Abstract
This paper concentrates on comparing the relative expressive power of five non-monotonic logics that have appeared in the literature. The results on the computational complexity of these logics suggest that these logics have very similar expressive power that exceeds that of classical monotonic logic. A refined classification of non-monotonic logics by their expressive power can be obtained using translation functions that satisfy additional requirements such as faithfulness and modularity used by Gottlob. Basically, we adopt Gottlob’s framework for our analysis, but propose a weaker notion of faithfulness. A surprising result is deduced in light of Gottlob’s results: Moore’s autoepistemic logic is less expressive than Reiter’s default logic and Marek and Truszczyński’s strong autoepistemic logic. The expressive power of priority logic by Wang et al. is also analyzed and shown to coincide with that of default logic. Finally, we present an exact classification of the non-monotonic logics under consideration in the framework proposed in the paper.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
J.L. Balcázar, I. Díaz, and J. Gabarró. Structural Complexity I. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988.
P.A. Bonatti and T. Eiter. Querying disjunctive database through nonmonotonic logics. Theoretical Computer Science, 160:321–363, 1996.
M. Cadoli, F.M. Donini, and M. Schaerf. Is intractability of nonmonotonic reasoning a real drawback. Artificial Intelligence, 88:215–251, 1996.
M. Cadoli and M. Lenzerini. The complexity of propositional closed world reasoning and circumscription. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 2:255–310, 1994.
T. Eiter and G. Gottlob. Propositional circumscription and extended closed world reasoning are Π p2 -complete. Theoretical Computer Science, 114:231–245, 1993.
J. Engelfriet, V. Marek, J. Treur, and M. Truszczyński. Infinitary default logic for specification of nonmonotonic reasoning. In J. Alferes, L. Pereira, and E. Orlowska, editors, Proceedings of the 5th European Workshop on Logics is Artificial Intelligence, pages 224–236. Springer Verlag, October 1996. LNAI, vol. 1126.
Goran Gogic, Henry Kautz, Christos Papadimitriou, and Bart Selman. The comparative linguistics of knowledge representation. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 862–869, Montreal, Canada, August 1995. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
G. Gottlob. Complexity results for nonmonotonic logics. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2(3):397–425, June 1992.
G. Gottlob. Translating default logic into standard autoepistemic logic. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 42(2):711–740, 1995.
T. Imielinski. Results on translating defaults to circumscription. Artificial Intelligence, 32:131–146, 1987.
T. Janhunen. Representing autoepistemic introspection in terms of default rules. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 70–74, Budapest, Hungary, August 1996. John Wiley.
T. Janhunen. Separating disbeliefs from beliefs in autoepistemic reasoning. In J. Dix, U. Furbach, and A. Nerode, editors, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning, pages 132–151, Dagstuhl, Germany, July 1997. Springer-Verlag. LNAI 1265.
K. Konolige. On the relation between default and autoepistemic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 35:343–382, 1988.
V. Lifschitz. Computing circumscription. In Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 121–127, Los Angeles, California, USA, August 1985. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
V. Marek, J. Treur, and M. Truszczyński. Representation theory for default logic. Annals of Mathematics in Artificial Intelligence, 21:343–358, 1997.
W. Marek, G.F. Shvarts, and M. Truszczyński. Modal nonmonotonic logics: Ranges, characterization, computation. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pages 395–404, Cambridge, MA, USA, April 1991. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
W. Marek and M. Truszczyński. Modal logic for default reasoning. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 1:275–302, 1990.
W. Marek and M. Truszczyński. Nonmonotonic Logic: Context-Dependent Reasoning. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993.
J. McCarthy. Circumscription—a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:27–39, 1980.
R.C. Moore. Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic logic. In Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 272–279, Karlsruhe, FRG, August 1983. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
I. Niemelä. On the decidability and complexity of autoepistemic reasoning. Fundamenta Informaticae, 17(1,2):117–155, 1992.
I. Niemelä. A unifying framework for nonmonotonic reasoning. In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 334–338, Vienna, Austria, August 1992. John Wiley.
I. Niemelä. Autoepistemic logic as a unified basis for nonmonotonic reasoning. Doctoral dissertation. Research report A24, Helsinki University of Technology, Digital Systems Laboratory, Espoo, Finland, August 1993.
R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81–132, 1980.
G. Schwarz. On embedding default logic into Moore’s autoepistemic logic. Artificial Intelligence, 80:349–359, 1996.
J. Stillman. It’s not my default: the complexity of membership problems in restricted propositional default logics. In Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 571–578, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, July 1990. The MIT Press.
M. Truszczyński. Modal interpretations of default logic. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 393–398, Sydney, Australia, August 1991. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
X. Wang, J.-H. You, and L.Y. Yuan. Nonmonotonic reasoning by monotonic inferences with priority constraints. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Non-monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming, pages 91–109. Springer, 1996. LNAI 1216.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Janhunen, T. (1998). On the Intertranslatability of Autoepistemic, Default and Priority Logics, and Parallel Circumscription. In: Dix, J., del Cerro, L.F., Furbach, U. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1489. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49545-2_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49545-2_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-65141-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49545-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive