Logic & Formal Reasoning
Space Efficiency of Propositional Knowledge Representation Formalisms
Cadoli, M., Donini, F. M., Liberatore, P., Schaerf, M.
We investigate the space efficiency of a Propositional Knowledge Representation (PKR) formalism. Intuitively, the space efficiency of a formalism F in representing a certain piece of knowledge A, is the size of the shortest formula of F that represents A. In this paper we assume that knowledge is either a set of propositional interpretations (models) or a set of propositional formulae (theorems). We provide a formal way of talking about the relative ability of PKR formalisms to compactly represent a set of models or a set of theorems. We introduce two new compactness measures, the corresponding classes, and show that the relative space efficiency of a PKR formalism in representing models/theorems is directly related to such classes. In particular, we consider formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning, such as circumscription and default logic, as well as belief revision operators and the stable model semantics for logic programs with negation. One interesting result is that formalisms with the same time complexity do not necessarily belong to the same space efficiency class.
Automated Complexity Analysis Based on the Dependency Pair Method
This article is concerned with automated complexity analysis of term rewrite systems. Since these systems underlie much of declarative programming, time complexity of functions defined by rewrite systems is of particular interest. Among other results, we present a variant of the dependency pair method for analysing runtime complexities of term rewrite systems automatically. The established results significantly extent previously known techniques: we give examples of rewrite systems subject to our methods that could previously not been analysed automatically. Furthermore, the techniques have been implemented in the Tyrolean Complexity Tool. We provide ample numerical data for assessing the viability of the method.
Conformant Planning via Symbolic Model Checking
We tackle the problem of planning in nondeterministic domains, by presenting a new approach to conformant planning. Conformant planning is the problem of finding a sequence of actions that is guaranteed to achieve the goal despite the nondeterminism of the domain. Our approach is based on the representation of the planning domain as a finite state automaton. We use Symbolic Model Checking techniques, in particular Binary Decision Diagrams, to compactly represent and efficiently search the automaton. In this paper we make the following contributions. First, we present a general planning algorithm for conformant planning, which applies to fully nondeterministic domains, with uncertainty in the initial condition and in action effects. The algorithm is based on a breadth-first, backward search, and returns conformant plans of minimal length, if a solution to the planning problem exists, otherwise it terminates concluding that the problem admits no conformant solution. Second, we provide a symbolic representation of the search space based on Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs), which is the basis for search techniques derived from symbolic model checking. The symbolic representation makes it possible to analyze potentially large sets of states and transitions in a single computation step, thus providing for an efficient implementation. Third, we present CMBP (Conformant Model Based Planner), an efficient implementation of the data structures and algorithm described above, directly based on BDD manipulations, which allows for a compact representation of the search layers and an efficient implementation of the search steps. Finally, we present an experimental comparison of our approach with the state-of-the-art conformant planners CGP, QBFPLAN and GPT. Our analysis includes all the planning problems from the distribution packages of these systems, plus other problems defined to stress a number of specific factors. Our approach appears to be the most effective: CMBP is strictly more expressive than QBFPLAN and CGP and, in all the problems where a comparison is possible, CMBP outperforms its competitors, sometimes by orders of magnitude.
OBDD-based Universal Planning for Synchronized Agents in Non-Deterministic Domains
Recently model checking representation and search techniques were shown to be efficiently applicable to planning, in particular to non-deterministic planning. Such planning approaches use Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams (OBDDs) to encode a planning domain as a non-deterministic finite automaton and then apply fast algorithms from model checking to search for a solution. OBDDs can effectively scale and can provide universal plans for complex planning domains. We are particularly interested in addressing the complexities arising in non-deterministic, multi-agent domains. In this article, we present UMOP, a new universal OBDD-based planning framework for non-deterministic, multi-agent domains. We introduce a new planning domain description language, NADL, to specify non-deterministic, multi-agent domains. The language contributes the explicit definition of controllable agents and uncontrollable environment agents. We describe the syntax and semantics of NADL and show how to build an efficient OBDD-based representation of an NADL description. The UMOP planning system uses NADL and different OBDD-based universal planning algorithms. It includes the previously developed strong and strong cyclic planning algorithms. In addition, we introduce our new optimistic planning algorithm that relaxes optimality guarantees and generates plausible universal plans in some domains where no strong nor strong cyclic solution exists. We present empirical results applying UMOP to domains ranging from deterministic and single-agent with no environment actions to non-deterministic and multi-agent with complex environment actions. UMOP is shown to be a rich and efficient planning system.
Reasoning about Minimal Belief and Negation as Failure
We investigate the problem of reasoning in the propositional fragment of MBNF, the logic of minimal belief and negation as failure introduced by Lifschitz, which can be considered as a unifying framework for several nonmonotonic formalisms, including default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, epistemic queries, and logic programming. We characterize the complexity and provide algorithms for reasoning in propositional MBNF. In particular, we show that entailment in propositional MBNF lies at the third level of the polynomial hierarchy, hence it is harder than reasoning in all the above mentioned propositional formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning. We also prove the exact correspondence between negation as failure in MBNF and negative introspection in Moore's autoepistemic logic.
Cooperation between Top-Down and Bottom-Up Theorem Provers
Top-down and bottom-up theorem proving approaches each have specific advantages and disadvantages. Bottom-up provers profit from strong redundancy control but suffer from the lack of goal-orientation, whereas top-down provers are goal-oriented but often have weak calculi when their proof lengths are considered. In order to integrate both approaches, we try to achieve cooperation between a top-down and a bottom-up prover in two different ways: The first technique aims at supporting a bottom-up with a top-down prover. A top-down prover generates subgoal clauses, they are then processed by a bottom-up prover. The second technique deals with the use of bottom-up generated lemmas in a top-down prover. We apply our concept to the areas of model elimination and superposition. We discuss the ability of our techniques to shorten proofs as well as to reorder the search space in an appropriate manner. Furthermore, in order to identify subgoal clauses and lemmas which are actually relevant for the proof task, we develop methods for a relevancy-based filtering. Experiments with the provers SETHEO and SPASS performed in the problem library TPTP reveal the high potential of our cooperation approaches.
A Temporal Description Logic for Reasoning about Actions and Plans
A class of interval-based temporal languages for uniformly representing and reasoning about actions and plans is presented. Actions are represented by describing what is true while the action itself is occurring, and plans are constructed by temporally relating actions and world states. The temporal languages are members of the family of Description Logics, which are characterized by high expressivity combined with good computational properties. The subsumption problem for a class of temporal Description Logics is investigated and sound and complete decision procedures are given. The basic language TL-F is considered first: it is the composition of a temporal logic TL -- able to express interval temporal networks -- together with the non-temporal logic F -- a Feature Description Logic. It is proven that subsumption in this language is an NP-complete problem. Then it is shown how to reason with the more expressive languages TLU-FU and TL-ALCF. The former adds disjunction both at the temporal and non-temporal sides of the language, the latter extends the non-temporal side with set-valued features (i.e., roles) and a propositionally complete language.
The Divide-and-Conquer Subgoal-Ordering Algorithm for Speeding up Logic Inference
It is common to view programs as a combination of logic and control: the logic part defines what the program must do, the control part -- how to do it. The Logic Programming paradigm was developed with the intention of separating the logic from the control. Recently, extensive research has been conducted on automatic generation of control for logic programs. Only a few of these works considered the issue of automatic generation of control for improving the efficiency of logic programs. In this paper we present a novel algorithm for automatic finding of lowest-cost subgoal orderings. The algorithm works using the divide-and-conquer strategy. The given set of subgoals is partitioned into smaller sets, based on co-occurrence of free variables. The subsets are ordered recursively and merged, yielding a provably optimal order. We experimentally demonstrate the utility of the algorithm by testing it in several domains, and discuss the possibilities of its cooperation with other existing methods.
Probabilistic Deduction with Conditional Constraints over Basic Events
We study the problem of probabilistic deduction with conditional constraints over basic events. We show that globally complete probabilistic deduction with conditional constraints over basic events is NP-hard. We then concentrate on the special case of probabilistic deduction in conditional constraint trees. We elaborate very efficient techniques for globally complete probabilistic deduction. In detail, for conditional constraint trees with point probabilities, we present a local approach to globally complete probabilistic deduction, which runs in linear time in the size of the conditional constraint trees. For conditional constraint trees with interval probabilities, we show that globally complete probabilistic deduction can be done in a global approach by solving nonlinear programs. We show how these nonlinear programs can be transformed into equivalent linear programs, which are solvable in polynomial time in the size of the conditional constraint trees.
Complexity of Prioritized Default Logics
In default reasoning, usually not all possible ways of resolving conflicts between default rules are acceptable. Criteria expressing acceptable ways of resolving the conflicts may be hardwired in the inference mechanism, for example specificity in inheritance reasoning can be handled this way, or they may be given abstractly as an ordering on the default rules. In this article we investigate formalizations of the latter approach in Reiter's default logic. Our goal is to analyze and compare the computational properties of three such formalizations in terms of their computational complexity: the prioritized default logics of Baader and Hollunder, and Brewka, and a prioritized default logic that is based on lexicographic comparison. The analysis locates the propositional variants of these logics on the second and third levels of the polynomial hierarchy, and identifies the boundary between tractable and intractable inference for restricted classes of prioritized default theories.