Reasoning with Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams

  • Takashi Horiyama
  • Toshihide Ibaraki
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1969)

Abstract

We consider problems of reasoning with a knowledge-base, which is represented by an ordered binary decision diagram (OBDD), for two special cases of general and Horn knowledge-bases. Our main results say that both finding a model of a knowledge-base and deducing from a knowledge-base can be done in linear time for general case, but that abduction is NP-complete even if the knowledge-base is restricted to be Horn. Then, we consider the abduction when its assumption set consists of all propositional literals (i.e., an answer for a given query is allowed to include any positive literals), and show that it can be done in polynomial time if the knowledge-base is Horn, while it remains NP-complete for the general case. Some other solvable cases are also discussed.

References

  1. 1.
    S.B. Akers, “Binary Decision Diagrams,” IEEE Trans. Comput., C-27, no.6, pp.509–516, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    K.S. Brace, R.L. Rundell, and R.E. Bryant, “Efficient Implementation of a BDD Package,” Proc. of 27th ACM/IEEE DAC, pp.40–45, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.E. Bryant, “Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation,” IEEE Trans. Comput., C-35, no.8, pp.677–691, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    O. Coudert, “Doing Two-Level Logic Minimization 100 Times Faster,” Proc. of 6th ACM/SIAM SODA, pp.112–118, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W.F. Dowling and J.H. Gallier, “Linear Time Algorithms for Testing the Satisfiability of Horn Formula,” J. Logic Programm., 3, pp.267–284, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. Eiter and G. Gottlob, “The Complexity of Logic-Based Abduction,” Journal of the ACM, 42(1), pp.3–42, 1995.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Horiyama and T. Ibaraki, “Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams as Knowledge-Bases,” Proc. of 10th ISAAC, LNCS 1741, pp.83–92, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H.A. Kautz, M.J. Kearns, and B. Selman, “Reasoning with Characteristic Models,” Proc. of AAAI-93, pp.34–39, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H.A. Kautz, M.J. Kearns, and B. Selman, “Horn Approximations of Empirical Data,” Artificial Intelligence, 74, pp.129–245, 1995.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    H.A. Kautz and B. Selman, “An Empirical Evaluation of Knowledge Compilation by Theory Approximation,” in Proc. AAAI-94, 1994, pp.155–161.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J.C. Madre and J.P. Billion, “Proving Circuit Correctness using Formal Comparison Between Expected and Extracted Behaviour,” Proc. of 25th ACM/IEEE DAC, pp.205–210, 1988.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J.C. Madre and O. Coudert, “A Logically Complete Reasoning Maintenance System Based on a Logical Constraint Solver,” Proc. of IJCAI-91, pp.294–299, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. McCarthy and P.J. Hayes, “Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence,” in Machine Intelligence 4, 1969.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Selman and H.J. Levesque, “Abductive and Default Reasoning: A Computational Core,” Proc. of AAAI-90, pp.343–348, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    F. Somenzi, CUDD: CU Decision Diagram Package, University of Colorado at Boulder http://vlsi.colorado.edu/, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    N. Takahashi, N. Ishiura, and S. Yajima, “Fault Simulation for Multiple Faults Using BDD Representation of Fault Sets,” in Proc. IEEE/ACM ICCAD-91, pp.550–553, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takashi Horiyama
    • 1
  • Toshihide Ibaraki
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School of Information ScienceNara Institute of Science and TechnologyNaraJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of InformaticsKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations