Skip to main content

Equivalence of Logic Programs Under Updates

  • Conference paper
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 3229))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

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 1Q)∪ R and (P 2Q)∪ 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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brass, S., Dix, J.: Characterization of the disjunctive stable semantics by partial evaluation. Journal of Logic Programming 32(3), 207–228 (1997)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Eiter, T., Fink, M.: Uniform equivalence of logic programs under the stable model semantics. In: Palamidessi, C. (ed.) ICLP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2916, pp. 224–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Sabbatini, G., Tompits, H.: Reasoning about evolving nonmonotonic knowledge bases. In: Nieuwenhuis, R., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2250, pp. 407–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Simplifying logic programs under uniform and strong equivalence. In: Lifschitz, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) LPNMR 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2923, pp. 87–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9, 365–385 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Inoue, K.: A simple characterization of extended abduction. In: Palamidessi, C., Moniz Pereira, L., Lloyd, J.W., Dahl, V., Furbach, U., Kerber, M., Lau, K.-K., Sagiv, Y., Stuckey, P.J. (eds.) CL 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1861, pp. 718–732. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Negation as failure in the head. Journal of Logic Programming 35(1), 39–78 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Disjunctive explanations. In: Stuckey, P.J. (ed.) ICLP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2401, pp. 317–332. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kakas, C., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: The role of abduction in logic programming. In: Gabbay, D.M., Hogger, C.J., Robinson, J.A. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 5, pp. 235–324. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Leite, J.A.: Evolving Knowledge Bases. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D., Valverde, A.: Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2, 526–541 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Lifschitz, V., Tang, L.R., Turner, H.: Nested expressions in logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25, 369–389 (1999)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Lifschitz, V., Woo, T.Y.C.: Answer sets in general nonmonotonic reasoning (preliminary report). In: Proc. of KR 1992, pp. 603–614. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lin, F.: Reducing strong equivalence of logic programs to entailment in classical propositional logic. In: Proc. of KR 2002, pp. 170–176. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Maher, M.J.: Equivalence of logic programs. In: [16], pp. 627–658 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Minker, J. (ed.): Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Osorio, M., Navarro, J.A., Arrazola, J.: Equivalence in answer set programming. In: Pettorossi, A. (ed.) LOPSTR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2372, pp. 57–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Pearce, D., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Encodings for equilibrium logic and logic programs with nested expressions. In: Brazdil, P.B., Jorge, A.M. (eds.) EPIA 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2258, pp. 306–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sagiv, Y.: Optimizing Datalog programs. In: [16], pp. 659–668 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tamaki, H., Sato, T.: Unfold/fold transformation of logic programs. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on Logic Programming, pp. 127–138 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Turner, H.: Strong equivalence made easy: nested expressions and weight constraints. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 3(4-5), 609–622 (2003)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Woltran, S.: Characterizations for relativized notions of equivalence in answer set programming. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3229, pp. 161–173. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Inoue, K., Sakama, C. (2004). Equivalence of Logic Programs Under Updates. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3229. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30227-8_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30227-8_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23242-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30227-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics