Joost Vennekens

Logic programs with annotated disjunctions

Current literature offers a number of different approaches to what could generally be called “probabilistic logic programming”. These are usually based on Horn clauses. Here, we introduce a new formalism, Logic Programs with Annotated Disjunctions, based on disjunctive logic programs. In this formalism, each of the disjuncts in the head of a clause is annotated with a probability. Viewing such a set of probabilistic disjunctive clauses as a probabilistic disjunction of normal logic programs allows us to derive a possible world semantics, more precisely, a probability distribution on the set of all Herbrand interpretations. We demonstrate the strength of this formalism by some examples and compare it to related work.

The Second Answer Set Programming Competition

This paper reports on the Second Answer Set Programming Competition . The competitions in areas of Satisfiability checking, Pseudo-Boolean constraint solving and Quantified Boolean Formula evaluation have proven to be a strong driving force for a community to develop better performing systems. Following this experience, the Answer Set Programming competition series was set up in 2007, and ran as part of the International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR). This second competition, held in conjunction with LPNMR 2009, differed from the first one in two important ways. First, while the original competition was restricted to systems designed for the answer set programming language , the sequel was open to systems designed for other modeling languages, as well. Consequently, among the contestants of the second competition were a CLP(FD) team and three model generation systems for (extensions of) classical logic. Second, this latest competition covered not only satisfiability problems but also optimization ones. We present and discuss the set-up and the results of the competition.

Cp-logic: A language of causal probabilistic events and its relation to logic programming

This paper develops a logical language for representing probabilistic causal laws. Our interest in such a language is two-fold. First, it can be motivated as a fundamental study of the representation of causal knowledge. Causality has an inherent dynamic aspect, which has been studied at the semantical level by Shafer in his framework of probability trees. In such a dynamic context, where the evolution of a domain over time is considered, the idea of a causal law as something which guides this evolution is quite natural. In our formalization, a set of probabilistic causal laws can be used to represent a class of probability trees in a concise, flexible and modular way. In this way, our work extends Shafers by offering a convenient logical representation for his semantical objects. Second, this language also has relevance for the area of probabilistic logic programming. In particular, we prove that the formal semantics of a theory in our language can be equivalently defined as a probability distribution over the well-founded models of certain logic programs, rendering it formally quite similar to existing languages such as ICL or PRISM. Because we can motivate and explain our language in a completely self-contained way as a representation of probabilistic causal laws, this provides a new way of explaining the intuitions behind such probabilistic logic programs: we can say precisely which knowledge such a program expresses, in terms that are equally understandable by a non-logician. Moreover, we also obtain an additional piece of knowledge representation methodology for probabilistic logic programs, by showing how they can express probabilistic causal laws.

Splitting an operator: Algebraic modularity results for logics with fixpoint semantics

It is well known that, under certain conditions, it is possible to split logic programs under stable model semantics, that is, to divide such a program into a number of different “levels”, such that the models of the entire program can be constructed by incrementally constructing models for each level. Similar results exist for other nonmonotonic formalisms, such as auto-epistemic logic and default logic. In this work, we present a general, algebraic splitting theory for logics with a fixpoint semantics. Together with the framework of approximation theory, a general fixpoint theory for arbitrary operators, this gives us a uniform and powerful way of deriving splitting results for each logic with a fixpoint semantics. We demonstrate the usefulness of these results, by generalizing existing results for logic programming, auto-epistemic logic and default logic.

Well-founded semantics and the algebraic theory of non-monotone inductive definitions

Approximation theory is a fixpoint theory of general (monotone and non-monotone) operators which generalizes all main semantics of logic programming, default logic and autoepistemic logic. In this paper, we study inductive constructions using operators and show their confluence to the well-founded fixpoint of the operator. This result is one argument for the thesis that Approximation theory is the fixpoint theory of certain generalised forms of (non-monotone) induction. We also use the result to derive a new, more intuitive definition of the wellfounded semantics of logic programs and the semantics of ID-logic, which moreover is easier to implement in model generators.

Representing causal information about a probabilistic process

We study causal information about probabilistic processes, i.e., information about why events occur. A language is developed in which such information can be formally represented and we investigate when this suffices to uniquely characterize the probability distribution that results from such a process. We examine both detailed representations of temporal aspects and representations in which time is implicit. In this last case, our logic turns into a more fine-grained version of Pearls approach to causality. We relate our logic to certain probabilistic logic programming languages, which leads to a clearer view on the knowledge representation properties of these language. We show that our logic induces a semantics for disjunctive logic programs, in which these represent non-deterministic processes. We show that logic programs under the well-founded semantics can be seen as a language of deterministic causality, which we relate to McCain & Turners causal theories.

Building a Knowledge Base System for an Integration of Logic Programming and Classical Logic

This paper presents a Knowledge Base project for FO(ID), an extension of classical logic with inductive definitions. This logic is a natural integration of classical logic and logic programming based on the view of a logic program as a definition. We discuss the relationship between inductive definitions and common sense reasoning and the strong similarities and striking differences with ASP and Abductive LP. We report on inference systems that combine state-of-the-art techniques of SAT and ASP. Experiments show that FO(ID) model expansion systems are competitive with the best ASP-solvers.

A Tarskian Informal Semantics for Answer Set Programming

In their seminal papers on stable model semantics, Gelfond and Lifschitz introduced ASP by casting programs as epistemic theories, in which rules represent statements about the knowledge of a rational agent. To the best of our knowledge, theirs is still the only published systematic account of the intuitive meaning of rules and programs under the stable semantics. In current ASP practice, however, we find numerous applications in which rational agents no longer seem to play any role. Therefore, we propose here an alternative explanation of the intuitive meaning of ASP programs, in which they are not viewed as statements about an agents beliefs, but as objective statements about the world. We argue that this view is more natural for a large part of current ASP practice, in particular the so-called Generate-Define-Test programs.

Chr(prism)-based probabilistic logic learning

PRISM is an extension of Prolog with probabilistic predicates and built-in support for expectation-maximization learning. Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is a high-level programming language based on multi-headed multiset rewrite rules. In this paper, we introduce a new probabilistic logic formalism, called CHRiSM , based on a combination of CHR and PRISM. It can be used for high-level rapid prototyping of complex statistical models by means of “chance rules”. The underlying PRISM system can then be used for several probabilistic inference tasks, including probability computation and parameter learning. We define the CHRiSM language in terms of syntax and operational semantics, and illustrate it with examples. We define the notion of ambiguous programs and define a distribution semantics for unambiguous programs. Next, we describe an implementation of CHRiSM , based on CHR(PRISM). We discuss the relation between CHRiSM and other probabilistic logic programming languages, in particular PCHR. Finally, we identify potential application domains.

Actual Causation in CP-logic

Given a causal model of some domain and a particular story that has taken place in this domain, the problem of actual causation is deciding which of the possible causes for some effect actually caused it. One of the most influential approaches to this problem has been developed by Halpern and Pearl in the context of structural models. In this paper, I argue that this is actually not the best setting for studying this problem. As an alternative, I offer the probabilistic logic programming language of CP-logic. Unlike structural models, CP-logic incorporates the deviant/default distinction that is generally considered an important aspect of actual causation, and it has an explicitly dynamic semantics, which helps to formalize the stories that serve as input to an actual causation problem.