Semantics and complexity of recursive aggregates in answer set programming

The addition of aggregates has been one of the most relevant enhancements to the language of answer set programming (ASP). They strengthen the modelling power of ASP in terms of natural and concise problem representations. Previous semantic definitions typically agree in the case of non-recursive aggregates, but the picture is less clear for aggregates involved in recursion. Some proposals explicitly avoid recursive aggregates, most others differ, and many of them do not satisfy desirable criteria, such as minimality or coincidence with answer sets in the aggregate-free case. In this paper we define a semantics for programs with arbitrary aggregates (including monotone, antimonotone, and nonmonotone aggregates) in the full ASP language allowing also for disjunction in the head (disjunctive logic programming - DLP). This semantics is a genuine generalization of the answer set semantics for DLP, it is defined by a natural variant of the Gelfond-Lifschitz transformation, and treats aggregate and non-aggregate literals in a uniform way. This novel transformation is interesting per se also in the aggregate-free case, since it is simpler than the original transformation and does not need to differentiate between positive and negative literals. We prove that our semantics guarantees the minimality (and therefore the incomparability) of answer sets, and we demonstrate that it coincides with the standard answer set semantics on aggregate-free programs. Moreover, we carry out an in-depth study of the computational complexity of the language. The analysis pays particular attention to the impact of syntactical restrictions on programs in the form of limited use of aggregates, disjunction, and negation. While the addition of aggregates does not affect the complexity of the full DLP language, it turns out that their presence does increase the complexity of normal (i.e., non-disjunctive) ASP programs up to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. However, we show that there are large classes of aggregates the addition of which does not cause any complexity gap even for normal programs, including the fragment allowing for arbitrary monotone, arbitrary antimonotone, and stratified (i.e., non-recursive) nonmonotone aggregates. The analysis provides some useful indications on the possibility to implement aggregates in existing reasoning engines.

[1]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  A framework for representing knowledge" in the psychology of computer vision , 1975 .

[2]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases , 1991, New Generation Computing.

[3]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  Aggregate Functions in DLV , 2003, Answer Set Programming.

[4]  Joohyung Lee,et al.  A Reductive Semantics for Counting and Choice in Answer Set Programming , 2008, AAAI.

[5]  Martin Gebser,et al.  The nomore++ Approach to Answer Set Solving , 2005, LPAR.

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

[7]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  A Logic for Default Reasoning , 1987, Artif. Intell..

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

[9]  Enrico Pontelli,et al.  On Logic Programming with Aggregates , 2006 .

[10]  Miroslaw Truszczynski,et al.  Semantics of disjunctive programs with monotone aggregates - an operator-based approach , 2004, NMR.

[11]  Enrico Pontelli,et al.  A Constructive Semantic Characterization of Aggregates in ASP , 2006, ArXiv.

[12]  Thomas Linke,et al.  NoMoRe : A System for Non-monotonic Reasoning with Logic Programs under Answer Set Semantics , 2001, IJCAR.

[13]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  Word problems requiring exponential time(Preliminary Report) , 1973, STOC.

[14]  John McCarthy,et al.  SOME PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ARTI CIAL INTELLIGENCE , 1987 .

[15]  Robert C. Moore.  Semantical Considerations on Nonmonotonic Logic , 1985, IJCAI.

[16]  Paolo Ferraris,et al.  Answer Sets for Propositional Theories , 2005, LPNMR.

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

[18]  Martin Gebser,et al.  Conflict-Driven Answer Set Solving , 2007, IJCAI.

[19]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Representing Knowledge in A-Prolog , 2002, Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond.

[20]  Adrian Walker,et al.  Towards a Theory of Declarative Knowledge , 1988, Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming..

[21]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  Autoepistemic logic , 1991, JACM.

[22]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  On logic programs with cardinality constraints , 2002, NMR.

[23]  Yuliya Lierler,et al.  Cmodels-2: SAT-based Answer Set Solver Enhanced to Non-tight Programs , 2004, LPNMR.

[24]  Peter J. Stuckey,et al.  Semantics of Logic Programs with Aggregates , 1991, ISLP.

[25]  John McCarthy,et al.  Circumscription - A Form of Non-Monotonic Reasoning , 1980, Artif. Intell..

[26]  Joohyung Lee,et al.  A New Perspective on Stable Models , 2007, IJCAI.

[27]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  Complexity and expressive power of logic programming , 2001, CSUR.

[28]  Maurice Bruynooghe,et al.  Partial Stable Models for Logic Programs with Aggregates , 2004, LPNMR.

[29]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  Set Constraints in Logic Programming , 2004, LPNMR.

[30]  John McCarthy,et al.  Programs with common sense , 1960 .

[31]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  Modular Logic Programming and Generalized Quantifiers , 1997, LPNMR.

[32]  Patrick Henry Winston,et al.  The psychology of computer vision , 1976, Pattern Recognit..

[33]  Jia-Huai You,et al.  Unfolding partiality and disjunctions in stable model semantics , 2000, TOCL.

[34]  Gerhard Weikum,et al.  ACM Transactions on Database Systems , 2005 .

[35]  Vladimir Lifschitz,et al.  Weight constraints as nested expressions , 2003, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

[36]  Timo Soininen,et al.  Extending and implementing the stable model semantics , 2000, Artif. Intell..

[37]  Nardine Osman,et al.  Twentieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 2007 .

[38]  Jack Minker,et al.  On Indefinite Databases and the Closed World Assumption , 1987, CADE.

[39]  Hamid Pirahesh,et al.  The Magic of Duplicates and Aggregates , 1990, VLDB.

[40]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  Succinctness as a Source of Complexity in Logical Formalisms , 1999, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[41]  Chitta Baral.  Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving: Query answering and answer set computing systems , 2003 .

[42]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  Disjunctive datalog , 1997, TODS.

[43]  Teodor C. Przymusinski.  On the Declarative Semantics of Deductive Databases and Logic Programs , 1988, Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming..

[44]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  On the computational cost of disjunctive logic programming: Propositional case , 1995, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[45]  Alex S. Taylor,et al.  Machine intelligence , 2009, CHI.

[46]  Enrico Pontelli,et al.  Answer Sets for Logic Programs with Arbitrary Abstract Constraint Atoms , 2006, AAAI.

[47]  Chitta Baral,et al.  Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving , 2003 .

[48]  Fangzhen Lin,et al.  ASSAT: computing answer sets of a logic program by SAT solvers , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[49]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  Logic Programs With Monotone Cardinality Atoms , 2003, LPNMR.

[50]  Drew McDermott,et al.  Nonmonotonic Logic II: Nonmonotonic Modal Theories , 1982, JACM.

[51]  Drew McDermott,et al.  Non-Monotonic Logic I , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[52]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  Declarative and Computational Properties of Logic Programs with Aggregates , 2005, IJCAI.

[53]  Ulrich Berger,et al.  Computational Logic , 2001, NATO ASI Series.

[54]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Principles of Database and Knowledge-Base Systems, Volume II , 1988, Principles of computer science series.

[55]  Maurice Bruynooghe,et al.  Well-founded and stable semantics of logic programs with aggregates , 2007, Theory Pract. Log. Program..

[56]  Hans Tompits,et al.  A Uniform Integration of Higher-Order Reasoning and External Evaluations in Answer-Set Programming , 2005, IJCAI.

[57]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  Recursive Aggregates in Disjunctive Logic Programs: Semantics and Complexity , 2004, JELIA.

[58]  John B. Shoven,et al.  I , Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal.

[59]  Jeffrey D. Uuman.  Principles of database and knowledge- base systems , 1989 .

[60]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  A framework for representing knowledge , 1974 .

[61]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning , 2002, TOCL.

[62]  Ilkka Niemelä,et al.  Stable Model Semantics of Weight Constraint Rules , 1999, LPNMR.

[63]  Kenneth A. Ross,et al.  Monotonic aggregation in deductive databases , 1992, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[64]  Wolfgang Faber.  Decomposition of Nonmonotone Aggregates in Logic Programming ⋆ , 2006 .

[65]  Dan Suciu,et al.  Journal of the ACM , 2006 .

[66]  Thomas Linke,et al.  NoMoRe : A System for Non-Monotonic Reasoning under Answer Set Semantics , 2001, LPNMR.

[67]  Hans Tompits,et al.  Effective Integration of Declarative Rules with External Evaluations for Semantic-Web Reasoning , 2006, ESWC.

[68]  Enrico Pontelli,et al.  A Constructive semantic characterization of aggregates in answer set programming , 2007, Theory Pract. Log. Program..