A knowledge compilation map

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Volumn 17, Issue , 2002, Pages 229-264

  Darwiche, Adnan ^a   Marquis, Pierre ^b  

^a University of California   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITÉ D'ARTOIS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; GRAPH THEORY; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; ONLINE SYSTEMS; QUERY LANGUAGES; SET THEORY;

COMPILATION LANGUAGES; KNOWLEDGE COMPILATION MAPS; POLYTIME TRANSFORMATIONS;

KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION;

EID: 2942671259     PISSN: 10769757     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1613/jair.989     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. th European Conference on Planning (ECP'97), pp. 130-142.
2. Blum, M., Chandra, A. K., & Wegman, M. N. (1980). Equivalence of free Boolean graphs can be decided probabilistically in polynomial time. Information Processing Letters, 10(2), 80-82.
3. Boole, G. (1854). An investigation of the laws of thought. Walton and Maberley, London.
4. th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'97), pp. 122-127, Nagoya.
5. Bryant, R. E. (1986). Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-35, 677-691.
6. Bryant, R. E. (1992). Symbolic Boolean manipulation with ordered binary decision diagrams. ACM Computing Surveys, 24(3), 293-318.
7. Cadoli, M., & Donini, F. (1997). A survey on knowledge compilation. AI Communications, 10, 137-150. (printed in 1998).
8. rd International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'96), pp. 364-373.
9. Chandra, A., & Markowsky, G. (1978). On the number of prime implicants. Discrete Mathematics, 24, 7-11.
10. Darwiche, A. (1999). Compiling knowledge into decomposable negation normal form. In Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'99), pp. 284-289. Morgan Kaufmann, California.
11. Darwiche, A. (2001a). Decomposable negation normal form. Journal of the ACM, 48(4), 608-647.
12. Darwiche, A. (2001b). On the tractability of counting theory models and its application to belief revision and truth maintenance. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 11 (1-2), 11-34.
13. Darwiche, A., & Huang, J. (2002). Testing equivalence probabilistically. Tech. rep. D-123, Computer Science Department, UCLA, Los Angeles, Ca 90095.
14. th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'92), pp. 780-785, San Jose, California.
15. Dechter, R., & Rish, I. (1994). Directional resolution: the Davis-Putnam procedure, revisited. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'94), pp. 134-145, Bonn.
16. del Val, A. (1994). Tractable databases: How to make propositional unit resolution complete through compilation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'94), PP- 551-561. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Mateo, California.
17. Gergov, J., & Meinel, C. (1994a). Efficient analysis and manipulation of obdds can be extended to fbdds. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 43(10), 1197-1209.
18. Gergov, J., & Meinel, C. (1994b). On the complexity of analysis and manipulation of Boolean functions in terms of decision diagrams. Information Processing Letters, 50, 317-322.
19. th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'95), pp. 862-869, Montreal.
20. Herzig, A., & Rifi, O. (1999). Prepositional belief base update and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence, 115(1), 107-138.
21. th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'80), pp. 302-309.
22. Khardon, R., & Roth, D. (1997). Learning to reason. Journal of the ACM, 44(5), 697-725.
23. Lang, J., Liberatore, P., & Marquis, P. (2000). Prepositional independence-Part I: formula-variable independence and forgetting. Submitted.
24. Madre, J. C., & Coudert, O. (1992). A new method to compute prime and essential prime implicants of boolean functions. In Advanced research in VLSI and parallel systems, Proceedings of the Brown/MIT conference, pp. 113-128.
25. Marquis, P. (2000). Consequence finding algorithms, Vol. 5 of Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems: Algorithms for Uncertain and Defeasible Reasoning. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
26. Marquis, P. (1995). Knowledge compilation using theory prime implicates. In Proc. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'95), pp. 837-843. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Mateo, California.
27. Meinel, C., & Theobald, T. (1998). Algorithms and Data Structures in VLSI Design: OBDD Foundations and Applications. Springer.
28. Papadimitriou, C. (1994). Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley.
29. Quine, W. (1955). A way to simplify truth functions. American Mathematical Monthly, 52, 627-631.
30. Quine, W. (1959). On cores and prime implicants of truth functions. American Mathematical Monthly, 66, 755-760.
31. Reiter, R., & de Kleer, J. (1987). Foundations of assumption-based truth maintenance systems: Preliminary report. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 183-188.
32. Roth, D. (1996). On the hardness of approximate reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 82(1-2), 273-302.
33. th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'96), pp. 510-515, Portland, Oregan.
34. Selman, B., & Kautz, H. (1996). Knowledge compilation and theory approximation. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 43, 193-224.
35. th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'01), pp. 359-365, Seattle (WA).
36. Wegener, I. (1987). The complexity of boolean functions. Wiley-Teubner, Stuttgart.