R B. Abhyankar Emphasizing theory and implementation issues more than specific applications and Prolog programming techniques, Computing with Logic Logic Programming with Prolog (The Benjamin Cummings Publishing Company, Menlo Park, Calif., 1988, 535 pp., $27 95) by David Maier and David S. Warren, respected researchers in logic programming, is a superb book Offering an in-depth treatment of advanced topics, the book also includes the necessary background material on logic and automatic theorem proving, making it self-contained. The only real prerequisite is a first course in data structures, although it would be helpful if the reader has also had a first course in program translation. The book has a wealth of exercises and would make an excellent textbook for advanced undergraduate or graduate students in computer science; it is also appropriate for programmers interested in the implementation of Prolog The book presents the concepts of logic programming using theory presentation, implementation, and application of Proplog, Datalog, and Prolog, three logic programming languages of increasing complexity that are based on horn clause subsets of propositional, predicate, and functional logic, respectively This incremental approach, unique to this book, is effective in conveying a thorough understanding of the subject The book consists of 12 chapters grouped into three parts (Part 1 chapters 1 to 3, Part 2. chapters 4 to 6, and Part 3 chapters 7 to 12), an appendix, and an index The three parts, each dealing with one of these logic programming languages, are organized the same First, the authors informally present the language using examples; an interpreter is also presented. Then the formal syntax and semantics for the language and logic are presented, along with soundness and completeness results for the logic and the effects of various search strategies Next, they give optimization techniques for the interpreter Each chapter ends with exercises, brief comments regarding the material in the chapter, and a bibliography Chapter I presents top-down and bottom-up interpreters for Proplog Chapter 2 offers a good discussion of the related notions: negation as failure, closed-world assumption, minimal models, and stratified programs Chapter 3 considers clause indexing and lazy concatenation as optimization techniques for the Proplog interpreter in chapter 1 Chapter 4 explains the connection between Datalog and relational algebra. Chapter 5 contains a proof of Herbrand's theorem for predicate logic.

This bibliography was originally compliled for and distributed at the 1988 Workshop on Principles of Hybrid Reasoning. An informal proceedings was distributed to all participants prior to the workshop. Since the proceedings included previouslypublished papers and early drafts of work in progress, it was distributed no further. However, since most of the draft papers have subsequently appeared in published form, it is now possible to give a virtual proceedings. Published versions of the proceedings papers are indicated in this bibliography with an asterisk.

We introduce deep neural networks for end-to-end differentiable theorem proving that operate on dense vector representations of symbols. These neural networks are recursively constructed by following the backward chaining algorithm as used in Prolog. Specifically, we replace symbolic unification with a differentiable computation on vector representations of symbols using a radial basis function kernel, thereby combining symbolic reasoning with learning subsymbolic vector representations. The resulting neural network can be trained to infer facts from a given incomplete knowledge base using gradient descent. By doing so, it learns to (i) place representations of similar symbols in close proximity in a vector space, (ii) make use of such similarities to prove facts, (iii) induce logical rules, and (iv) it can use provided and induced logical rules for complex multi-hop reasoning. On four benchmark knowledge bases we demonstrate that this architecture outperforms ComplEx, a state-of-the-art neural link prediction model, while at the same time inducing interpretable function-free first-order logic rules.

We propose a deep learning-based approach to the problem of premise selection: selecting mathematical statements relevant for proving a given conjecture. We represent a higher-order logic formula as a graph that is invariant to variable renaming but still fully preserves syntactic and semantic information. We then embed the graph into a vector via a novel embedding method that preserves the information of edge ordering. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art results on the HolStep dataset, improving the classification accuracy from 83% to 90.3%.

In the context of superintelligent AI systems, the term "oracle" has two meanings. One refers to modular systems queried for domain-specific tasks. Another usage, referring to a class of systems which may be useful for addressing the value alignment and AI control problems, is a superintelligent AI system that only answers questions. The aim of this manuscript is to survey contemporary research problems related to oracles which align with long-term research goals of AI safety. We examine existing question answering systems and argue that their high degree of architectural heterogeneity makes them poor candidates for rigorous analysis as oracles. On the other hand, we identify computer algebra systems (CASs) as being primitive examples of domain-specific oracles for mathematics and argue that efforts to integrate computer algebra systems with theorem provers, systems which have largely been developed independent of one another, provide a concrete set of problems related to the notion of provable safety that has emerged in the AI safety community. We review approaches to interfacing CASs with theorem provers, describe well-defined architectural deficiencies that have been identified with CASs, and suggest possible lines of research and practical software projects for scientists interested in AI safety.

Forgetting is an operation on knowledge bases that has been addressed in different areas of Knowledge Representation and with respect to different formalisms, including classical propositional and first-order logic, modal logics, logic programming, and description logics. Definitions of forgetting have been expressed in terms of manipulation of formulas, sets of postulates, isomorphisms between models, bisimulations, second-order quantification, elementary equivalence, and others. In this paper, forgetting is regarded as an abstract belief change operator, independent of the underlying logic. The central thesis is that forgetting amounts to a reduction in the language, specifically the signature, of a logic. The main definition is simple: the result of forgetting a portion of a signature in a theory is given by the set of logical consequences of this theory over the reduced language. This definition offers several advantages. Foremost, it provides a uniform approach to forgetting, with a definition that is applicable to any logic with a well-defined consequence relation. Hence it generalises a disparate set of logic-specific definitions with a general, high-level definition. Results obtained in this approach are thus applicable to all subsumed formal systems, and many results are obtained much more straightforwardly. This view also leads to insights with respect to specific logics: for example, forgetting in first-order logic is somewhat different from the accepted approach. Moreover, the approach clarifies the relation between forgetting and related operations, including belief contraction.

In this paper, we study Reiter's propositional default logic when the treewidth of a certain graph representation (semi-primal graph) of the input theory is bounded. We establish a dynamic programming algorithm on tree decompositions that decides whether a theory has a consistent stable extension (Ext). Our algorithm can even be used to enumerate all generating defaults (ExtEnum) that lead to stable extensions. We show that our algorithm decides Ext in linear time in the input theory and triple exponential time in the treewidth (so-called fixed-parameter linear algorithm). Further, our algorithm solves ExtEnum with a pre-computation step that is linear in the input theory and triple exponential in the treewidth followed by a linear delay to output solutions.

We present an algorithm for the generation of prime implicates in equational logic, that is, of the most general consequences of formulæ containing equations and disequations between first-order terms. This algorithm is defined by a calculus that is proved to be correct and complete. We then focus on the case where the considered clause set is ground, i.e., contains no variables, and devise a specialized tree data structure that is designed to efficiently detect and delete redundant implicates. The corresponding algorithms are presented along with their termination and correctness proofs. Finally, an experimental evaluation of this prime implicate generation method is conducted in the ground case, including a comparison with state-of-the-art propositional and first-order prime implicate generation tools.

Finding solution values for unknowns in Boolean equations was a principal reasoning mode in the Algebra of Logic of the 19th century. Schr\"oder investigated it as "Aufl\"osungsproblem" ("solution problem"). It is closely related to the modern notion of Boolean unification. Today it is commonly presented in an algebraic setting, but seems potentially useful also in knowledge representation based on predicate logic. We show that it can be modeled on the basis of first-order logic extended by second-order quantification. A wealth of classical results transfers, foundations for algorithms unfold, and connections with second-order quantifier elimination and Craig interpolation show up. Although for first-order inputs the set of solutions is recursively enumerable, the development of constructive methods remains a challenge. We identify some cases that allow constructions, most of them based on Craig interpolation, and show a method to take vocabulary restrictions on solution components into account.

Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) has been shown to subsume various other non-monotonic reasoning formalisms, among them normal logic programming (LP). We re-examine the relationship between ABA and LP and show that normal LP also subsumes (flat) ABA. More precisely, we specify a procedure that given a (flat) ABA framework yields an associated logic program with almost the same syntax whose semantics coincide with those of the ABA framework. That is, the 3-valued stable (respectively well-founded, regular, 2-valued stable, and ideal) models of the associated logic program coincide with the complete (respectively grounded, preferred, stable, and ideal) assumption labellings and extensions of the ABA framework. Moreover, we show how our results on the translation from ABA to LP can be reapplied for a reverse translation from LP to ABA, and observe that some of the existing results in the literature are in fact special cases of our work. Overall, we show that (flat) ABA frameworks can be seen as normal logic programs with a slightly different syntax. This implies that methods developed for one of these formalisms can be equivalently applied to the other by simply modifying the syntax.