Strong equivalence made easy: Nested expressions and weight constraints

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming

Volumn 3, Issue 4-5, 2003, Pages 609-622

  Turner, Hudson ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA DULUTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Answer sets; Nested expressions; Strong equivalence; Weight constraints

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATIC PROGRAMMING; CONSTRAINT THEORY; ENCODING (SYMBOLS); MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; PROBLEM SOLVING; SET THEORY;

ANSWER SET PROGRAMMING; WEIGHT CONSTRAINTS;

LOGIC PROGRAMMING;

EID: 0345393804     PISSN: 14710684     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1471068403001819     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. EITER, T. AND GOTTLOB, G. 1993. Complexity results for disjunctive logic programming and application to nonmonotonic logics. Logic Programming: Proceedings of the 1993 International Symposium, pp. 266-278.
2. ERDEM, E. AND LIFSCHITZ, V. 1999. Transformations of logic programs related to causality and planning. Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning: Proceedings Fifth International Conference (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1730), pp. 107-116.
3. FERRARIS, P. AND LIFSCHITZ, V. 2001. Weight constraints as nested expressions. Available at www.cs.utexas.edu/users/vl/papers.html.
4. GELFOND, M. AND LIFSCHITZ, V. 1990. Logic programs with classical negation. In: D. Warren and P. Szeredi (eds.), Logic Programming: Proceedings 7th International Conference, pp. 579-597.
5. GELFOND, M. AND LIFSCHITZ, V. 1991. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9, pp. 365-385.
6. JANHUNEN, T. AND OIKARINEN, E. 2002. Testing the equivalence of logic programs under stable model semantics. Logics in Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings 8th European ¿ Conference (JELIA'02), pp. 493-504.
7. LIFSCHITZ, V., PEARCE, D. AND VALVERDE, A. 2001. Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2, pp. 526-541.
8. LIFSCHITZ, V., TANG, L. AND TURNER, H. 1999. Nested expressions in logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25,(2-3), pp. 369-390.
9. LIN, F. 2002. Reducing strong equivalence of logic programs to entailment in classical logic. Proceedings of KR'02. pp. 170-176.
10. MCCAIN, N. AND TURNER, H. 1997. Causal theories of action and change. In Proc. of AAAI-97, pp. 460-465.
11. NIEMELÄ, I. AND SIMONS, P. 2000. Extending the SMODELS system with cardinality and weight constraints. In: J. Minker (ed.), Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence, pp. 491-521. Kluwer.
12. PEARCE, D., TOMPITS, H. AND WOLTRAN, S. 2001. Encodings for equilibrium logic and logic programs with nested expressions. Proceedings 10th Portuguese Conference on AI (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2258), pp. 306-320.
13. REITER, R. 1980. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13, 1,2, pp. 81-132.
14. TURNER, H. 1999. A logic of universal causation. Artificial Intelligence 113, pp. 87-123.
15. TURNER, H. 2001. Strong equivalence for logic programs and default theories (made easy). Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning: Proceedings Sixth International Conference (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2173), pp. 81-92.