Aggregated Fuzzy Answer Set Programming

  • Jeroen Janssen
  • Steven Schockaert
  • Dirk Vermeir
  • Martine De Cock
Article

Abstract

Fuzzy Answer Set Programming (FASP) is an extension of answer set programming (ASP), based on fuzzy logic. It allows to encode continuous optimization problems in the same concise manner as ASP allows to model combinatorial problems. As a result of its inherent continuity, rules in FASP may be satisfied or violated to certain degrees. Rather than insisting that all rules are fully satisfied, we may only require that they are satisfied partially, to the best extent possible. However, most approaches that feature partial rule satisfaction limit themselves to attaching predefined weights to rules, which is not sufficiently flexible for most real-life applications. In this paper, we develop an alternative, based on aggregator functions that specify which (combination of) rules are most important to satisfy. We extend upon previous work by allowing aggregator expressions to define partially ordered preferences, and by the use of a fixpoint semantics.

Keywords

Answer Set Programming Fuzzy logic 

Mathematics Subject Classifications (2010)

68N17 03B52 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alsinet, T., Godo, L., Sandri, S.: Two formalisms of extended possibilistic logic programming with context-dependent fuzzy unification: a comparative description. Electron. Notes Theor. Comp. Sci. 66(5), 1–21 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balog, K., de Rijcke, M.: Determining expert profiles (with an application to expert finding). In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI07), pp. 2657–2662 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baral, C.: Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bauters, K., Schockaert, S., De Cock, M., Vermeir, D.: Possibilistic answer set programming revisited. In: Proceedings of the 26th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI) (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brewka, G.: Complex preferences for answer set optimization. In: Dubois, D., Welty, C.A., Williams, M.A. (eds.) KR, pp. 213–223 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brewka, G., Niemelä, I., Truszczyński, M.: Answer set optimization. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 867–872 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cao, T.H.: Annotated fuzzy logic programs. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 113(2), 277–298 (2000)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choquet, G.: Theory of capacities. Ann. Inst. Fourier 5, 131–295 (1954)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Damásio, C.V., Pereira, L.M.: Hybrid probabilistic logic programs as residuated logic programs. In: Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA’00), pp. 57–72 (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Damásio, C.V., Pereira, L.M.: Antitonic logic programs. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR’01), pp. 379–392 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damásio, C.V., Pereira, L.M.: Monotonic and residuated logic programs. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU’01), pp. 748–759 (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Damásio, C.V., Pereira, L.M.: Sorted monotonic logic programs and their embeddings. In: Proceedings of Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty (IPMU04), pp. 807–814 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Damásio, C.V., Medina, J., Ojeda-Aciego, M.: Sorted multi-adjoint logic programs: termination results and applications. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA’04), pp. 260–273 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Damásio, C.V., Medina, J., Ojeda-Aciego, M.: Termination of logic programs with imperfect information: applications and query procedure. Journal of Applied Logic 5(3), 435–458 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    De Cock, M.: A Thorough Study of Linguistic Modifiers in Fuzzy Set Theory. Ph.D. thesis, Ghent University (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dekhtyar, A., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Hybrid probabilistic programs. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP’97), pp. 391–405 (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Detyniecki, M.: Numerical aggregation operators: state of the art. In: Proceedings of the First International Summer School on Aggregation Operators and Their Applications (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dubois, D., Fortemps, P.: Computing improved optimal solutions to max–min flexible constraint satisfaction problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 118, 95–126 (1999)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Weighted minimum and maximun operations in fuzzy sets theory. Inf. Sci. 39(2), 205–210 (1986)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Advances in the egalitarist approach to decision-making in a fuzzy environment. In: Yoshida, Y. (eds.) Dynamical Aspect in Fuzzy Decision Making, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol. 73, pp. 213–240 (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dubois, D., Lang, J., Prade, H.: Towards possibilistic logic programming. In: Proceedings of the Eigth International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP’91), pp. 581–595 (1991)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Prade, H.: Refinements of the maximin approach to decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 81(1), 103–122 (1996)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Emden, M.H.v.: Quantitative deduction and its fixpoint theory. J. Log. Program. 30(1), 37–53 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fagin, R., Wimmers, E.L.: A formula for incorporating weights into scoring rules. Theor. Comp. Sci. 239, 309–338 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fitting, M.: Bilattices and the semantics of logic programming. J. Log. Program. 11(2), 91–116 (1991)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fodor, J.C., Yager, R.R., Rybalov, A.: Structure of uninorms. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 5(4), 411–427 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fuhr, N.: Probabilistic datalog: implementing logical information retrieval for advanced applications. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 51(2), 95–110 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Garg, N., Kavitha, T., Kumar, A., Mehlhorn, K., Mestre, J.: Assigning Papers to Referees (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming (ICLP/SLP’88), pp. 1081–1086 (1988)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grabisch, M.: k-Additive fuzzy measures. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems (IPMU96) (1996)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Grabisch, M., Nguyen, H.T., E., W.: Fundamentals of Uncertainty Calculi with Applications to Fuzzy Inference. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1995)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hájek, P.: Metamathematics of Fuzzy Logic (Trends in Logic) (2001)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ishizuka, M., Kanai, N.: Prolog-elf incorporating fuzzy logic. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’85), pp. 701–703 (1985)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Janssen, J., Heymans, S., Vermeir, D., De Cock, M.: Compiling fuzzy answer set programs to fuzzy propositional theories. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP08) (2008)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Janssen, J., Schockaert, S., Vermeir, D., De Cock, M.: Fuzzy answer set programming with literal preferences. In: Proceedings of the Joint 2009 International Fuzzy Systems Association World Congress and 2009 European Society of Fuzzy Logic and Technology Conference (IFSA/EUSFLAT2009), pp. 1347–1352 (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Janssen, J., Schockaert, S., Vermeir, D., De Cock, M.: General fuzzy answer set programs. In: Gesù, V.D., Pal, S.K., Petrosino, A. (eds.) WILF, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5571, pp. 352–359 (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Janssen, J., Schockaert, S., Vermeir, D., De Cock, M.: Reducing fuzzy answer set programming to model finding in fuzzy logics. Theory Prac. Log. Program. (To appear)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kifer, M., Li, A.: On the semantics of rule-based expert systems with uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT’88), pp. 102–117 (1988)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kifer, M., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Theory of generalized annotated logic programming and its applications. J. Log. Program. 12(3&4), 335–367 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lakshmanan, L.V.S.: An epistemic foundation for logic programming with uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS’94), pp. 89–100 (1994)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lakshmanan, V.S.: Towards a Generalized Theory of Deductive Databases with Uncertainty. Ph.D. thesis, Concordia University (1997)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lakshmanan, L.V.S., Sadri, F.: Modeling uncertainty in deductive databases. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA’94), pp. 724–733 (1994)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lakshmanan, L.V.S., Sadri, F.: Probabilistic deductive databases. In: Proceedings of the 1994 International Symposium on Logic programming (ILPS’94), pp. 254–268. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lakshmanan, L.V.S., Sadri, F.: Uncertain deductive databases: a hybrid approach. Inf. Syst. 22(9), 483–508 (1997)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lakshmanan, L.V.S., Shiri, N.: A parametric approach to deductive databases with uncertainty. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 13(4), 554–570 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Faber, W., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Perri, S., Scarcello, F.: The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Trans. Computat. Log. 7(3), 499–562 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Loyer, Y., Straccia, U.: The well-founded semantics in normal logic programs with uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Functional and Logic Programming (FLOPS’02), pp. 152–166 (2002)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Loyer, Y., Straccia, U.: The approximate well-founded semantics for logic programs with uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS’03), pp. 541–550 (2003)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Luhandjula, M.K.: Compensatory operators in fuzzy linear programming with multiple objectives. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 8(3), 245–252 (1982)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lukasiewicz, T.: Probabilistic logic programming. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’98), pp. 388–392 (1998)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lukasiewicz, T.: Many-valued disjunctive logic programs with probabilistic semantics. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR’99), pp. 277–289 (1999)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lukasiewicz, T.: Fuzzy description logic programs under the answer set semantics for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web (RuleML’06), pp. 89–96 (2006)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lukasiewicz, T., Straccia, U.: Tightly integrated fuzzy description logic programs under the answer set semantics for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Web Reasoning and Rule Systems (RR’07), pp. 289–298 (2007)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lukasiewicz, T., Straccia, U.: Top-k retrieval in description logic programs under vagueness for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM’07), pp. 16–30 (2007)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Madrid, N., Ojeda-Aciego, M.: Towards a fuzzy answer set semantics for residuated logic programs. In: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT’08), pp. 260–264 (2008)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Madrid, N., Ojeda-Aciego, M.: On coherence and consistence in fuzzy answer set semantics for residuated logic programs. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Fuzzy Logic and Applications (WILF’09), pp. 60–67 (2009)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Madrid, N., Ojeda-Aciego, M.: Measuring instability in normal residuated logic programs: discarding information. Commun. Comp. Inf. Sci. 80, 128–137 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Madrid, N., Ojeda-Aciego, M.: On the measure of instability in normal residuated logic programs. In: Proceedings of FUZZ-IEEE’10 (2010)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Marek, V., Truszczyński, M.: Stable Models and an Alternative Logic Programming Paradigm, chapter 7, pp. 169–181 (1999)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nerode, A., Remmel, J.B., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Annotated nonmonotonic rule systems. Theor. Comp. Sci. 171(1-2), 111–146 (1997)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ng, R., Subrahmanian, V.S.: A semantical framework for supporting subjective and conditional probabilities in deductive databases. J. Autom. Reason. 10(2), 191–235 (1993)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ng, R., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Stable semantics for probabilistic deductive databases. Inf. Comput. 110(1), 42–83 (1994)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Nicolas, P., Garcia, L., Stéphan, I.: Possibilistic stable models. In: Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Answer Set Programming and Constraints, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (2005)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Nicolas, P., Garcia, L., Stéphan, I., Lefèvre, C.: Possibilistic uncertainty handling for answer set programming. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 47(1–2), 139–181 (2006)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Niemelä, I.: Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 25, 241–273 (1999)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Novák, V., Perfilieva, I., Moc̆kor̆, J.: Mathematical Principles of Fuzzy Logic. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1999)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Saad, E.: Extended fuzzy logic programs with fuzzy answer set semantics. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM’09), pp. 223–239 (2009)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Schiex, T., Fargier, H., Verfaillie, G.: Valued constraint satisfaction problems: hard and easy problems. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’95), pp. 631–637 (1995)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Schockaert, S., Janssen, J., Vermeir, D., De Cock, M.: Answer sets in a fuzzy equilibrium logic. In: Proceedings of Rule Reasoning 2009 (RR2009), pp. 135–149 (2009)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Shapiro, E.Y.: Logic programs with uncertainties: a tool for implementing rule-based systems. In: Proceedings of the Eighth international joint conference on Artificial intelligence (IJCAI’83), pp. 529–532 (1983)Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Simons, P.: Extending and Implementing the Stable Model Semantics. Ph.D. thesis, Helsinki University of Technology (2000)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Straccia, U.: Query answering in normal logic programs under uncertainty. In: In 8th European Conferences on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU-05), pp. 687–700 (2005)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Straccia, U.: Annotated answer set programming. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems (IPMU’06) (2006)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Straccia, U.: Managing uncertainty and vagueness in description logics, logic programs and description logic programs. In: Reasoning Web: 4th International Summer School 2008, pp. 54–103 (2008)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Straccia, U., Ojeda-Aciego, M., Damásio, C.V.: On fixed-points of multivalued functions on complete lattices and their application to generalized logic programs. SIAM J. Comput. 38(5), 1881–1911 (2009)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Subrahmanian, V.S.: Amalgamating knowledge bases. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 19(2), 291–331 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Sugeno, M.: Theory of Fuzzy Integrals and its Application. Ph.D. thesis, Tokyo Institute of Technology (1974)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tarski, A.: A lattice theoretical fixpoint theorem and its application. Pac. J. Math. 5, 285–309 (1955)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Turksen, I.B.: Interval-valued fuzzy sets and “compensatory and”. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 51(3), 295–307 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Van Nieuwenborgh, D., De Cock, M., Vermeir, D.: An introduction to fuzzy answer set programming. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 50(3–4), 363–388 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Vojtás, P.: Fuzzy logic programming. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 124(3), 361–370 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Wagner, G.: Negation in fuzzy and possibilistic logic programs. Uncertainty Theory in Artificial Intelligence Series (3), 113–128 (1998)Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Yager, R.R.: A new methodology for ordinal multiple aspect decisions based on fuzzy sets. Decis. Sci. 12, 589–600 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Yager, R.R.: On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 18(1), 183–190 (1988)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Yager, R.R., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.): The Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators: Theory and Applications. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeroen Janssen
    • 1
  • Steven Schockaert
    • 2
  • Dirk Vermeir
    • 1
  • Martine De Cock
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceVrije Universiteit Brussel, VUBBrusselBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversiteit Gent, UGentGentBelgium

Personalised recommendations