Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... Extended LP s Background: We assume the reader is familiar with extended LP s [ 11 ] with the semantics of stratified (ordinary, non extended) logic programs with negation as failure (e.g. 33 ] and with the standard concepts in the logic programming literature (e.g. as reviewed in [ 2 ] ) including predicate atom dependency graph and its acyclicity non recursiveness; and instantiation. Appendix A contains some review of these concepts. In this section, we introduce some preliminary definitions, notation, and terminology. This includes reviewing extended LP s cf. 11 ] ....

....total stratifications; the choice among them does not matter. Let p i stand for the i (ground) atom in this sequence ae. The answer set is constructed iteratively: S 0 = S i = j=1; i T j , i 1 S = i T i where ; stands for the empty set, Acyclicity (our terminology follows [2]) prevents recursion among ground atoms, hence is often also called non recursiveness in the literature. This is a cause of some confusion, however, in that strictly speaking, acyclicity does not prevent recursion among predicates. 6 T i = foep i j Cand i 6= 8k 2 Cand :oe i : 9j 2 Cand i ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

.... [ 4 ] 3 ] extended logic programs [ 2 ] the concept of ordinary, non extended logic programs, the semantics of stratified (ordinary, non extended) logic programs with negation as failure (e.g. 7 ] and the standard concepts in the logic programming literature (e.g. as reviewed in [ 1 ] ) including predicate atom dependency graph and its acyclicity non recursiveness; and instantiation. Appendix A contains some review of these concepts. In this section, we introduce some preliminary definitions, notation, and terminology. This includes reviewing extended logic programs ....

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

....kinds of rules today are often found embedded in systems built using Object Oriented (OO) programming languages (e.g. C and Java) and are often used for business process connectors work ow. These four families of rule systems all have common core abstraction: declarative logic programs (LP) [1] provides a helpful review) Declarative here means in the sense of KR theory. Note that this supports both backward inferencing and forward inferencing. In addition to specifying XML syntax for rules, RuleML speci es an associated KR semantics (KRsem) The KRsem speci es what set of ....

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73-148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

....and Systems (WITS 01) on Dec. 16, 2001. see http: www.dfki.de ruleml and the author s home page (http: www.mit.edu bgrosof) see the overview of the Semantic Web Activity on the World Wide Web Consortium s website http: wwww.w3. org sometimes called general LP or normal LP; see [1] for a helpful review 2 RuleML and expressively extended Logic Programs We are leading, with Harold Boley of DFKI (Germany) and Said Tabet of Nisus Inc. USA) an early phase standards e ort on a markup language for exchange of rules in XML, called RuleML (Rule Markup Language) The goal of ....

....kinds of rules today are often found embedded in systems built using Object Oriented (OO) programming languages (e.g. C and Java) and are often used for business process connectors work ow. These four families of rule systems all have common core abstraction: declarative logic programs (LP) [1] provides a helpful review) Declarative here means in the sense of KR theory. Note that this supports both backward inferencing and forward inferencing. RuleML is actually a family (lattice) of rule KR expressive classes : each with a DTD (syntax) and an associated KR semantics (KRsem) ....

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73-148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

....derived relations in SQL relational databases, and to several other varieties of rule based systems. Overview: see the Abstract. 2 Preliminaries Background: We assume the reader is mainly familiar with: the standard concepts and results in the logic programming literature (e.g. as reviewed in [2]) including ordinary logic program (also known as a normal or general logic program; e.g. cf. pure Prolog) instantiation, unification, predicate atom dependency graph and its cyclicity characteristics, the stratified semantics [1] and locally stratified semantics [14] the well founded ....

....shallower atoms; in addition, the Overrides atoms are treated as deepest. Every rule with empty label is interpreted as having the same catch all label empty label, which is treated as a new symbol (i.e. new with respect to the rest of the LP s language) 1 Acyclicity (our terminology follows [2]) prevents recursion among ground atoms, hence is often also called nonrecursiveness in the literature. This is a cause of some confusion, however, in that strictly speaking, acyclicity does not prevent recursion among predicates. In each iteration (i.e. in each stratum) one atom rule locale ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

....Web agent negotiation, between two enterprises in a manufacturing supply chain. Another scenario [4] is to use DIPLOMAT to represent a dynamically evolving rule set of 1 supporting both forward and backward inferencing, with standard model theoretic semantics (reviewed, e.g. in [1]) 2 http: logic.stanford.edu kif and http: www.cs.umbc.edu kif a Webserver bookstore sales agent, that performs personalized discounting and targeted promotions advertisements. Acknowledgements Hoi Chan, Michael Travers, and Xiaocheng Luan contributed to the DIPLOMAT implementation, ....

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

....world at large. One family is logic programs (LP s) including, but not limited to, Prolog. Logic programs have a general, declarative sense; they can be forward chaining as well as backward chaining, and need not be a generalpurpose programming language in the manner of Prolog. Baral Gelfond [1] gives a useful review of declarative logic programs as a KR. Another family is production rules: descendants of OPS5 [2] e.g. the public domain system Jess 9 . A third (relatively loose) family is 8 in the sense of declarative knowledge representation, in which a set of premises entails a ....

....is the first step. 2) Prioritized override between conflicting rules (i.e. prioritized default rules and conflict handling) is the second step. Our approach is to use ordinary Logic Programs to provide the first step. By Logic Program, we mean in the declarative sense, e.g. cf. [1] 11 . Inferencing for LP s can be run forward or backward, using a variety of control strategies and algorithms; Prolog, by contrast, does backward only inferencing, using a particular control strategy. Ordinary LP s (OLP s) offer several other significant advantages beyond enabling ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

....of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) We are in the sparsely occupied middle ground, aiming for considerable expressive power but also considerable automatability. Our point of departure for our KR is pure logic programs (in the knowledge representation theory sense, not Prolog) Baral Gelfond [1] provide a helpful review. Logic programs are not only declarative and relatively powerful expressively, but also practical, relatively computationally efficient, and widely deployed. We embody the representation concretely as XML messages. This choice enhances human readability (via standard XML ....

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

.... is familiar with extended logic programs [ Gelfond and Lifschitz, 1991 ] with the semantics of stratified (ordinary, non extended) logic programs with negation as failure (e.g. Przymusinski, 1988 ] and with the standard concepts in the logic programming literature (e.g. as reviewed in [ Baral and Gelfond, 1994 ] including predicate atom dependency graph and its acyclicity non recursiveness; and instantiation. The Appendix contains some review of these concepts. Recall that each rule r in an extended logic program has the form: L 0 L 1 : Lm fail Lm 1 : fail L n where n m 0, ....

....Work Prioritized default circumscription [ Grosof, 1991 ] Grosof, 1992 ] generalizing [ McCarthy, 1986 ] Lifschitz, 1985 ] has a similar, though more general, concept of prioritization. However, circumscription behaves contrapositively, and thus quite differently from logic programs. Baral Gelfond [ 1994 ] discuss techniques for achieving some of the effects of priorities within extended logic programs, e.g. via abnormalities, but do not give a general method. Pereira et al. [ 1993 ] address the issues of consistency, and priorities between abnormalities, in extended logic programs. Their ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

No context found.

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

No context found.

Chitta Baral and Michael Gelfond. Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming, 19,20:73--148, 1994. Includes extensive review of literature.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC