation and Applications , 1986, CADE.

[13]  Donald W. Loveland,et al.  Automated theorem proving: a logical basis , 1978, Fundamental studies in computer science.

[14]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  A forward-chaining multiple-context reasoner and its application to logic design , 1990, [1990] Proceedings of the 2nd International IEEE Conference on Tools for Artificial Intelligence.

[15]  David Maier,et al.  Magic sets and other strange ways to implement logic programs (extended abstract) , 1985, PODS '86.

[16]  Harry E. Pople,et al.  Session 6 Theorem Proving and Logic: I I ON THE MECHANIZATION OF ABDUCTIVE LOGIC , 2006 .

[17]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  Foundations of Assumption-based Truth Maintenance Systems: Preliminary Report , 1987, AAAI.

[18]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  Linear Resolution for Consequence Finding , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[19]  Hiroshi Fujita,et al.  A Model Generation Theorem Prover in KL1 Using a Ramified -Stack Algorithm , 1991, International Conference on Logic Programming.

[20]  Danny De Schreye,et al.  On the Duality of Abduction and Model Generation in a Framework for Model Generation with Equality , 1994, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Randy Goebel,et al.  Theorist: A Logical Reasoning System for Defaults and Diagnosis , 1987 .

[22]  Drew McDermott,et al.  Introduction to artificial intelligence , 1986, Addison-Wesley series in computer science.

[23]  Miyuki Koshimura,et al.  MGTP: A Parallel Theorem Prover Based on Lazy Model Generation , 1992, CADE.