Abstract
The problem of computing X-minimal models, that is, models minimal with respect to a subset X of all the atoms in a theory, is very relevant for computing circumscriptions and diagnosis. Unfortunately, the problem is NP-hard. In this paper we present two novel algorithms for computing X-minimal models. The advantage of these new algorithms is that, unlike existing ones, they are capable of generating the models one by one. There is no need to compute a superset of all minimal models before finding the first X-minimal one. Our procedures may use local serach techniques, or, alternatively, complete methods. We have implemented and tested the algorithms and the preliminary experimental results are encouraging.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ben-Eliyahu, R. 2000. A demand-driven algorithm for generating minimal models. In AAAI-2000: the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 101–106.
Ben-Eliyahu, R., and Dechter, R. 1996. On computing minimal models. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 18:3–27. A short version in AAAI-93: Proceedings of the 11th national conference on artificial intelligence.
Ben-Eliyahu, R., and Palopoli, L. 1997. Reasoning with minimal models: Efficient algorithms and applications. Artificial Intelligence 96:421–449.
Bollobas, B.; Combinatorics. Cambridge University Press, 1986.
William F. Dowling and Jean H. Gallier. Linear time algorithms for testing the satisfiability of propositional Horn formulae. Journal of Logic Programming, 3:267–284, 1984.
de Kleer, J., and Williams, B. 1987. Diagnosis multiple faults. Artificial Intelligence 32:97–130.
de Kleer, J.; Mackworth, A.; and Reiter, R. 1992. Characterizing diagnosis and systems. Artificial Intelligence 56:197–222.
Gelfond, M.; Przymusinska, H.; and Przymusinski, T. 1989. On the relationship between Circumscription and Negation as Failure, Artificial Intelligence 38 75–94.
Janhunen, T.; Niemella, I; Simons, P. and J. You, 2000.Unfolding partiality and disjunctions in stable model semantics. In KR-2000: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning.
Koch, C. and Leone, N. 1999. Stable Model Checking Made Easy. In IJCAI-99: Proceedings of the 16th international joint conference on Artificial Intelligence, 70–75.
Lifshitz, V. 1985. Computing circumscription. In IJCAI-85: Proceedings of the international joint conference on AI 121–127.
Lomonosov, M.; Personal communication., 2000.
McCarthy, J.1980. Circumscription-a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13:27–39.
Reiter, R.1987. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence 32:57–95.
SATLIB-The Satisfiability Library-http://aida.intellektik.informatik.tudarmstadt.de/SATLIB/
Selman, B. and Kirkpatrick, S. 1996. Critical behavior in the computational cost of satisfiability testing. Artificial Intelligence, 81:273–296.
Selman, B. Kautz, H. Cohen, B. Local Search Strategies for Satisfiability Testing. Proceedings of 2nd DIMACS Challenge on Cliques, Coloring and Satisfiability, 1994.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Avin, C., Zohary, R.BE. (2001). Algorithms for Computing X-Minimal Models. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M.l. (eds) Logic Programming and Nonmotonic Reasoning. LPNMR 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2173. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45402-0_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45402-0_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42593-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45402-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive