Choice Logics and Their Computational Properties

Qualitative Choice Logic (QCL) and Conjunctive Choice Logic (CCL) are formalisms for preference handling, with especially QCL being well established in the field of AI. So far, analyses of these logics need to be done on a case-by-case basis, albeit they share several common features. This calls for a more general choice logic framework, with QCL and CCL as well as some of their derivatives being particular instantiations. We provide such a framework, which allows us, on the one hand, to easily define new choice logics and, on the other hand, to examine properties of different choice logics in a uniform setting. In particular, we investigate strong equivalence, a core concept in nonclassical logics for understanding formula simplification, and computational complexity. Our analysis also yields new results for QCL and CCL. For example, we show that the main reasoning task regarding preferred models is Θ2P-complete for QCL and CCL, while being ∆2P-complete for a newly introduced choice logic.

[1]  Gabriella Pigozzi,et al.  Preferences in artificial intelligence , 2016, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[2]  Eyke Hüllermeier,et al.  Preferences in AI: An overview , 2011, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[4]  Salem Benferhat,et al.  Two alternatives for handling preferences in qualitative choice logic , 2008, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[5]  Jérôme Lang,et al.  Logical Preference Representation and Combinatorial Vote , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[6]  N. Rescher The Logic of Preference , 1968 .

[7]  Salem Benferhat,et al.  Qualitative choice logic , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Ilkka Niemelä,et al.  Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction , 2004, Comput. Intell..

[9]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Encoding Choice Logics in ASP , 2020, ICLP Workshops.

[10]  Dongmo Zhang,et al.  Representing and Reasoning about Game Strategies , 2015, J. Philos. Log..

[11]  Salem Benferhat,et al.  Conjunctive Choice Logic , 2016, ISAIM.

[12]  Salem Benferhat,et al.  Alert Correlation based on a Logical Handling of Administrator Preferences and Knowledge , 2018, SECRYPT.

[13]  Aravaipa Canyon Basin,et al.  Volume 3 , 2012, Journal of Diabetes Investigation.

[14]  Miroslaw Truszczynski,et al.  Abstract Preference Frameworks - a Unifying Perspective on Separability and Strong Equivalence , 2013, AAAI.

[15]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Nonmonotonic Logics: Meaning and Utility , 1987, IJCAI.

[16]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  Do Hard SAT-Related Reasoning Tasks Become Easier in the Krom Fragment? , 2013, IJCAI.

[17]  Dongmo Zhang,et al.  The logic of collective choice , 1988, AAMAS.

[18]  Ludovic Lietard,et al.  Towards a Gradual QCL Model for Database Querying , 2014, IPMU.

[19]  Nic Wilson,et al.  From Preference Logics to Preference Languages, and Back , 2010, KR.

[20]  M. Bernreiter A General Framework for Choice Logics , 2020 .

[21]  S. Gottwald A Treatise on Many-Valued Logics , 2001 .

[22]  Panos Rondogiannis,et al.  Lexicographic Logic: a Many-valued Logic for Preference Representation , 2020, ArXiv.

[23]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Everything Else Being Equal: A Modal Logic for Ceteris Paribus Preferences , 2009, J. Philos. Log..

[24]  A. Karimi,et al.  Master‟s thesis , 2011 .