On the Equivalence between the \(\mathcal{L}_1\) Action Language and Partial Actions in Transaction Logic

  • Martín Rezk
  • Michael Kifer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6902)


Transaction Logic with Partially Defined Actions (TR PAD ) is an expressive formalism for reasoning about the effects of actions and for declarative specification of state-changing transactions. The action language \(\mathcal{L}_1\) is a well-known formalism to describe changing domains and for reasoning about actions. The purpose of this paper is to compare these two formalisms and identify their similarities and points of divergence in order to better understand their modeling and reasoning capabilities. We provide a sound reduction of a large fragment of \(\mathcal{L}_1\) to TR PAD , and show that this reduction is complete with respect to the LP embedding of \(\mathcal{L}_1\). We also explore how action planning is modeled in both languages and discuss the relationship to other languages for representing actions.


Logic Programming Action Language Domain Description Atomic Fact Reasoning Capability 
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.
    Baral, C., Gelfond, M., Provetti, A.: Representing actions: Laws, observations and hypotheses. Journal of Logic Programming (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berardi, D., Boley, H., Grosof, B., Gruninger, M., Hull, R., Kifer, M., Martin, D., McIlraith, S., Su, J., Tabet, S.: SWSL: Semantic Web Services Language. Technical report, Semantic Web Services Initiative (April 2005),
  3. 3.
    Bonner, A.J., Kifer, M.: Transaction logic programming (or a logic of declarative and procedural knowledge). Technical Report CSRI-323, University of Toronto (November 1995),
  4. 4.
    Bonner, A.J., Kifer, M.: A logic for programming database transactions. In: Chomicki, J., Saake, G. (eds.) Logics for Databases and Information Systems. ch.5, pp. 117–166. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (March 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Representing action and change by logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming 17, 301–322 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Giunchiglia, E., Lifschitz, V.: An action language based on causal explanation: Preliminary report. In: Proc. AAAI 1998, pp. 623–630. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Inclezan, D.: Modular action language ALM. In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) ICLP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5649, pp. 542–543. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kifer, M., Lara, R., Polleres, A., Zhao, C., Keller, U., Lausen, H., Fensel, D.: A logical framework for web service discovery. In: ISWC 2004 Semantic Web Services Workshop. CEUR Workshop Proceedings (November 2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lam, P.E., Mitchell, J.C., Sundaram, S.: A formalization of HIPAA for a medical messaging system. In: Fischer-Hübner, S., Lambrinoudakis, C., Pernul, G. (eds.) TrustBus 2009. LNCS, vol. 5695, pp. 73–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pearce, D., Wagner, G.: Logic programming with strong negation. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Extensions of Logic Programming, pp. 311–326. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rezk, M., Kifer, M.: On the equivalence between the L1 action language and partial actions in transaction logic (2011),
  12. 12.
    Rezk, M., Kifer, M.: Reasoning with actions in transaction logic (2011),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martín Rezk
    • 1
  • Michael Kifer
    • 2
  1. 1.KRDB Research CenterFree University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceStony Brook UniversityU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations