Equivalence of Logic Programs Under Updates

This paper defines a general framework for testing equivalence of logic programs with respect to two parameters. Given two sets of rules \({\cal Q}\) and \({\cal R}\), two logic programs P 1 and P 2 are said to be update equivalent with respect to \(({\cal Q},{\cal R})\) if (P 1∖ Q)∪ R and (P 2∖ Q)∪ R have the same answer sets for any two logic programs \(Q\subseteq{\cal Q}\) and \(R\subseteq{\cal R}\). The notion of update equivalence is suitable to take program updates into account when two logic programs are compared. That is, the notion of relativity stipulates the languages of updates, and two parameters \({\cal Q}\) and \({\cal R}\) correspond to the languages for deletion and addition, respectively. Clearly, the notion of strong equivalence is a special case of update equivalence where \({\cal Q}\) is empty and \({\cal R}\) is the set of all rules in the language. In fact, the notion of update equivalence is strong enough to capture many other notions such as weak equivalence, update equivalence on common rules, and uniform equivalence. We also discuss computation and complexity of update equivalence.

[1]  Yehoshua Sagiv Optimizing Datalog Programs , 1988, Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming..

[2]  David Pearce,et al.  Strongly equivalent logic programs , 2001, ACM Trans. Comput. Log..

[3]  Luís Moniz Pereira,et al.  Computational Logic — CL 2000 , 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

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

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

[6]  Katsumi Inoue,et al.  A Simple Characterization of Extended Abduction , 2000, Computational Logic.

[7]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Characterizations for Relativized Notions of Equivalence in Answer Set Programming , 2004, JELIA.

[8]  Frank Wolter,et al.  Monodic fragments of first-order temporal logics: 2000-2001 A.D , 2001, LPAR.

[9]  Fangzhen Lin Reducing Strong Equivalence of Logic Programs to Entailment in Classical Propositional Logic , 2002, KR.

[10]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Encodings for Equilibrium Logic and Logic Programs with Nested Expressions , 2001, EPIA.

[11]  Thomas Eiter,et al.  Uniform Equivalence of Logic Programs under the Stable Model Semantics , 2003, ICLP.

[12]  Vladimir Lifschitz,et al.  Nested expressions in logic programs , 1999, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[13]  Jürgen Dix,et al.  Characterizations of the Disjunctive Stable Semantics by Partial Evaluation , 1997, J. Log. Program..

[14]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Simplifying Logic Programs Under Uniform and Strong Equivalence , 2004, LPNMR.

[15]  Mauricio Osorio,et al.  Equivalence in Answer Set Programming , 2001, LOPSTR.

[16]  Hudson Turner,et al.  Strong equivalence made easy: nested expressions and weight constraints , 2003, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[17]  Hans Tompits,et al.  Reasoning about evolving nonmonotonic knowledge bases , 2001, TOCL.

[18]  Jack Minker Foundations of deductive databases and logic programming , 1988 .

[19]  Hisao Tamaki,et al.  Unfold/Fold Transformation of Logic Programs , 1984, ICLP.

[20]  Yehoshua Sagiv,et al.  Optimizing datalog programs , 1987, Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming..

[21]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Negation as Failure in the Head , 1998, J. Log. Program..

[22]  Vladimir Lifschitz,et al.  Answer Sets in General Nonmonotonic Reasoning (Preliminary Report) , 1992, KR.

[23]  Chiaki Sakama,et al.  Disjunctive Explanations , 2002, ICLP.

[24]  Antonis C. Kakas,et al.  The role of abduction in logic programming , 1998 .

[25]  A. Campbell,et al.  Progress in Artificial Intelligence , 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[26]  Krzysztof R. Apt,et al.  Logic Programming , 1990, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.