In this paper, we consider an approach to update nonmonotonic knowledge bases represented as extended logic programs under the answer set semantics. In this approach, new information is incorporated into the current knowledge base subject to a causal rejection principle, which enforces that, in case of conflicts between rules, more recent rules are preferred and older rules are overridden. Such a rejection principle is also exploited in other approaches to update logic programs, notably in the method of dynamic logic programming, due to Alferes et al.One of the central issues of this paper is a thorough analysis of various properties of the current approach, in order to get a better understanding of the inherent causal rejection principle. For this purpose, we review postulates and principles for update and revision operators which have been proposed in the area of theory change and nonmonotonic reasoning. Moreover, some new properties for approaches to updating logic programs are considered as well. Like related update approaches, the current semantics does not incorporate a notion of minimality of change, so we consider refinements of the semantics in this direction. As well, we investigate the relationship of our approach to others in more detail. In particular, we show that the current approach is semantically equivalent to inheritance programs, which have been independently defined by Buccafurri et al., and that it coincides with certain classes of dynamic logic programs, for which we provide characterizations in terms of graph conditions. In view of this analysis, most of our results about properties of the causal rejection principle apply to each of these approaches as well. Finally, we also deal with computational issues. Besides a discussion on the computational complexity of our approach, we outline how the update semantics and its refinements can be directly implemented on top of existing logic programming systems. In the present case, we implemented the update approach using the logic programming system DLV.

Abstract. Among others, Alferes et al. (1998) presented an approach for updating logic programs with sets of rules based on dynamic logic programs. We syntactically redefine dynamic logic programs and investigate their semantical properties, looking at them from perspectives such as a belief revision and abstract consequence relation view. Since the approach does not respect minimality of change, we refine its stable model semantics and present minimal stable models and strict stable models. We also compare the update approach to related work, and find that is equivalent to a class of inheritance programs independently defined by Buccafurri et al. (1999).

No abstract

At present, the search for specific information on the World Wide Web is faced with several problems, which arise on the one hand from the vast number of information sources available, and on the other hand from their intrinsic heterogeneity, since standards are missing. A promising approach for solving the complex problems emerging in this context is the use of multi-agent systems of information agents, which cooperatively solve advanced information-retrieval problems. This requires advanced capabilities to address complex tasks, such as search and assessment of information sources, query planning, information merging and fusion, dealing with incomplete information, and handling of inconsistency.In this paper, our interest lies in the role which some methods from the field of declarative logic programming can play in the realization of reasoning capabilities for information agents. In particular, we are interested to see in how they can be used, extended, and further developed for the specific needs of this application domain. We review some existing systems and current projects, which typically address information-integration problems. We then focus on declarative knowledge-representation methods, and review and evaluate approaches and methods from logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning for information agents. We discuss advantages and drawbacks, and point out the possible extensions and open issues.

No abstract

Abstract. Recently, several approaches to updating knowledge bases modeled as extended logic programs have been introduced, ranging from basic methods to incorporate (sequences of) sets of rules into a logic program, to more elaborate methods which use an update policy for specifying how updates must be incorporated. In this paper, we introduce a framework for reasoning about evolving knowledge bases, which are represented as extended logic programs and maintained by an update policy. We first describe a formal model which captures various update approaches, and we define a logical language for expressing properties of evolving knowledge bases. We then investigate semantical and computational properties of our framework, where we focus on properties of knowledge states with respect to the canonical reasoning task of whether a given formula holds on a given evolving knowledge base. In particular, we present finitary characterizations of the evolution for certain classes of framework instances, which can be exploited for obtaining decidability results. In more detail, we characterize the complexity of reasoning for some meaningful classes of evolving knowledge bases, ranging from polynomial to double exponential space complexity.

Recently, several approaches to updating knowledge bases modeled as extended logic programs have been introduced, ranging from basic methods to incorporate (sequences of) sets of rules into a logic program, to more elaborate methods which use an update policy for specifying how updates must be incorporated. In this article, we introduce a framework for reasoning about evolving knowledge bases, which are represented as extended logic programs and maintained by an update policy. We first describe a formal model which captures various update approaches, and we define a logical language for expressing properties of evolving knowledge bases. We then investigate semantical and computational properties of our framework, where we focus on properties of knowledge states with respect to the canonical reasoning task of whether a given formula holds in a given evolving knowledge base. In particular, we present finitary characterizations of the evolution for certain classes of framework instances, which can be exploited for obtaining decidability results. In more detail, we characterize the complexity of reasoning for some meaningful classes of evolving knowledge bases, ranging from polynomial to double exponential space complexity.