Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Overview of disjunctive logic programming

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The field of disjunctive programming started approximately in 1982 and has reached its first decade. The first result in the field was the development of the Generalized Closed World Assumption (GCWA). Major results have been made in this field since 1986. An overview is presented of the developments that have taken place, which include model theoretic, proof theoretic and fixpoint semantics for disjunctive, and extended normal disjunctive theories including alternative forms of negation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J.J. Alferes and L.M. Pereira, On logic program semantics with two kinds of negation, in:Proc. Joint Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, ed. K. Apt, Washington, DC, USA, 1992 (The MIT Press) pp. 574–588.

    Google Scholar 

  2. K.R. Apt, H.A. Blair and A. Walker, Towards a theory of declarative knowledge, in:Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufman, Washington, 1988) pp. 89–148.

    Google Scholar 

  3. K.R. Apt and R.N. Bol, Logic programming and negation: A survey, J. Logic Prog. 19/20 (1994) 9–71.

    Google Scholar 

  4. K.R. Apt, Logic programming, in:Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. B, ed. J. van Leeuwen (Elsevier, 1990) pp. 493–574.

  5. K.R. Apt and M.H. van Emden, Contributions to the theory of logic programming, J. ACM 29(3) (1982) 841–862.

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. Baral, Issues in knowledge representation: Semantics and Knowledge Combination, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 (1991); also University of Maryland Technical Report CS-TR-2761, UMIACS TR-91-129.

    Google Scholar 

  7. C. Baral, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Generalized disjunctive well-founded semantics for logic programs: Declarative semantics, in:Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, eds. Z. Ras, M. Zemankova and M.L. Emrich (Knoxville, TN, October 1990) pp. 465–473.

  8. C. Baral, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Generalized disjunctive well-founded semantics for logic programs: Procedural semantics, in:Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, eds. Z. Ras, M. Zemankova and M.L. Emrich, Knoxville, TN 1990, pp. 456–464.

  9. C. Baral, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Generalized well-founded semantics for logic programs,Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, ed. M.E. Stickle, Kaiserslautern, FRG, 1990 (Springer) pp. 102–116.

    Google Scholar 

  10. C. Baral, J. Lobo and J. Minker, WF3: A semantics for negation in normal disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. 6th Int. Symp. on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, Charlotte, NC, 1991.

  11. C. Baral and M. Gelfond, Logic programming and knowledge representation, J. Logic Progr. 19/20 (1994) 73–148.

    Google Scholar 

  12. C. Bell, A. Nerode, R. Ng and V.S. Subrahmanian, Mixed integer programming methods for computing non-monotonic deductive databases. Also Technical Report CS-TR-2801, University of Maryland (1991), to appear in J. ACM.

  13. R. Ben-Eliyahu and R. Dechter, Propositional semantics for default logic, Technical Report R-163, Cognitive Science Lab., Computer Science Dept., Univ. of California at Los Angeles, USA (1992). Also presented at the4th Int. Workshop on Non-monotonic Reasoning, Vermont, 1992. Notes edited by H. Kautz and D.W. Etherington.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Ben-Eliyahu and R. Dechter, Propositional semantics for disjunctive logic programming. in: K. Apt, editor,Proc. Joint Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, ed. K. Apt, Washington, DC, USA, 1992 (MIT Press) pp. 379–385. Full paper appears in [15].

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Ben-Eliyahu and R. Dechter, Propositional semantics for disjunctive logic programs. Ann. Math. and AI, this issue.

  16. A. Borgida and D.W. Etherington, Hierarchical knowledge bases and efficient disjunctive reasoning, in:Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (1989) pp. 33–43.

  17. G. Bossu and P. Siegel, Saturation, nonmonotonic reasoning and the closed-world assumption, Artificial Intelligence 25 (1985) 13–63.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Cadoli, Two methods for tractable reasoning in artificial intelligence: Language restriction and theory approximation, Ph.D. Thesis, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, Via Salaria 113, 00198 Roma, Italy (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Cadoli and M. Lenzerini, The complexity of closed world reasoning and circumscription, in:Proc. AAAI, 1990, pp. 550–555. Also Technical Report, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, via Salaria 113, 00198 Roma, Italy.

  20. M. Cadoli and M. Schaerf, A survey on complexity results for non-monotonic logics, J. Logic Progr. 17(2–4) (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  21. E. Chan, A possible world semantics for non-Horn databases (University of Waterloo, Canada, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  22. W. Chen and D.S. Warren, A goal-oriented approach to compute the well-founded semantics,J. Logic Progr. 17(2–4) (1993) 279–300.

    Google Scholar 

  23. S. Chi and L.J. Henschen, Recursive query answering with non-Horn clauses, in:Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, eds. E.L. Lusk and R.A. Overbeek, Argonne, IL, 1988, pp. 294–312.

  24. J. Chomicki and V.S. Subrahmanian, Generalized closed world assumption is π 02 complete, Inform. Processing Lett., 34 (1990) 281–292.

    Google Scholar 

  25. K.L. Clark, Negation as failure, in:Logic and Data Bases, eds. H. Gallaire and J. Minker (Plenum, New York, 1978) pp. 293–322.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H. Decker, On alternative models, fixpoints and consistency of disjunctive databases, Siemens Corp. Technical Report (1991).

  27. H. Decker, On the declarative, operational and procedural semantics of disjunctive computational theories, in:Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on the Deductive Approach to Information Systems and Databases, Aiguablava, Spain, 1991 (invited paper).

  28. R. Demolombe, An efficient strategy for non-Horn deductive data bases (1988), Extended version of ref. [29]. CERT Technical Report, Toulouse, France.

  29. R. Demolombe, An efficient strategy for non-Horn deductive data bases, in:Information Processing 89, ed. G.X. Deiter (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1989) pp. 325–330.

    Google Scholar 

  30. J. Dix, Classifying semantics of logic programs, in: Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning:Proc. 1st Int. Workshop, eds. A. Nerode, W. Marek and V.S. Subrahmanian (MIT Press, 1991) pp. 166–180.

  31. J. Dix, Semantics of logic programs: Their intuitions and formal properties. An overview, to appear in Logic, Action and Informaticae (1994).

  32. J. Dix, G. Gottlob and V. Marek. Causal models of disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, ed. P. Van Hentenryck (The MIT Press, 1994) pp. 290–302.

  33. J. Dix and M. Müller, An axiomatic approach to semantics of disjunctive programs, in:Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, ed. P. Van Hentenryck (The MIT Press, 1994) pp. 303–320.

  34. P.M. Dung and K. Kanchanasut, On generalized predicate completion of non-Horn programs, in:North American Conf. in Logic Programming (Cleveland, 1989) pp. 587–603.

  35. P.M. Dung and N.H. Liem, Negation as failure for disjunctive logic programming, Ann. Math. and AI, this issue.

  36. T. Eiter and G. Gottlob, On the complexity of logic-based abduction, in:Proc. 10th Symp. on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS-93) (LNCS Springer-Verlag, 1993).

  37. T. Eiter and G. Gottlob, Propositional circumscription and extended closed world reasoning are П p2 -complete, Technical Report CD-TR 91/20, Christian Doppler Labor Für Expertensysteme Technische Universität Wien, Vienna, Austria (1993), to appear in Theor. Comp. Sci.

    Google Scholar 

  38. J.A. Fernández, Disjunctive deductive databases. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. USA (1994), TR CS-TR-3208 UMIACS-TR-94-6.

    Google Scholar 

  39. J.A. Fernández and J. Lobo, A proof procedure for stable theories, submitted to J. Logic Progr. (1993).

  40. J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Bottom-up evaluation on disjunctive databases, in:Proc. Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, ed. K. Furukawa (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991) pp. 660–675.

    Google Scholar 

  41. J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Theory and algorithms for disjunctive deductive databases, Programmirovanie 3 (1993) 5–39 (in Russian) Invited Paper by the Academy of Sciences of Russia, (in English) University of Maryland Department of Computer Science CS-TR-3223 and UMIACS-TR-94-17 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  42. J.A. Fernández, J. Lobo, J. Minker and V.S. Subrahmanian, Disjunctive LP+integrity constraints=stable model semantics, Ann. Math. and AI 8 (1993) 449–474.

    Google Scholar 

  43. J.A. Fernández, Z.A. Khandakar and J. Minker, A tractable class of disjunctive deductive databases, in:Proc. Workshop on Deductive Databases, Joint Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming (JICSLP'92), Washington, DC, 1992.

  44. J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Semantics of disjunctive deductive databases, in:Int. Conf. on Database Theory: Lecture Notes in Computer Science 646 (Springer-Verlag, 1992) pp. 21–50.

  45. J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Bottom-up computation of perfect models for disjunctive theories, J. Logic Prog. (1993) submitted. Preliminary version presented at the ILPS'91 Workshop on Disjunctive Logic Programs, San Diego, California.

  46. M.C. Fitting and M. Ben-Jacob, Stratified and three-valued logic programming semantics, in:Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, eds. R.A. Kowalski and K.A. Bowen, Seattle, WA, 1988, pp. 1054–1069.

  47. D.M. Gabbay, N-PROLOG: an extension of PROLOG with hypothetical implication, Part 2, J. Logic Progr. 4 (1985) 251–283.

    Google Scholar 

  48. D.M. Gabbay and U. Reyle, N-PROLOG: an extension of PROLOG with hypothetical implication, Part 1, J. Logic Progr. 4 (1984) 319–355.

    Google Scholar 

  49. M. Gelfond, Logic programming and reasoning with incomplete information, Ann. Math. and AI, this issue.

  50. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz, Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases, New Generation Comp. 9 (1991) 365–385.

    Google Scholar 

  51. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz, The stable model semantics for logic programming, in:Proc. 5th Logic Programming Symp. (Ass. Logic Programming, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1988) pp. 1070–1080.

    Google Scholar 

  52. M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz, Logic programs with classical negation, in: Logic Programming:Proc. 7th Int. Conf., eds. D.H.D. Warren and P. Szeredi (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990) pp. 579–597.

    Google Scholar 

  53. M. Gelfond, H. Przymusińska and T.C. Przymusinski, The extended closed world assumption and its relation to parallel circumscription,Proc. 5th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOID Symp. on Principle of Database Systems (1986) pp. 133–139.

  54. M. Gelfond, V. Lifschitz, H. Przymusińska and M. Truszczyński, Disjunctive defaults, in:Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proc. 2nd Int. Conf., San Mateo, CA, April 22–25, 1991, eds. J. Allen, R. Fikes and E. Sandewall (Morgan Kaufmann) pp. 230–237.

  55. M.L. Ginsberg, ed.,Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning (Morgan Kaufmann, 1987).

  56. G. Gottlob, Complexity results for non-monotonic logics, J. Logic and Comput. 2 (1992) 397–425.

    Google Scholar 

  57. J. Grant and J. Minker, Answering queries in indefinite databases and the null value problem, in:Advances in Computing Research, ed. P. Kanellakis (1986) pp. 247–267.

  58. L.J. Henschen and H. Park, Compiling the GCWA in indefinite databases, in:Foundations of Decutive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, Washington, 1988) pp. 395–438.

    Google Scholar 

  59. R. Hill, Lush resolution and its completeness, TR DCL Memo 78, Department of Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh (1974).

  60. T. Imielinski, Incomplete deductive databases, Ann. Math. and AI 3 (1991) 259–293.

    Google Scholar 

  61. T. Imielinski and K. Vadaparty, Complexity of query processing in databases with OR-objects, in:Proc. 7th ACM SIGACT/SIGMOD Symp. on Principles of Database Systems, Philadelphia, PA, 1989, pp. 51–65.

  62. K. Inoue, M. Koshimura and R. Hasegawa, Embedding negation as failure into a model generation theorem prover, in:Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, ed. D. Kapur, Saratoga Springs NY, USA, 1992 (Springer-Verlag) pp. 400–415.

    Google Scholar 

  63. J. Jaffar, J.-L. Lassez and J.W. Lloyd, Completeness of the negation as failure rule, in:Proc. 8th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Karlsruhe, West Germany, 1983, pp. 500–506.

  64. A.C. Kakas, R.A. Kowalski and F. Toni, Abductive logic programming, J. Logic and Comput. 2 (1993) 719–770. Also, Technical Report, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, London (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  65. R.A. Kowalski and D. Kuehner, Linear resolution with selection function, Artificial Intelligence 2 (1991) 227–260.

    Google Scholar 

  66. R.A. Kowalski, The early years of logic programming, Commun. ACM 31(1) (1988) 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  67. S. Kraus, D. Lehmann and M. Magidor, Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics, Artificial Intelligence (44) (1990) 167–207.

    Google Scholar 

  68. J.L. Lassez and M.J. Maher, Closure and fairness in the semantics of programming logic, Theor. Comp. Sci. 29 (1984) 167–184.

    Google Scholar 

  69. V. Lifschitz and H. Turner, From disjunctive programs to abduction, in:Proc. of the Workshop on Non-monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming: Theory, Implementation and Applications, held in conjunction with ICLP'94, eds. J. Dix, L.M. Pereira and T. Przymusinski, 1994, pp. 111–125.

  70. K.C. Liu and R. Sunderraman, Indefinite and maybe information in relational databases, ACM Transact. Database Syst. 15(1) (1990) 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  71. K.-C. Liu and R. Sunderraman, On representing indefinite and maybe information in relational databases: a generalization,Proc. IEEE Data Engineering, 1990, pp. 495–502.

  72. J.W. Lloyd,Foundations of Logic Programming (Springer, 1984).

  73. J.W. Lloyd,Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd Ed. (Springer, 1987).

  74. J. Lobo, On the semantics of disjunctive logic programs with negation, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science (1990); also, University of Maryland Technical Report CS-TR-2604, UMIACS-TR-91-20.

  75. J. Lobo, J. Minker and A. Rajesekar, Extending the semantics of logic programs to disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, eds. G. Levi and M. Martelli. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1989. (MIT Press) pp. 255–267.

    Google Scholar 

  76. J. Lobo, J. Minker and A. Rajasekar,Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming (MIT Press, 1992).

  77. J. Lobo, A. Rajasekar and J. Minker, Weak completion theory for non-Horn programs, in:Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, eds. R.A. Kowalski and K.A. Bowen (Seattle, Washington, August 15–19, 1988) pp. 828–842.

  78. J. Lobo, C. Yu and G. Wang, Computing the transitive closure in disjunctive databases, Technical Report, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago (1992).

  79. D.W. Loveland,Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis (North-Holland, 1978).

  80. D.W. Loveland, Near-Horn PROLOG, in:Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, ed. J.-L. Lassez (1987) pp. 456–459.

  81. D.W. Loveland and D.W. Reed, A near-Horn PROLOG for compilation, in:Computational Logic: Essays in Honor of J. Alan Robinson, ed. J.-L. Lassez (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991), to appear; also Technical Report CS-1989-14, Duke University.

    Google Scholar 

  82. D.W. Loveland, D.W. Reed and D.S. Wilson, SATCHMORE: SATCHMO with RElevancy. Technical Report CS-1994-16, Dept. of Computer Science. Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  83. R. Manthey and F. Bry. SATCHMO: A theorem prover implemented in Prolog, in:Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, 1988.

  84. W. Marek and M. Truszczyński, Autoepistemic logic, J. ACM 38 (1991) 588–619.

    Google Scholar 

  85. W. Marek and M. Truszczyński,Non-monotonic Logics: Context-Dependent Reasoning (Springer-Verlag, 1993).

  86. J. McCarthy, Circumscription — a form of non-monotonic reasoning, Artificial Intelligence 13 (1980) 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  87. D. McDermott and J. Doyle, Non-monotonic logic I, Artificial Intelligence 25 (1980) 41–72.

    Google Scholar 

  88. J. Minker, On definite databases and the closed world assumption, in:Lecture Notes in Computer Science 138 (Springer, 1982) pp. 292–308.

    Google Scholar 

  89. J. Minker,Proc. Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  90. J. Minker, Perspectives in deductive databases, J. Logic Progr. 5 (1988) 33–60.

    Google Scholar 

  91. J. Minker, Toward a foundation of disjunctive logic programming, in:Proc. North American Conf. on Logic Programming, eds. E.L. Lusk and R.A. Overbeek (1989) pp. 1215–1235.

  92. J. Minker, An overview of nonmonotonic reasoning and logic programming, J. Logic Progr. 17 (2–4) (1993) 95–126.

    Google Scholar 

  93. J. Minker and A. Rajasekar, A fixpoint semantics for non-Horn logic programs, Technical Report CS-TR-1869, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  94. J. Minker and A. Rajasekar, Procedural interpretation of non Horn logic programs, in:Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Automated Deduction, eds. E.L. Lusk and R.A. Overbeek (1988) pp. 278–293.

  95. J. Minker and A. Rajasekar, Disjunctive logic programming, in:Proc. Int. Symp. Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, 1989, pp. 381–394 (Invited Lecture).

  96. J. Minker and A. Rajasekar, A fixpoint semantics for disjunctive logic programs, J. Logic Progr. 9 (1990) 45–74.

    Google Scholar 

  97. J. Minker and C. Ruiz, On extended disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. 7th Int. Symp. on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, eds. J. Komorowski and Z.W. Raś. Lecture Notes in AI. Springer-Verlag (1993) pp. 1–18 (Invited Paper).

  98. J. Minker and C. Ruiz, Semantics for disjunctive logic programs with explicit and default negation, Fundamenta Informaticae 20(3/4) (1994) 145–192. Anniversary Issue edited by H. Rasiowa.

    Google Scholar 

  99. J. Minker and G. Zanon, An extension to linear resolution with selection function, Inform. Proc. Lett. 14(3) (1982) 191–194.

    Google Scholar 

  100. R.C. Moore, Possible-world semantics for autoepistemic logic, in:Proc. AAAI Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, 1984, pp. 396–401.

  101. R.C. Moore, Semantical considerations on non-monotonic logic, Artificial Intelligence 25 (1985) 75–94.

    Google Scholar 

  102. T.C. Przymusinski, On the declarative semantics of deductive databases and logic programming, in:Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, Washington, 1988) pp. 193–216.

    Google Scholar 

  103. T.C. Przymusinski, Perfect model semantics, in:Proc 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, eds. R. Kowalski and K. Bowen (1988) pp. 1081–1096.

  104. T.C. Przymusinski, Every logic program has a natural stratification and an iterated fixed point model, in:Proc. 8th ACM SIGACT/SIGMOD/SIGART Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (1989) pp. 11–21.

  105. T.C. Przymusinski, On the declarative and procedural semantics of logic programs, J. Automated Reasoning 5(2) (June 1989).

  106. T.C. Przymusinski, Extended stable semantics for normal and disjunctive programs, in:Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, eds. D.H.D. Warren and P. Szeredi. Jerusalem, Israel, 1990 (MIT Press), 459–477.

  107. T.C. Przymusinski, Three valued stable models and well-founded models of logic programs, Technical Report, Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at El Paso (1990).

  108. T.C. Przymusinski, Stationary semantics for disjunctive logic programs and deductive databases, in:Proc. North American Conf. on Logic Programming, eds. S. Debray and M. Hermenegildo (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990) pp. 42–59.

    Google Scholar 

  109. T.C. Przymusinski, Stable semantics for disjunctive programs, New Generation Comp. J. 9 (1991) 401–424.

    Google Scholar 

  110. T. Przymusinski, Static semantics of logic programs, in:Proc Workshop on Non-monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming: Theory, Implementation and Applications, held in conjunction with ICLP'94, eds. J. Dix, L.M. Pereira and T. Przymusinski, 1994, pp. 17–32.

  111. A. Rajasekar, Semantics for disjunctive logic programs, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science (1989); also, University of Maryland Technical Report CS-TR-2359, UMIACS-TR-89-122.

  112. A. Rajasekar, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Weak generalized closed world assumption, J. Automated Reasoning (1989) 293–307.

  113. A. Rajasekar and J. Minker, Stratification semantics for general disjunctive programs, in:Proc. North American Conf. on Logic Programming, eds. E.L. Lusk and R.A. Overbeek, 1989, pp. 573–586.

  114. D.W. Reed, D.W. Loveland and B.T. Smith, An alternative of disjunction logic programs, in:Proc. Int. Logic Programming Symp. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991); also Technical Report, CS-1991-11, Department of Computer Science, Duke University.

    Google Scholar 

  115. E. Reiter, On closed world data bases, in:Logic and Data Bases, eds. H. Gallaire and J. Minker (Plenum, New York, 1978) p. 55–76.

    Google Scholar 

  116. R. Reiter, A logic for default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence 13 (1980) 81–132.

    Google Scholar 

  117. R. Reiter, A sound and sometimes complete query evaluation algorithm for relational databases with null values, J. ACM 33 (1986) 349–370.

    Google Scholar 

  118. R. Reiter, Nonmonotonic reasoning, Ann. Rev. Comp. Sci. (1987) 147–188.

  119. J. Rohmer, R. Lescoeur and J.-M. Kerisit, The Alexander method: a Technique for the processing of recusive axioms in deductive databases, new Generation Comp. 4(3) (1986).

  120. K.A. Ross, A procedural semantics for well-founded negation in logic programs, in:Proc. 8th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (1989).

  121. K.A. Ross, Well-founded semantics for disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Deductive and Object Oriented Databases, Kyoto, Japan, 1989, pp. 352–369.

  122. K.A. Ross and R.W. Topor, Inferring negative information from disjunctive databases, J. Automated Reasoning 4 (1988) 397–424.

    Google Scholar 

  123. C. Sakama, Possible model semantics for disjunctive databases, in:Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Deductive and Object Oriented Databases, 1989, pp. 337–351.

  124. C. Sakama and K. Inoue, On the equivalence between disjunctive and abductive logic programs, in:Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Logic Programming, ed. P. Van Hentenryck (MIT Press, 1994) pp. 489–503.

  125. D. Seipel, Tree-based fixpoint iteration for disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. ILPS'93 Workshop on Logic Programming with Incomplete Information, 1993, pp. 177–189.

  126. J.C. Shepherdson, negation in logic programming, in:Foundations of deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, 1988) pp. 19–88.

  127. B.T. Smith and D.W. Loveland, A simple near-Horn PROLOG interpreter, in:Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, eds. R.A. Kowalski and K.A. Bowen, Seattle, Washington, 1988, pp. 794–809.

  128. B. Spencer, Avoiding duplicate proofs with the foothold refinement, Ann. of Math. and AI, this issue.

  129. L.S. Sterling and E.Y. Shapiro,The Art of Prolog (MIT Press, 1986).

  130. M. Suchenek, Minimal models for closed world databases, in:Proc. ISMIS 4, ed. Z.W. Ras (1989) pp. 515–522.

  131. M.E. van Emden and R.A. Kowalski, The semantics of predicate logic as a programming language, J. ACM 23 (1976) 733–742.

    Google Scholar 

  132. A. Van Gelder, Negation as failure using tight derivations for general logic programs, in:Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, 1988) pp. 1149–1176.

  133. A. Van Gelder, K.A. Ross and J. Schlipf, Unfounded sets and well-founded semantics for general logic programs, in:Proc. 7th Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (1988) pp. 221–230.

  134. M.Y. Vardi, The complexity of relational languages in:Proc. 14th ACM Symp. on the Theory of Computing, (1982) pp. 137–146.

  135. G. Wagner, Solving the Steamroller, and other puzzles, with extended disjunctive logic programming, in:Proc. Workshop on Non-monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming: Theory, Implementation and Applications, held in conjunction with ICLP'94, eds. J. Dix, L.M. Pereira and T. Przymusinski, 1994, pp. 127–144.

  136. A. Yahya, J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Ordered model trees: A normal form for disjunctive deductive databased, Technical Report UMIACS-TR-93-63 and CS-TR-3103, University of Maryland Institute for Advance Computer Studies, College Park, MD 20742 (1993), to appear in J. Automated Reasoning.

    Google Scholar 

  137. A. Yahya and L.J. Henschen, Deduction in non-Horn databases, J. Automated Reasoning 1 (1985) 141–160.

    Google Scholar 

  138. L.Y. Yuan and D.-A. Chiang, A sound and complete evaluation algorithm for relational databases with disjunctive information, in:Principles of Database Systems (1989) 66–74.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Institute for Advanced Computer Studies, University of Maryland, 20742, College Park, MD, USA

    Jack Minker

Authors
  1. Jack Minker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Dedicated to Chitta Baral, José Alberto Fernández, Jorge Lobo and Arcot Rajasekar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Minker, J. Overview of disjunctive logic programming. Ann Math Artif Intell 12, 1–24 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530759

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530759

Keywords

Search

Navigation