Grounding FO and FO(ID) with Bounds

Grounding is the task of reducing a first-order theory and finite domain to an equivalent propositional theory. It is used as preprocessing phase in many logic-based reasoning systems. Such systems provide a rich first-order input language to a user and can rely on efficient propositional solvers to perform the actual reasoning. Besides a first-order theory and finite domain, the input for grounders contains in many applications also additional data. By exploiting this data, the size of the grounder's output can often be reduced significantly. A common practice to improve the efficiency of a grounder in this context is by manually adding semantically redundant information to the input theory, indicating where and when the grounder should exploit the data. In this paper we present a method to compute and add such redundant information automatically. Our method therefore simplifies the task of writing input theories that can be grounded efficiently by current systems. We first present our method for classical first-order logic (FO) theories. Then we extend it to FO(ID), the extension of FO with inductive definitions, which allows for more concise and comprehensive input theories. We discuss implementation issues and experimentally validate the practical applicability of our method.

[1]  Marc Denecker,et al.  Extending Classical Logic with Inductive Definitions , 2000, Computational Logic.

[2]  DAVID MITCHELL,et al.  Model Expansion as a Framework for Modelling and Solving Search Problems , 2007 .

[3]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  Stable models and an alternative logic programming paradigm , 1998, The Logic Programming Paradigm.

[4]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  GidL: A grounder for FO+ , 2008, Non-Monotonic Reasoning.

[5]  Manu Sridharan,et al.  Exploiting subformula sharing in automatic analysis of quantified formulas , 2003 .

[6]  Randal E. Bryant,et al.  Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[7]  Ilkka Niemelä,et al.  Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm , 1999, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Francesco Scarcello,et al.  Enhancing DLV instantiator by backjumping techniques , 2007, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[9]  Wolfgang Faber,et al.  Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning , 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  Kenneth A. Ross,et al.  The well-founded semantics for general logic programs , 1991, JACM.

[11]  William McCune,et al.  Mace4 Reference Manual and Guide , 2003, ArXiv.

[12]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  The IDP framework for declarative problem solving , 2006 .

[13]  Eugenia Ternovska,et al.  Inductive situation calculus , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Francesco Scarcello,et al.  Improving ASP Instantiators by Join-Ordering Methods , 2001, LPNMR.

[15]  Chu Min Li,et al.  Heuristics Based on Unit Propagation for Satisfiability Problems , 1997, IJCAI.

[16]  Stephan Schulz A Comparison of Different Techniques for Grounding Near-Propositional CNF Formulae , 2002, FLAIRS Conference.

[17]  Maurice Bruynooghe,et al.  SAT(ID): Satisfiability of Propositional Logic Extended with Inductive Definitions , 2008, SAT.

[18]  Eyal Amir,et al.  Compact Propositional Encodings of First-Order Theories , 2005, IJCAI.

[19]  Jennifer Widom,et al.  Database System Implementation , 2000 .

[20]  Jean Goubault-Larrecq A BDD-Based Simplification and Skolemization Procedure , 1995, Log. J. IGPL.

[21]  Robert Demolombe,et al.  Estimation of the Number of Tuples Satisfying a Query Expressed in Predicate Calculus Language , 1980, VLDB.

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

[23]  Peter A. Flach,et al.  Comparative Evaluation of Approaches to Propositionalization , 2003, ILP.

[24]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  The IDP system , 2010 .

[25]  Daniel Jackson,et al.  Software Abstractions - Logic, Language, and Analysis , 2006 .

[26]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  Grounding with Bounds , 2008, AAAI.

[27]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory , 1960, JACM.

[28]  Tommi Syrjänen,et al.  Logic programming and cardinality constraints : theory and practice , 2009 .

[29]  Ronald Fagin Generalized first-order spectra, and polynomial. time recognizable sets , 1974 .

[30]  Emina Torlak,et al.  Kodkod: A Relational Model Finder , 2007, TACAS.

[31]  Bart Selman,et al.  Pushing the Envelope: Planning, Propositional Logic and Stochastic Search , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 2.

[32]  Koen Claessen,et al.  New techniques that improve mace-style model nding , 2003 .

[33]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Proceedings, The Twentieth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the Seventeenth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, July 9-13, 2005, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA , 2005 .

[34]  Maarten Mariën,et al.  On the Relation Between ID-Logic and Answer Set Programming , 2004, JELIA.

[35]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  The IDP system: A model expansion system for an extension of classical logic , 2008 .

[36]  Eugenia Ternovska,et al.  Grounding for Model Expansion in k-Guarded Formulas with Inductive Definitions , 2007, IJCAI.

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

[38]  Miroslaw Truszczynski,et al.  The Second Answer Set Programming Competition , 2009, LPNMR.

[39]  Eugenia Ternovska,et al.  A logic of nonmonotone inductive definitions , 2008, TOCL.

[40]  Miroslaw Truszczynski,et al.  Tools for modeling and solving search problems , 2006, AI Commun..

[41]  Eugenia Ternovska,et al.  Reducing Inductive Definitions to Propositional Satisfiability , 2005, ICLP.

[42]  Martin Gebser,et al.  GrinGo : A New Grounder for Answer Set Programming , 2007, LPNMR.

[43]  Charles L. Forgy,et al.  Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Patterns/Many Objects Match Problem , 1982, Artif. Intell..

[44]  David G. Mitchell,et al.  A Framework for Representing and Solving NP Search Problems , 2005, AAAI.

[45]  Joost Vennekens,et al.  Well-Founded Semantics and the Algebraic Theory of Non-monotone Inductive Definitions , 2007, LPNMR.

[46]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  MidL: A SAT(ID) solver , 2007 .

[47]  Johan Wittocx,et al.  Approximate Reasoning in First-Order Logic Theories , 2008, KR.

[48]  Marco Cadoli,et al.  Compiling Problem Specifications into SAT , 2001, ESOP.