Meta-reasoning: A Survey

  • Stefania Costantini
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2408)

Abstract

We present the basic principles and possible applications of systems capable of meta-reasoning and reflection. After a discussion of the seminal approaches, we outline our own perception of the state of the art, mainly but not only in computational logic and logic programming. We review relevant successful applications of meta-reasoning, and the basic underlying semantic principles.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hill, P.M., Gallagher, J.: Meta-programming in logic programming. In Gabbay, D., Hogger, C.J., Robinson, J.A., eds.: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol. 5, Oxford University Press (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barklund, J.: Metaprogramming in logic. In Kent, A., Williams, J.G., eds.: Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology. Volume 33. M. Dekker, New York (1995) 205–227Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lanzarone, G.A.: Metalogic programming. In Sessa, M.I., ed.: 1985–1995 Ten Years of Logic Programming in Italy. Palladio (1995) 29–70Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abramson, H., Rogers, M.H., eds.: Meta-Programming in Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., THE MIT Press (1989)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruynooghe, M., ed.: Proc. of the Second Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic, Leuven (Belgium), Dept. of Comp. Sci., Katholieke Univ. Leuven (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pettorossi, A., ed.: Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 649, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fribourg, L., Turini, F., eds.: Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation-Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 883, Springer-Verlag (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barklund, J., Costantini, S., van Harmelen, F., eds.: Proc. Workshop on Meta Programming and Metareasonong in Logic, post-JICSLP96 workshop, Bonn (Germany), UPMAIL technical Report No. 127 (Sept. 2, 1996), Computing Science Dept., Uppsala Univ. (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maes, P., Nardi, D., eds.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection, Amsterdam, North-Holland (1988)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kiczales, G., ed.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection, Proc. Of the First Intnl. Conf. Reflection 96, Xerox PARC (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cointe, A., ed.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection, Proc. Of the Second Intnl. Conf. Reflection 99. LNCS 1616, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smorinski, C.: The incompleteness theorem. In Barwise, J., ed.: Handbook of Mathematical Logic. North-Holland (1977) 821–865Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smullyan, R.: Diagonalization and Self-Reference. Oxford University Press (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kripke, S.A.: Semantical considerations on modal logic. In: Acta Philosophica Fennica. Volume 16. (1963) 493–574MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Cialdea, M., Nardi, D., Schaerf, M.: Modal and meta languages: Consistency and expressiveness. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 243–266Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aiello, M., Weyhrauch, L.W.: Checking proofs in the metamathematics of first order logic. In: Proc. Fourth Intl. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Tbilisi, Georgia, Morgan Kaufman Publishers (1975) 1–8Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bundy, A., Welham, B.: Using meta-level inference for selective application of multiple rewrite rules in algebraic manipulation. Artificial Intelligence 16 (1981) 189–212CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weyhrauch, R.W.: Prolegomena to a theory of mechanized formal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence (1980) 133–70Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Cecchi, C., Sartini, D.: Representation and use of metaknowledge. Proc. of the IEEE 74 (1986) 1304–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Levi, G.: The uses of metaknowledge in AI systems. In: Proc. European Conf. on Artificial Intelligence. (1984) 705–717Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Davis, R., Buchanan, B.: Meta-level knowledge: Overview and applications. In: Procs. Fifth Int. Joint Conf. On Artificial Intelligence, Los Altos, Calif., Morgan Kaufmann (1977) 920–927Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maes, P.: Computational Reflection. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Wetenschappen, Dienst Artificiele Intelligentie, Brussel (1986)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Genesereth, M.R.: Metalevel reasoning. In: Logic-87-8, Logic Group, Stanford University (1987)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Levi, G.: The uses of metaknowledge in AI systems. In Maes, P., Nardi, D., eds.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1988) 243–254Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Nardi, D., Schaerf, M.: Yet Another Solution to the Three Wisemen Puzzle. In Ras, Z.W., Saitta, L., eds.: Methodologies for Intelligent Systems 3: ISMIS-88, Elsevier Science Publishing (1988) 398–407Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Nardi, D., Schaerf, M.: Reasoning about Knowledge and Ignorance. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems 1988: FGCS-88, ICOT Press (1988) 618–627Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Genesereth, M.R., Nilsson, J.: Logical Foundations of Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, California (1987)MATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Russell, S.J., Wefald, E.: Do the right thing: studies in limited rationality (Chapter 2: Metareasoning Architectures). The MIT Press (1991)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Cialdea, M., Nardi, D.: A meta level abstract description of diagnosis in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International PEG Conference, PEG-91. (1991) 437–442Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Cialdea, M., Nardi, D.: Reasoning about Student Knowledge and Reasoning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education 4 (1993) 397–413Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Damásio, C., Nejdl, W., Pereira, L.M., Schroeder, M.: Model-based diagnosis preferences and strategies representation with logic meta-programming. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 267–308Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Barklund, J., Costantini, S., Dell’Acqua, P., Lanzarone, G.A.: Reflection Principles in Computational Logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 10 (2000)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Barklund, J.: What is a meta-variable in Prolog? In Abramson, H., Rogers, M.H., eds.: Meta-Programming in Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1989) 383–98Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hill, P.M., Lloyd, J.W.: Analysis of metaprograms. In Abramson, H., Rogers, M.H., eds.: Meta-Programming in Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., THE MIT Press (1988) 23–51Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Barklund, J., Costantini, S., Dell’Acqua, P., Lanzarone, G.A.: Semantical properties of encodings in logic programming. In Lloyd, J.W., ed.: Logic Programming-Proc. 1995 Intl. Symp., Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press (1995) 288–302Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    van Harmelen, F.: Definable naming relations in meta-level systems. In Pettorossi, A., ed.: Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 649, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1992) 89–104Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cervesato, I., Rossi, G.: Logic meta-programming facilities in’ Log. In Pettorossi, A., ed.: Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 649, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1992) 148–161Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Costantini, S.: Semantics of a metalogic programming language. Intl. Journal of Foundation of Computer Science 1 (1990)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Perlis, D.: Languages with self-reference I: foundations (or: we can have everything in first-order logic!). Artificial Intelligence 25 (1985) 301–322MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Perlis, D.: Languages with self-reference II. Artificial Intelligence 34 (1988) 179–212MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Konolige, K.: Reasoning by introspection. In Maes, P., Nardi, D., eds.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1988) 61–74Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Genesereth, M.R.: Introspective fidelity. In Maes, P., Nardi, D., eds.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1988) 75–86Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    van Harmelen, F., Wielinga, B., Bredeweg, B., Schreiber, G., Karbach, W., Reinders, M., Voss, A., Akkermans, H., Bartsch-Spörl, B., Vinkhuyzen, E.: Knowledgelevel reflection. In: Enhancing the Knowledge Engineering Process-Contributions from ESPRIT. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1992) 175–204Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Carlucci Aiello, L., Weyhrauch, R.W.: Using Meta-theoretic Reasoning to do Algebra. Volume 87 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer Verlag (1980) 1–13Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bowen, K.A., Kowalski, R.A.: Amalgamating language and metalanguage in logic programming. In Clark, K.L., Tärnlund, S.Å., eds.: Logic Programming. Academic Press, London (1982) 153–172Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    McCarthy, J.e.a.: (The LISP 1.5 Programmer’s Manual)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Levi, G., Ramundo, D.: A formalization of metaprogramming for real. In Warren, D.S., ed.: Logic Programming-Procs. of the Tenth International Conference, Cambridge, Mass., The MIT Press (1993) 354–373Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Subrahmanian, V.S.: Foundations of metalogic programming. In Abramson, H., Rogers, M.H., eds.: Meta-Programming in Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., The MIT Press (1988) 1–14Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Martens, B., De Schreye, D.: Why untyped nonground metaprogramming is not (much of) a problem. J. Logic Programming 22 (1995)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sterling, L., Shapiro, E.Y., eds.: The Art of Prolog. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1986)MATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kowalski, R.A.: Meta matters. invited presentation at Second Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic META90 (1990)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kowalski, R.A.: Problems and promises of computational logic. In Lloyd, J.W., ed.: Computational Logic. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1990) 1–36Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Smith, B.C.: Reflection and semantics in Lisp. Technical report, Xerox Parc ISL-5, Palo Alto (CA) (1984)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lemmens, I., Braspenning, P.: A formal analysis of smithinsonian computational reflection. (In Cointe, P., ed.: Proc. Reflection’ 99) 135–137Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Casaschi, G., Costantini, S., Lanzarone, G.A.: Realizzazione di un interprete riflessivo per clausole di Horn. In Mello, P., ed.: Gulp89, Proc. 4th Italian National Symp. on Logic Programming, Bologna (1989 (in italian)) 227–241Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Friedman, D.P., Sobel, J.M.: An introduction to reflection-oriented programming. In Kiczales, G., ed.: Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection, Proc. Of the First Intnl. Conf. Reflection 96, Xerox PARC (1996)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Attardi, G., Simi, M.: Meta-level reasoning across viewpoints. In O’Shea, T., ed.: Proc. European Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, North-Holland (1984) 315–325Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hill, P.M., Lloyd, J.W.: The Gödel Programming Language. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bowers, A.F., Gurr, C.: Towards fast and declarative meta-programming. In Apt, K.R., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 137–166Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Giunchiglia, F., Cimatti, A.: Introspective metatheoretic reasoning. In Fribourg, L., Turini, F., eds.: Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation-Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 883 (1994) 425–439Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Giunchiglia, F., Traverso, A.: A metatheory of a mechanized object theory. Artificial Intelligence 80 (1996) 197–241CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Giunchiglia, F., Serafini, L.: Multilanguage hierarchical logics, or: how we can do without modal logics. Artificial Intelligence 65 (1994) 29–70MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Costantini, S., Lanzarone, G.A.: A metalogic programming language. In Levi, G., Martelli, M., eds.: Proc. 6th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., The MIT Press (1989) 218–233Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Costantini, S., Lanzarone, G.A.: A metalogic programming approach: language, semantics and applications. Int. J. of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 6 (1994) 239–287MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Konolige, K.: An autoepistemic analysis of metalevel reasoning in logic programming. In Pettorossi, A., ed.: Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 649, Barlin, Springer-Verlag (1992)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dell’Acqua, P.: Development of the interpreter for a metalogic programming language. Degree thesis, Univ. degli Studi di Milano, Milano (1989 (in italian))Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Maes, P.: Concepts and experiments in computational reflection. In: Proc. Of OOPSLA’87. ACM SIGPLAN NOTICES (1987) 147–155Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Kiczales, G., des Rivieres, J., Bobrow, D.G.: The Art of Meta-Object Protocol. The MIT Press (1991)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Malenfant, J., Lapalme, G., Vaucher, G.: Objvprolog: Metaclasses in logic. In: Proc. Of ECOOP’89, Cambridge Univ. Press (1990) 257–269Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Malenfant, J., Lapalme, G., Vaucher, G.: Metaclasses for metaprogramming in prolog. In Bruynooghe, M., ed.: Proc. of the Second Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Katholieke Univ. Leuven (1990) 272–83Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Stroud, R., Welch, I.: the evolution of a reflective java extension. LNCS 1616, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1999)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Jiang, Y.J.: Ambivalent logic as the semantic basis of metalogic programming: I. In Van Hentenryck, P., ed.: Proc. 11th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., THE MIT Press (1994) 387–401Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Kalsbeek, M., Jiang, Y.: A vademecum of ambivalent logic. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 27–56Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Kalsbeek, M.: Correctness of the vanilla meta-interpreter and ambivalent syntax. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 3–26Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Christiansen, H.: A complete resolution principle for logical meta-programming languages. In Pettorossi, A., ed.: Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 649, Barlin, Springer-Verlag (1992) 205–234Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Christiansen, H.: Efficient and complete demo predicates for definite clause languages. Datalogiske Skrifter, Technical Report 51, Dept. of Computer Science, Roskilde University (1994)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Brogi, A., Mancarella, P., Pedreschi, D., Turini, F.: Composition operators for logic theories. In Lloyd, J.W., ed.: Computational Logic. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1990) 117–134Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Brogi, A., Contiero, S.: Composing logic programs by meta-programming in Gödel. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 167–194Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Brogi, A., Turini, F.: Meta-logic for program composition: Semantic issues. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 83–110Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Barklund, J., Boberg, K., Dell’Acqua, P.: A basis for a multilevel metalogic programming language. In Fribourg, L., Turini, F., eds.: Logic Program Synthesis and Transformation-Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 883, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1994) 262–275Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Barklund, J., Boberg, K., Dell’Acqua, P., Veanes, M.: Meta-programming with theory systems. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 195–224Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Shoham, Y., McDermott, D.: Temporal reasoning. In Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence (ed. Shapiro, S. C.) pp. 967–981, 1987.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. New Generation Computing 4 (1986) 67–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.: Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. Machine Intelligence 4 (1969) 463–502MATHGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Kowalski, R.A.: Database updates in the event calculus. J. Logic Programming (1992) 121–146Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F.: The situation calculus and event calculus compared. In: Proc. 1994 Intl. Logic Programming Symp. (1994) 539–553Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F.: Reconciling the event calculus with the situation calculus. J. Logic Programming 31 (1997) 39–58MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Provetti, A.: Hypothetical reasoning: From situation calculus to event calculus. Computational Intelligence Journal 12 (1996) 478–498CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Díaz, O., Paton, N.: Stimuli and business policies as modeling constructs: their definition and validation through the event calculus. In: Proc. of CAiSE’97. (1997) 33–46Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Sripada, S.: Efficient implementation of the event calculus for temporal database applications. In Lloyd, J.W., ed.: Proc. 12th Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., The MIT Press (1995) 99–113Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Pfenning, F.: The practice of logical frameworks. In Kirchner, H., ed.: Trees in Algebra and Programming-CAAP’ 96. LNCS 1059, Linkoping, Sweden, Springer-Verlag (1996) 119–134Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Clavel, M.G., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Meseguer, J.: Principles of Maude. In Proc. First Intl Workshop on Rewriting Logic, volume 4 of Electronic Notes in Th. Comp. Sc. (ed. Meseguer, J.), 1996.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Clavel, M.G., Duran, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Marti-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Quesada, J.: Maude as a metalanguage. In Proc. Second Intl. Workshop on Rewriting Logic, volume 15 of Electronic Notes in Th. Comp. Sc., 1998.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Clavel, M.G., Meseguer, J.: Axiomatizing reflective logics and languages. In Kiczales, G., ed.: Proc. Reflection’ 96, Xerox PARC (1996) 263–288Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Costantini, S., Lanzarone, G.A., Sbarbaro, L.: A formal definition and a sound implementation of analogical reasoning in logic programming. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 14 (1995) 17–36CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Costantini, S., Dell’Acqua, P., Lanzarone, G.A.: Reflective agents in metalogic programming. In Pettorossi, A., ed.: Meta-Programming in Logic. LNCS 649, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1992) 135–147Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Martin, D.L., Cheyer, A.J., Moran, D.B.: The open agent architecture: a framework for building distributed software systems. Applied Artificial Intelligence 13(1–2) (1999) 91–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In Fikes, R., Sandewall, E., eds.: Proceedings of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R-91), Morgan Kaufmann Publishers: San Mateo, CA (1991) 473–484Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.: BDI Agents: from theory to practice. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS-95), San Francisco, CA (1995) 312–319Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    J., D., Subrahmanian, V., Pick, G.: Meta-agent programs. J. Logic Programming 45 (2000)Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Kim, J.S., Kowalski, R.A.: An application of amalgamated logic to multi-agent belief. In Bruynooghe, M., ed.: Proc. of the Second Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Katholieke Univ. Leuven (1990) 272–83Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kim, J.S., Kowalski, R.A.: A metalogic programming approach to multi-agent knowledge and belief. In Lifschitz, V., ed.: Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation, Academic Press (1991)Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F.: Towards a unified agent architecture that combines rationality with reactivity. In: Proc. International Workshop on Logic in Databases. LNCS 1154, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F.: From logic programming towards multi-agent systems. In Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 25, pp. 391–410, 1999.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Dell’Acqua, P., Sadri, F., Toni, F.: Combining introspection and communication with rationality and reactivity in agents. In Dix, J., Cerro, F.D., Furbach, U., eds.: Logics in Artificial Intelligence. LNCS 1489, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1998)Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Fung, T.H., R. A. Kowalski, R.A.: The IFF proof procedure for abductive logic programming. J. Logic Programming 33 (1997) 151–165MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Dell’Acqua, P., Sadri, F., Toni, F.: Communicating agents. In: Proc. International Workshop on Multi-Agent Systems in Logic Programming, in conjunction with ICLP’99, Las Cruces, New Mexico (1999)Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Costantini, S.: Towards active logic programming. In Brogi, A., Hill, P., eds.: Proc. of 2nd International Workshop on Component-based Software Development in Computational Logic (COCL’99). PLI’99, Paris, France, http://www.di.unipi.it/brogi/ResearchActivity/COCL99/proceedings/index.html (1999)
  110. 110.
    Gärdenfors, P.: Belief revision: a vademecum. In Pettorossi, A., ed.: MetaProgramming in Logic. LNCS 649, Berlin, Springer-Verlag (1992) 135–147Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Gärdenfors, P., Roth, H.: Belief revision. In Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., Robinson, J., eds.: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. Volume 4. Clarendon Press (1995) 36–119Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Dell’Acqua, P., Pereira, L.M.: Updating agents. (1999)Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Lamma, E., Riguzzi, F., Pereira, L.M.: Agents learning in a three-valued logical setting. In Panayiotopoulos, A., ed.: Workshop on Machine Learning and Intelligent Agents, in conjunction with Machine Learning and Applications, Advanced Course on Artificial Intelligence (ACAI’99), Chania (Greece) (1999) (Also available at http://centria.di.fct.unl.pt/~lmp/).
  114. 114.
    Brewka, G.: Declarative representation of revision strategies. In Baral, C., Truszczynski, M., eds.: NMR’2000, Proc. Of the 8th Intl. Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning. (2000)Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    McCarthy, J.: First order theories of individual concepts and propositions. Machine Intelligence 9 (1979) 129–147MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming, Second Edition. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1987)MATHGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Dell’Acqua, P.: Reflection principles in computational logic. PhD Thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala (1998)Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Dell’Acqua, P.: SLD-Resolution with reflection. PhL Thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala (1995)Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Jaffar, J., Lassez, J.L., Maher, M.J.: A theory of complete logic programs with equality. J. Logic Programming 3 (1984) 211–223CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Martens, B., De Schreye, D.: Two semantics for definite meta-programs, using the non-ground representation. In Apt, K., Turini, F., eds.: Meta-Logics and Logic Programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1995) 57–82Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Falaschi, M.and Levi, G., Martelli, M., Palamidessi, C.: A new declarative semantics for logic languages. In Kowalski, R. A.and Bowen, K.A., ed.: Proc. 5th Intl. Conf. Symp. on Logic Programming, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press (1988) 993–1005Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefania Costantini
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly

Personalised recommendations