
Based on an abstract framework for nonmonotonic reasoning, Bondarenko et at. have extended the logic programming semantics of admissible and preferred arguments to other nonmonotonic formalisms such as circumscription, autoepisternic logic and default logic. Although the new semantics have been tacitly assumed to mitigate the computational problems of nonmonotonic reasoning under the standard semantics of stable extensions, it seems questionable whether they improve the worst-case behaviour. As a matter of fact, we show that credulous reasoning under the new semantics in propositional logic programming and prepositional default logic has the same computational complexity as under the standard semantics. Furthermore, sceptical reasoning under the admissibility semantics is easier - since it is trivialised to monotonic reasoning. Finally, sceptical reasoning under the preferability semantics is harder than under the standard semantics.
Sponsors: International Joint Conferences on Artificial
Intelligence, Inc. (IJCAII)
Scandinavian AI Societies
Conference code: 97869
Cited By :28
Microsoft
Ericsson
36
41
Artificial intelligence, Abstract framework, Non-monotonic reasoning, Nonmonotonic, Logic programming semantics, Propositional logic, Default logic, Formal logic, Computational problem, Logic programming, Admissibility semantics, Semantics
Artificial intelligence, Abstract framework, Non-monotonic reasoning, Nonmonotonic, Logic programming semantics, Propositional logic, Default logic, Formal logic, Computational problem, Logic programming, Admissibility semantics, Semantics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
