Some postulates for nonmonotonic theory revision applied to logic programming

  • Cees Witteveen
  • Wiebe van der Hoek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1050)


We deal with the problem of revising nonmonotonic theories that are classically consistent, but do not have an acceptable (nonmonotonic) model. If a nonmonotonic semantics suffers from this lack of consistency preservation, we propose to apply theory revision. We present some postulates for such nonmonotonic theory revision and we will show that, unlike in classical theory revision, in nonmonotonic theory revision a theory has to be expanded instead of contracted in order to give it a satisfactory meaning. We apply the framework to the semantics of logic programming and we present some extensions of the stable, supported and positivistic semantics that satisfy both supraclassicality and consistency preservation.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    N. Bidoit, Negation in rule-based database languages: a survey, Theoretical Computer Science, 78, (1991), 3–83.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Gärdenfors, Knowledge in Flux, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1988.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Inoue, C. Sakama, Abductive Framework for Nonmonotonic Theory Change. Proceedings IJCAI'95, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. W. Lloyd, Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Makinson, General Patterns in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, in: D.M. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger, J.A. Robinson (eds) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol. 3, Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Oxford Science Publications, Oxford, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    V. Marek and M. Truszczyński, Nonmonotonic Logic, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Morris, P., Stable Closures, Defeasible Logic and Contradiction Tolerant Reasoning, Proceedings of the 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1988.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. M. Pereira, J. J. Alferes and J. N. Aparicio, Contradiction Removal within well-founded semantics. In: A. Nerode, W. Marek and V. S. Subrahmanian, editors, First International Workshop on Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning, MIT Press, 1991Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. M. Pereira, J. J. Alferes and J. N. Aparicio, The Extended Stable Models of Contradiction Removal Semantics. In: P. Barahona, L.M. Pereira and A. Porto, editors, Proceedings — EPIA 91, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Witteveen, Every Normal Program has a Nearly-Stable Model. In J. Dix, L.M. Pereira and T.C. Przymusinski, editors, Non-Monotonic Extensions of Logic Programming, LNAI 927, pp. 68–84, Springer Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    C. Witteveen and W. van der Hoek, Revision by Communication In V. Marek, A. Nerode and M. Truszczyński, editors, Logic Programming and Non-Monotonic Reasoning, LNAI 928, pp. 189–202, Springer Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Zacca, Deterministic and Non-Deterministic Stable Model Semantics for Unbound DATALOG queries, in: G. Gottlob, M. Vardi, editors, Database Theory — ICDT'95, Springer Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cees Witteveen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wiebe van der Hoek
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceDelft University of TechnologyAJ DelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUtrecht UniversityCH UtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations