Composition Operators for Logic Theories
Some basic meta-level operators for putting logic theories together are introduced, which relate to set-theoretic union, intersection and difference. Both a transformational and an interpretive characterization of the operators are provided and proved equivalent. The former definition says how to syntactically construct a new theory out of two given theories, the latter provides a meta-level interpretation of the same operators. A declarative — both model-theoretic and fixpoint — semantics of the operators is also provided, allowing one to assign the minimal model of the resulting theory as a function of the models of the argument theories. Some examples from default reasoning, knowledge assimilation, inheritance networks and hypothetical reasoning are presented to demonstrate the expressive power of the operators.
KeywordsAssimilation Vanilla ECSC
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [A88]Apt, K.R., “Introduction to Logic Programming”, Report CS-R8826 Center for Mathematics and Computer Science, Amsterdam, 1988. To appear in: J. van Leeuwen, (ed.), Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, North Holland.Google Scholar
- [PK85]Bowen, K.A., Kowalski, R.A. “Amalgamating Language and Metalanguage in Logic Programming”. In Logic Programming (K.L. Clark and S.-A. Tarnlund eds.) pp. 153–172 (1985).Google Scholar
- [BrMPT90]Brogi, A., Mancarella, P., Pedreschi, D., Turini, F. “Hierarchies through Basic Meta-Level Operators”. In Proceedings META 90 — Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic, pp. 381–396, Leuven, 1990.Google Scholar
- [BG77]Burstall, R.M. and Goguen, J.A. “Putting theories together to make specifications”. In Proceedings 5th IJCAI, Cambridge, Massachussets, 1990.Google Scholar
- [C78]Clark, K.L. “Negation as Failure”. In: H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.), Logic and Data Bases, Plenum Press, New York., pp. 293–322 (1978).Google Scholar
- [C88]Chan, D. “Constructive Negation Based on the Completed Database”. Proceedings 5th ICLP (R.A. Kowalski and K. Bowen, eds.), The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 111–125 (1988).Google Scholar
- [GS89]Gaifman, H. and Shapiro, E. “Fully Abstract Compositional Semantics for Logic Programs”, Proceedings POPL89, ACM, pp. 134–142 (1989).Google Scholar
- [HL88]Hill, P.M. and Lloyd, J.W. “Meta-Programming for Dynamic Knowledge Bases”. TR-CS-88-18, Dpt. of Computer Science, University of Bristol (1988).Google Scholar
- [HL89]Hill, P.M. and Lloyd, J.W. “Analysis of Meta-programs”. In H.D. Abramson and M.H. Rogers, editors, Meta-Programming in Logic Programming, pages 23–52, MIT Press (1989).Google Scholar
- [KS90]Kowalski, R.A. and Sadri, F., “Logic Programs with Exceptions”, in Proceedings 5th ICLP (D.H.D. Warren and P. Szeredi, eds.), The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 598–613 (1990).Google Scholar
- [MP88]Mancarella, P. and Pedreschi, D. “An Algebra of Logic Programs”, in Proc. of Fifth International Conference, Symposium of Logic Programming, Seattle 1006–1023 (1988).Google Scholar
- [MPRT90]Mancarella, P., Pedreschi, D., Rondinelli, M. and Tagliatti, M. “Algebraic Properties of a Class of Logic Programs”. In Proc. of Second NACLP, Austin (1990). To appear.Google Scholar