Dterministic and non-deterministic stable model semantics for unbound DATALOG queries

  • Domenico Saccà
Contributed Papers Nonmonotonic
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 893)


There are presently many proposals to extend the notion of stable model to the domain of partial interpretations. This paper is concerned with the analysis of the expressive powers of such types of stable model under various versions of deterministic semantics for unbound (i.e., without ground terms) queries on DATALOG programs with negation. Various versions of non-deterministic semantics are also proposed and their expressive powers are fully characterized as well.


Logic Program Stable Model Expressive Power Predicate Symbol Database Mapping 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abiteboul S., Simon E., and V. Vianu, “Non-deterministic languages to express deterministic transformations”, Proc. ACM PODS Symp., 1990, pp. 218–229.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baral V. and V. Subrahmanian, “Stable and extension class theory for logic programs and default logic”, Journal of Automated Reasoning, 1992, pp. 345–366.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bidoit N., “Negation in Rule-based Database Languages: a Survey”, Theoretical Computer Science 178, 3, 1991, pp. 3–83.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ceri S., Gottlob G. and L. Tanca, Logic Programming and Databases, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chandra A., and D. Harel, “Structure and Complexity of Relational Queries”, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 25, 1, 1982, pp. 99–128.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dung P., “Negation as Hypotheses: an abductive foundation for logic programming”, Proc. 8th Conf. on Logic Programming, 1991, pp. 3–17.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eiter T., Gottlob G. and H. Manila, “Expressive Power and Complexity of Disjunctive DATALOG”, Proc. ACM PODS Symp., Minneapolis, USA, May 1994, pp. 267–278.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gelfond M., and V. Lifschitz, “The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming”, Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1988, pp. 1070–1080.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giannotti F., Pedreschi D., Saccà, D. and C. Zaniolo, “Non-Determinism in Deductive Databases”, Proc. 2nd Conference on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, Proc. of DOOD 91, LNCS 566, Springer-Verlag, 1991, pp. 129–146.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gurovich Y., “Logic and the Challenge of Computer Science”, in E. Borger (ed.), Trends in Theoretical Computer Science, Computer Science Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Immerman N., “Languages which Capture Complexity Classes”, SIAM Journal on Computing 16, 4, 1987, pp. 760–778.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson D.S., “A Catalog of Complexity Classes”, in J. van Leewen (ed.), Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 1, North-Holland, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanellakis P.C., “Elements of Relational Database Theory”, in J. van Leewen (ed.), Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 2, North-Holland, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kolaitis P.G., “The Expressive Power of Stratified Logics Programs”, Information and Computation 90, 1991, pp. 50–66.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kolaitis P.G. and C.H. Papadimitriou, “Why not Negation by Fixpoint?”, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 43, 1991, pp. 125–144.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lloyd J.W., Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1987.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marek W. and M. Truszcynski, “Autoepistemic Logic”, Journal of the ACM 38, 3, 1991, pp. 588–619.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Papadimitriou C., Computational Complexity, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, USA, 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Przymusinski T.C., “Well-founded Semantics Coincides with Three-valued Stable Semantics”, Foundamenta Informaticae 13, 1990, pp. 445–463.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saccà D., “The Expressive Power of Stable Models for DATALOG Queries with Negation”, in Informal Proceedings of 2nd Work. on Structural Complexity and Recursion-theoretic methods in Logic Programming, Vancouver, Canada, 1993, pp. 150–162.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Saccà D. and C. Zaniolo, “Stable Models and Non-Determinism in Logic Programs with Negation”, Proc. ACM PODS Symp., 1990, pp. 205–218.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sacca D. and C. Zaniolo, “Determinism and Non-Determinism of Stable Models”, unpublished manuscript, 1992.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schlipf J.S., “The Expressive Powers of the Logic Programming Semantics”, Proc. ACM PODS Symp., 1990, pp. 196–204.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schlipf J.S., “A Survey of Complexity and Undecidability Results in Logic Programming”, Proc. Workshop on “Structural Complexity and Recursion-Theoretic Methods in Logic Programming, Washington D.C., USA, Nov. 1993, pp. 143–164.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ullman J.D., Principles of Database and Knowledge Base Systems, Vol 1–2, Computer Science Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van de Bussche J. and D. Van Gucht, “Semi-determinism”, Proc. of ACM PODS Symp., 1992, pp. 191–201.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Van Gelder A., Ross K. and J.S. Schlipf, “The Well-Founded Semantics for General Logic Programs”, Journal of the ACM 38, 3, 1991, pp. 620–650.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vardi M.Y., “The Complexity of Relational Query Languages”, Proc. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, 1982, pp. 137–146.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    You J. and L.Y. Yuan, “Three-valued Formalization of Logic Programming: is it needed? Proc. of ACM PODS Symp., 1990, pp. 172–182.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Domenico Saccà
    • 1
  1. 1.DEIS Dept.Università della CalabriaRendeItaly

Personalised recommendations