Abstract
The nature of a metalevel extension of Prolog is outlined. The key features include the treatment of theories (databases) and metalevel names as first-class objects which may be the values of variables. The use of the power of these constructs in traditional knowledge representation is explored. In particular, it is shown how frames, semantic nets, scripts, message passing, and non-standard control can be represented.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bowen, K. A., and Kowalski, R. A., “Amalgamating language and metalanguage in logic programming,” inLogic Programming (Clark, K. L., and Tärnlund, S. Å., eds.), Academic Press, London and New York, pp. 153–172, 1982.
Bowen, K. A., and Weinberg, T., “A meta-level extension of Prolog,” inProceedings of the 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming (Cohen, J., and Conery, J., eds.), IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, D. C., pp. 48–53, 1985.
Church, A., “A formulation of the simple theory of types,”The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 5, pp. 56–68, 1940.
Church, A., “A formulation of the logic of sense and denotation,” inStructure, Method, and Meaning (Essays in Honor of Henry M. Sheffer), New York, pp. 3–24, 1951.
Eshgi, K., “Application of meta-language programming to fault finding in logic circuits,” inProceedings of the First International Logic Programming Conference (van Caneghen, M., ed.), Marseille, pp. 240–246, 1982.
Furukawa, K., Takeuchi, A., Kunifuji, S., Yasukawa, H., Ohki, M., and Ueda, K., “MANDALA: A logic based knowledge programming system,” inProceedings of the International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems (ICOT, ed.), pp. 613–622, 1984.
Gödel, K., “Uber formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia mathematica und verwandter System I,”Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik, 38, pp. 173–198. 1931. [English translation in:From Frege to Gödel (van Heijenoort, J., ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 596–616, 1967.]
Kitakami, H., Kunifuji, S., Miyachi, T., and Furukawa, K., “A methodology for implementation of a knowledge acquisition system,” inProceedings of the 1984 International Symposium on Logic Programming IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, D. C., pp. 131–142, 1984.
Kripke, S. A., “Naming and necessity,” inSemantics of Natural Language (Davidson, D. and Harman, G., eds.), D. Reidel Pub. Co., Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 253–355, 1972.
Kuipers, B. J., “A frame for frames: representing knowledge for recognition,” inRepresentation and Understanding (Bobrow, D. G., and Collins, A., eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 151–184, 1975.
Minsky, M., “A framework for representing knowledge,” inThe Psychology of Computer Vision (Winston, P. H., ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 211–277, 1975.
Miyachi, T., Kunifuji, S., Kitakami, H., Furukawa, K., Takeuchi, A., and Yokota, H., “A knowledge assimilation method for logic databases,” inProceedings of the 1984 International Symposium on Logic Programming, IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, D. C., pp. 118–130, 1984.
Nakashima, H., “Prolog/KR — language features,” inProceedings of the First International Logic Programming Conference (van Caneghen, M., ed.), Faculte des Sciences de Luminy, Marseille, pp. 65–70, 1982.
Nakashima, H., “Knowledge representation in Prolog/KR,” in:Proceedings of the 1984 International Symposium on Logic Programming, IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, D. C., pp. 126–130, 1984.
Pereira, L., “Logic control with logic,” inImplementations of Prolog (Cambell, J., ed.), Ellis Horwood, Chichester, England, pp. 177–193, 1984.
Schank, R. and Abelson, R.,Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N. J., 1977.
Shapiro, E., “A subset of concurrent Prolog and its interpreter,”ICOT Technical Report, TR-003, Institute for New Generation Computer Technology, Tokyo, 1983.
Shoenfield, J.,Mathematical Logic, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1967.
Warren, D. H. D., “An abstract Prolog instruction set,”Technical Report, 309, Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, 1983.
Winograd, T., “Frame representations and the declarative-procedural controversy,” inRepresentation and Understanding (Bobrow, D. G., and Collins, A., eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 184–210, 1975.
Winston, P.,Artificial Intelligence, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1984.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work supported in part by US Air Force grant AFOSR-82-0292 and by US Air Force contract F30602-81-C-1069. The author is very grateful to the following people for numerous valuable conversations on the topics of this paper: Hamid Bacha, Aida Batarekh, Kevin Buettner, Ilyas Cicekli, Hideyuki Nakashima, Andy Turk, Maarten van Emden, and Toby Weinberg.
About this article
Cite this article
Bowen, K.A. Meta-level programming and knowledge representation. NGCO 3, 359–383 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03037077
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03037077