Inconsistency robustness is "information system performance in the face of continually pervasive inconsistencies." A fundamental principle of Inconsistency Robustness is to make contradictions explicit so that arguments for and against propositions can be formalized. This paper explores the role of Inconsistency Robustness in the history and theory of Logic Programs. Robert Kowalski put forward a bold thesis: "Looking back on our early discoveries, I value most the discovery that computation could be subsumed by deduction." However, mathematical logic cannot always infer computational steps because computational systems make use of arbitration for determining which message is processed next by a recipient that is sent multiple messages concurrently. Since reception orders are in general indeterminate, they cannot be inferred from prior information by mathematical logic alone. Therefore mathematical logic cannot in general implement computation. Over the course of history, the term "Functional Program" has grown more precise and technical as the field has matured. "Logic Program" should be on a similar trajectory. Accordingly, "Logic Program" should have a general precise characterization. In the fall of 1972, different characterizations of Logic Programs that have continued to this day: * A Logic Program uses Horn-Clause syntax for forward and backward chaining * Each computational step (according to Actor Model) of a Logic Program is deductively inferred (e.g. in Direct Logic). The above examples are illustrative of how issues of inconsistency robustness have repeatedly arisen in Logic Programs.

Finding satisfying assignments for the variables involved in a set of constraints can be cast as a (bounded) model generation problem: search for (bounded) models of a theory in some logic. The state-of-the-art approach for bounded model generation for rich knowledge representation languages like ASP and FO(.) and a CSP modeling language such as Zinc, is ground-and-solve: reduce the theory to a ground or propositional one and apply a search algorithm to the resulting theory. An important bottleneck is the blow-up of the size of the theory caused by the grounding phase. Lazily grounding the theory during search is a way to overcome this bottleneck. We present a theoretical framework and an implementation in the context of the FO(.) knowledge representation language. Instead of grounding all parts of a theory, justifications are derived for some parts of it. Given a partial assignment for the grounded part of the theory and valid justifications for the formulas of the non-grounded part, the justifications provide a recipe to construct a complete assignment that satisfies the non-grounded part. When a justification for a particular formula becomes invalid during search, a new one is derived; if that fails, the formula is split in a part to be grounded and a part that can be justified. Experimental results illustrate the power and generality of this approach.

Recent work introduced Generalized First Order Decision Diagrams (GFODD) as a knowledge representation that is useful in mechanizing decision theoretic planning in relational domains. GFODDs generalize function-free first order logic and include numerical values and numerical generalizations of existential and universal quantification. Previous work presented heuristic inference algorithms for GFODDs and implemented these heuristics in systems for decision theoretic planning. In this paper, we study the complexity of the computational problems addressed by such implementations. In particular, we study the evaluation problem, the satisfiability problem, and the equivalence problem for GFODDs under the assumption that the size of the intended model is given with the problem, a restriction that guarantees decidability. Our results provide a complete characterization placing these problems within the polynomial hierarchy. The same characterization applies to the corresponding restriction of problems in first order logic, giving an interesting new avenue for efficient inference when the number of objects is bounded. Our results show that for $\Sigma_k$ formulas, and for corresponding GFODDs, evaluation and satisfiability are $\Sigma_k^p$ complete, and equivalence is $\Pi_{k+1}^p$ complete. For $\Pi_k$ formulas evaluation is $\Pi_k^p$ complete, satisfiability is one level higher and is $\Sigma_{k+1}^p$ complete, and equivalence is $\Pi_{k+1}^p$ complete.

Distributed representations (such as those based on embeddings) and discrete representations (such as those based on logic) have complementary strengths. We explore one possible approach to combining these two kinds of representations. We present a model theory/semantics for first order logic based on vectors of reals. We describe the model theory, discuss some interesting properties of such a system and present a simple approach to query answering.

The interest in the combination of probability with logics for modeling the world has rapidly increased in the last few years. One of the most effective approaches is the Distribution Semantics which was adopted by many logic programming languages and in Descripion Logics. In this paper, we illustrate the work we have done in this research field by presenting a probabilistic semantics for description logics and reasoning and learning algorithms. In particular, we present in detail the system TRILL P, which computes the probability of queries w.r.t. probabilistic knowledge bases, which has been implemented in Prolog. Note: An extended abstract / full version of a paper accepted to be presented at the Doctoral Consortium of the 30th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2014), July 19-22, Vienna, Austria

Essentially, a connection graph is merely a data structure for a set of clauses indicating possible system. To use the graph, one has to introduce operations on the graph.

In AI we talk about expert systems.

The strategy has been implemented in a simple QLISP program.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means--electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise--without the prior written permission of the publisher.

The first section discusses the importance of having systems that own M.S. thesis (Moore, 19)5), suggests that predicate calculus can understand the concept of knowledge, and how knowledge is be treated in a more natural manner than resolution and related to action. Section 2 points out some of the special problems combined with domain-dependent control information for greater that are involved in reasoning about knowledge, and section $ efficiency. Furthermore, the problems of reasoning about knowledge seem to require the full ability to handle quantifiers presents a logic of knowledge based on the idea of possible worlds. Section 4 integrates this with a logic of actions and gives an and logical connectives which only predicate calculus posseses.