Advertisement

Semantics of Logic Programs and Representation of Smyth Powerdomain

Conference paper
Part of the Semantic Structures in Computation book series (SECO, volume 1)

Abstract

This paper provides a representation of the Smyth powerdomain in order to base the semantics of logic programs on Scott’s information systems. A new notion of ideal elements, called disjunctive states, is introduced. Disjunctive states are built from clauses over the token set of the underlying information system to capture disjunctive information. They are closed under Robinson’s hyperresolution rule. We establish an order-isomorphism between disjunctive states and compact, saturated sets, for which injectivity and surjectivity correspond to the soundness and completeness of hyperresolution. A key step for the order-isomorphism is the Hoffman-Mislove Theorem in light of a lemma by Keimel and Paseka. As an application, we provide a couple of specific Smyth powerdomain examples suitable for logic programming. In general, the notion of disjunctive state is applicable to sequent structures, or nondeterministic information systems. We show that the hyperresolution rule is sound and complete for sequent structures as well, making it possible to interpret a disjunctive logic program directly as a sequent structure.

Keywords

Smyth powerdomain Scott topology information systems logic programming resolution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    S. Abramsky and A. Jung, Domain theory, in: Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, Vol 3, (Clarendon Press, 1995).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Amadio and P.-L. Curien, Domains and Lambda-Calculi, Cambridge University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. R. Apt, Logic programming, in: Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science,Vol. B (MIT Press, 1990 493–574).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marc Bezem, Completeness of resolution revisited. Theoretical Computer Science 74, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Cederquist and T. Coquand, Entailment relations and distributive lattices, Manuscript.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. Coquand and Guo-Qiang Zhang, Sequents, frames, and completeness, in Computer Science Logic 2000 (P. Clote and H. Schwichtenberg Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1862, pp. 277–291, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. [7.
    M. Droste and R. Göbel, Non-deterministic information systems and their domains, Theoretical Computer Science 75, 289–309, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. Gunter, Semantics of Programming Languages - Structures and Techniques, Foundations of Computing (MIT Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Hofmann and M. Mislove, Local compactness and continuous lattices. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 871, Spring-Verlag, Berlin, (1981) 209–248.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Jung, M. A. Moshier and M. Kegelmann, Multi lingual sequent calculus and coherent spaces. Fundamenta Informaticae, vol 37, 1999, pages 369–412.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Keimel and J. Paseka. A direct proof of the Hofmann-Mislove theorem. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol 120, no.1, 301–303, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Lloyd, Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd extended ed., (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Lobo, J. Minker, and A. Rajasekar, Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming. (MIT Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    G. D. Plotkin, Tw as a universal domain, Journal of Computer and Systems Science, 17: 209–236, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. D. Plotkin, Domains. Lecture Notes, University of Edinburgh,1983.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J.A. Robinson, The generalized resolution principle. Machine Intelligence, vol 3, 77–93,Edinburgh University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Rounds and G.-Q. Zhang, Resolution in the Smyth powerdomain, Proceedings of the 13rd International Conference on Mathematical Foundations of rogramming Semantics (MFPS’97), ENTCS, Volume 6, (14 pages) 1997.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    W. Rounds and G.-Q. Zhang, Clausal logic and logic programming in algrbraic domains. Information and Computation, to appear.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. S. Scott, Domains for denotational semantics, in: Lecture Notes in Computer Science 140, 577--613, 1982.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. S. Scott, Completeness and axiomatizability. Proceedings of the Tarski Symposium, 411--435, 1974.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Smyth, Powerdomains, Journal of Computer and Systems Science, 16: 23–36, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Tarski, A lattice-theoretical fixed point theorem and its applications, Pacific Journal of Mathematics,vol. 5 (1955).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. Winskel, On powerdomains and modality, Theoretical Computer Science 36:127–137, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    G. Winskel, The Formal Semantics of Programming Languages - An Introduction, (MIT Press, 1993).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    G.-Q. Zhang and W. Rounds, Complexity of power default reasoning, Proceedings of the 12th Annual IEEE ymposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS’97), 328–339, Warsaw, Poland, July 1997.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G.-Q. Zhang, Logic of Domains,Progress in Theoretical Computer Science (Birkhauser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 1991).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA
  2. 2.Artificial Intelligence LaboratoryUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations