Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Justifications for programs with disjunctive and causal-choice rules*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2016

PEDRO CABALAR
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Corunna, Corunna, Spain (email: cabalar@udc.es, jorge.fandino@udc.es)
JORGE FANDINNO
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Corunna, Corunna, Spain (email: cabalar@udc.es, jorge.fandino@udc.es)
Corresponding

Abstract

In this paper, we study an extension of the stable model semantics for disjunctive logic programs where each true atom in a model is associated with an algebraic expression (in terms of rule labels) that represents its justifications. As in our previous work for non-disjunctive programs, these justifications are obtained in a purely semantic way, by algebraic operations (product, addition and application) on a lattice of causal values. Our new definition extends the concept of causal stable model to disjunctive logic programs and satisfies that each (standard) stable model corresponds to a disjoint class of causal stable models sharing the same truth assignments, but possibly varying the obtained explanations. We provide a pair of illustrative examples showing the behaviour of the new semantics and discuss the need of introducing a new type of rule, which we call causal-choice. This type of rule intuitively captures the idea of “A may cause B” and, when causal information is disregarded, amounts to a usual choice rule under the standard stable model semantics.

Type
Regular Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*

This research was partially supported by Spanish Project TIN2013-42149-P.

References

Baral, C. 2003. Knowledge representation, reasoning and declarative problem solving. Cambridge university press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabalar, P. and Fandinno, J. 2016a. Enablers and inhibitors in causal justifications of logic programs. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), (First View), 1–26.Google Scholar
Cabalar, P. and Fandinno, J. 2016b. Justifications for programs with disjunctive and causal-choice rules. CoRR abs/1608.00870.Google Scholar
Cabalar, P., Fandinno, J. and Fink, M. 2014a. Causal graph justifications of logic programs. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) 14, 4–5, 603618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabalar, P., Fandinno, J. and Fink, M. 2014b. A complexity assessment for queries involving sufficient and necessary causes. In Logics in Artificial Intelligence - 14th European Conference, JELIA 2014, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, September 24-26, 2014. Proc., Fermé, E. and Leite, J., Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8761. Springer, 297310.Google Scholar
Damásio, C. V., Analyti, A. and Antoniou, G. 2013. Justifications for logic programming. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Twelfth Intl. Conference, LPNMR 2013, Corunna, Spain, September 15-19, 2013. Proc., Cabalar, P. and Son, T. C., Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8148. Springer, 530542.Google Scholar
Denecker, M., Brewka, G. and Strass, H. 2015. A formal theory of justifications. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning - 13th Intl. Conference, LPNMR 2015, Lexington, KY, USA, September 27-30, 2015. Proc., Calimeri, F., Ianni, G., and Truszczynski, M., Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9345. Springer, 250264.Google Scholar
Eiter, T. and Gottlob, G. 1995. On the computational cost of disjunctive logic programming: Propositional case. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 15, 3–4, 289323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fandinno, J. 2015a. A causal semantics for logic programming. Ph.D. thesis, University of Corunna.Google Scholar
Fandinno, J. 2015b. Towards deriving conclusions from cause-effect relations. In in Proc. of the 8th Intl. Workshop on Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms, ASPOCP 2015, Cork, Ireland, August 31, 2015. Google Scholar
Fandinno, J. 2016. Deriving conclusions from non-monotonic cause-effect relations. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). (to appear).Google Scholar
Gebser, M., Pührer, J., Schaub, T. and Tompits, H. 2008. A meta-programming technique for debugging answer-set programs. In Proc. of the 23rd AAAI Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Chicago, USA, July 13-17, 2008, Fox, D. and Gomes, C. P., Eds. AAAI Press, 448453.Google Scholar
Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. 1988. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In Logic Programming, Proc. of the Fifth Intl. Conference and Symposium, Seattle, Washington, August 15-19, Kowalski, R. A. and Bowen, K. A., Eds. MIT Press, 10701080.Google Scholar
Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. 1991. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9, 3–4, 365386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, N. 2004. Two concepts of causation. In Causation and counterfactuals, Collins, J., Hall, N., and Paul, L. A., Eds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 225276.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. and Knobe, J. 2009. Cause and norm. Journal of Philosophy 11, 587612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. K. 1973. Causation. The Journal of Philosophy 70, 17, 556567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, F. 1995. Embracing causality in specifying the indirect effects of actions. In Proc. of the Fourteenth Intl. Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 95, Montréal Québec, Canada, August 20-25 1995, 2 Volumes. Morgan Kaufmann, 1985–1993.Google Scholar
Marek, V. W. and Truszczyński, M. 1999. Stable models and an alternative logic programming paradigm. In The Logic Programming Paradigm, Apt, K. R., Marek, V. W., Truszczyński, M., and Warren, D., Eds. Artificial Intelligence. Springer, 375398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCain, N. C. 1997. Causality in commonsense reasoning about actions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1987. Epistemological problems of artificial intelligence. Readings in artificial intelligence, 459.Google Scholar
Niemelä, I. 1999. Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25, 3–4, 241273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oetsch, J., Pührer, J. and Tompits, H. 2010. Catching the ouroboros: On debugging non-ground answer-set programs. CoRR abs/1007.4986.Google Scholar
Pearce, D. 2006. Equilibrium logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 47, 1–2, 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearl, J. 2000. Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Pemmasani, G., Guo, H., Dong, Y., Ramakrishnan, C. R. and Ramakrishnan, I. V. 2004. Online justification for tabled logic programs. In Functional and Logic Programming, 7th Intl. Symposium, FLOPS 2004, Nara, Japan, April 7-9, 2004, Proc., Kameyama, Y. and Stuckey, P. J., Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2998. Springer, 2438.Google Scholar
Pontelli, E., Son, T. C. and El-Khatib, O. 2009. Justifications for logic programs under answer set semantics. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) 9, 1, 156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, C. and Toni, F. 2016. Justifying answer sets using argumentation. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) 16, 1, 59110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Specht, G. 1993. Generating explanation trees even for negations in deductive database systems. In Proc. of the 5th Workshop on Logic Programming Environments (LPE 1993), October 29-30, 1993, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, Ducassé, M., Charlier, B. L., Lin, Y., and Yalçinalp, L. Ü., Eds. IRISA, Campus de Beaulieu, France, 8–13.Google Scholar
Thielscher, M. 1997. Ramification and causality. Artificial Intelligence 89, 1–2, 317364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vennekens, J. 2011. Actual causation in CP-logic. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) 11, 4–5, 647662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 88 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 14th October 2016 - 27th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-898fc554b-kxqz4 Total loading time: 0.357 Render date: 2021-01-27T05:12:13.344Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Justifications for programs with disjunctive and causal-choice rules*
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Justifications for programs with disjunctive and causal-choice rules*
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Justifications for programs with disjunctive and causal-choice rules*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *