Abductive logic programming: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 08:50, 24 November 2023

Latest revision as of 22:59, 1 February 2024

(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Logic programming using abductive reasoning}}

{{No footnotes|date=February 2015}}{{Programming paradigms}}

'''Abductive logic programming''' ('''ALP''') is a high-level [[knowledge representation|knowledge-representation]] framework that can be used to solve problems declaratively, based on [[abductive reasoning]]. It extends normal [[logic programming]] by allowing some predicates to be incompletely defined, declared as abducible predicates. Problem solving is effected by deriving hypotheses on these abducible predicates (abductive hypotheses) as solutions of problems to be solved. These problems can be either observations that need to be explained (as in classical abduction) or goals to be achieved (as in normal [[logic programming]]). It can be used to solve problems in diagnosis, [[planning]], natural language and [[machine learning]]. It has also been used to interpret [[negation as failure]] as a form of abductive reasoning.

Line 93:

==Default reasoning in ALP==

As shown in the Theorist system,<ref>{{cite report | url=https://www.cs.ubc.ca/~poole/papers/Theorist-CS-86-06.pdf |first1=David |last1=Poole |first2=Randy |last2=Goebel |first3=Romas |last3=Aleliunas | title=Theorist: A Logical Reasoning System for Defaults and Diagnosis | institution=Univ. Waterloo | type=Research Report | number=CS-86-06 | date=Feb 1986 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | url= |first1=David |last1=Poole |first2=Randy |last2=Goebel |first3=Romas |last3=Aleliunas | contribution=Theorist: A Logical Reasoning System for Defaults and Diagnosis | pages=331&ndash;352 | doi=10.1007/978-1-4612-4792-0 | isbn=978-1-4612-9158-9 | editor1=Nick J. Cercone | editor2= Gordon McCalla | title= The Knowledge Frontier &ndash; Essays in the Representation of Knowledge | ___location=New York, NY | publisher=Springer | series=Symbolic Computation | volume= | edition=1st | year=1987 |s2cid=38209923 }}</ref>, abduction can also be used for [[default reasoning]].

Moreover, abduction in ALP can simulate [[negation as failure]] in normal logic programming.

Consider the classic example of reasoning by default that a bird can fly if it cannot be shown that the bird is abnormal. Here is a variant of the example using negation as failure in normal logic programming:

<syntaxhighlight lang="prolog">

Line 120:

Using abduction in ALP it is possible to conclude <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">canfly(mary)</syntaxhighlight> under the assumption <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">normal_flying_bird(mary)</syntaxhighlight>. The conclusion can be derived from the assumption because it cannot be shown that the integrity constraint is violated, which is because it cannot be shown that <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">wounded(mary).</syntaxhighlight> In contrast, it is not possible to conclude <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">canfly(john),</syntaxhighlight> because the assumption <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">normal_flying_bird(john)</syntaxhighlight> together with the fact <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">wounded(john)</syntaxhighlight> violates the integrity constraint. This manner of reasoning in ALP simulates reasoning with negation as failure.<ref>Eshghi, K. and Kowalski, R.A., 1989, June. Abduction Compared with Negation by Failure. In ICLP (Vol. 89, pp. 234-255).</ref>

Conversely, it is possible to simulate abduction in ALP using negation as failure with the [[stable model semantics]].<ref>Kakas, A.C., Kowalski, R.A. and [[Francesca Toni |Toni, F.]], 1992. Abductive logic programming. Journal of logic and computation, 2(6), pp.719-770.</ref> This can be done by adding, for every abducible predicate <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">p,</syntaxhighlight> an additional contrary predicate <syntaxhighlight inline lang="prolog">negp,</syntaxhighlight> and a pair of clauses:

<syntaxhighlight lang="prolog">

Line 156:

* {{cite book |first1=A.C. |last1=Kakas |first2=P. |last2=Mancarella |chapter=Generalised Stable Models: A Semantics for Abduction |editor-first=L.C. |editor-last=Aiello |title=ECAI 90: proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence |publisher=Pitman |year=1990 |isbn=978-0273088226 |pages=385–391 }}

* {{cite journal |first1=L. |last1=Console |first2=D.T. |last2=Dupre |first3=P. |last3=Torasso |title=On the Relationship between Abduction and Deduction |journal=[[Journal of Logic and Computation]] |volume=1 |issue=5 |pages=661–690 |year=1991 |doi=10.1093/logcom/1.5.661 |citeseerx=10.1.1.31.9982 }}

* {{cite journal |first1=A.C. |last1=Kakas |first2=R.A. |last2=Kowalski |author2link = Robert Kowalski|first3=F. |last3=Toni|author3-link= Francesca Toni |title=Abductive Logic Programming |journal=Journal of Logic and Computation |volume=2 |issue=6 |pages=719–770 |year=1993 |doi=10.1093/logcom/2.6.719 |citeseerx=10.1.1.37.3655 }}

* {{cite journal |first1=Marc |last1=Denecker |first2=Danny |last2=De Schreye |title=SLDNFA: An Abductive Procedure for Abductive Logic Programs |journal=[[Journal of Logic Programming]] |volume=34 |issue=2 |pages=111–167 |date=February 1998 |doi=10.1016/S0743-1066(97)00074-5 |citeseerx = 10.1.1.21.6503 }}

* {{cite journal |first1=M. |last1=Denecker |first2=A.C. |last2=Kakas |title=Special issue: abductive logic programming |journal=Journal of Logic Programming |volume=44 |issue=1–3 |pages=1–4 |date=July 2000 |doi=10.1016/S0743-1066(99)00078-3 |doi-access=free }}

Line 169:

* [http://lia.deis.unibo.it/sciff/ SCIFF]

* [http://dtai.cs.kuleuven.be/krr/Asystem/asystem.html Asystem]

{{Programming paradigms navbox}}

[[Category:Logic programming]]