Many AI problems, when formalized, reduce to evaluating the probability that a propositional expression is true. In this paper we show that this problem is computationally intractable even in surprisingly restricted cases and even if we settle for an approximation to this probability. We consider various methods used in approximate reasoning such as computing degree of belief and Bayesian belief networks, as well as reasoning techniques such as constraint satisfaction and knowledge compilation, that use approximation to avoid computational difficulties, and reduce them to model-counting problems over a propositional domain. We prove that counting satisfying assignments of propositional languages is intractable even for Horn and monotone formulae, and even when the size of clauses and number of occurrences of the variables are extremely limited. This should be contrasted with the case of deductive reasoning, where Horn theories and theories with binary clauses are distinguished by the e...

this paper we survey recent results in knowledge compilation of propositional knowledge bases. We first define and limit the scope of such a technique, then we survey exact and approximate knowledge compilation methods. We include a discussion of compilation for non-monotonic knowledge bases. Keywords: Knowledge Representation, Efficiency of Reasoning

Abstract. We introduce a new framework for the study of reasoning. The Learning (in order) to Reason approach developed here views learning as an integral part of the inference process, and suggests that learning and reasoning should be studied together. The Learning to Reason framework combines the interfaces to the world used by known learning models with the reasoning task and a performance criterion suitable for it. In this framework, the intelligent agent is given access to its favorite learning interface, and is also given a grace period in which it can interact with this interface and construct a representation KB of the world W. The reasoning performance is measured only after this period, when the agent is presented with queries � from some query language, relevant to the world, and has to answer whether W implies �. The approach is meant to overcome the main computational difficulties in the traditional treatment of reasoning which stem from its separation from the “world”. Since the agent interacts with the world when constructing its knowledge representation it can choose a representation that is useful for the task at hand. Moreover, we can now make explicit the dependence of the reasoning performance on the environment the agent interacts with. We show how previous results from learning theory and reasoning fit into this framework and

We develop a methodology for comparing knowledge representation formalisms in terms of their "representational succinctness, " that is, their ability to express knowledge situations relatively efficiently. We use this framework for comparing many important formalisms for knowledge base representation: propositional logic, default logic, circumscription, and model preference defaults; and, at a lower level, Horn formulas, characteristic models, decision trees, disjunctive normal form, and conjunctive normal form. We also show that adding new variables improves the effective expressibility of certain knowledge representation formalisms. 1

Independence { the study of what is relevant to a given problem of reasoning { has received an increasing attention from the AI community. In this paper, we consider two basic forms of independence, namely, a syntactic one and a semantic one. We show features and drawbacks of them. In particular, while the syntactic form of independence is computationally easy to check, there are cases in which things that intuitively are not relevant are not recognized as such. We also consider the problem of forgetting, i.e., distilling from a knowledge base only the part that is relevant to the set of queries constructed from a subset of the alphabet. While such process is computationally hard, it allows for a simpli - cation of subsequent reasoning, and can thus be viewed as a form of compilation: once the relevant part of a knowledge base has been extracted, all reasoning tasks to be performed can be simpli ed.

Several studies about computational complexity of non-monotonic reasoning (NMR) showed that non-monotonic inference is significantly harder than classical, monotonic inference. This contrasts with the general idea that NMR can be used to make knowledge representation and reasoning simpler, not harder. In this paper we show that, to some extent, NMR fulfills the representation goal. In particular, we prove that non-monotonic formalisms such as circumscription and default logic allow for a much more compact and natural representation of propositional knowledge than propositional calculus. Proofs are based on a suitable definition of compilable inference problem, and on non-uniform complexity classes. Some results about intractability of circumscription and default logic can therefore be interpreted as the price one has to pay for having such an extra-compact representation. On the other hand, intractability of inference and compactness of representation are not equivalent notions: we ex...

Formal AI systems traditionally represent knowledge using logical formulas. Sometimes, however, a model-based representation is more compact and enables faster reasoning than the corresponding formula-based representation. The central idea behind our work is to represent a large set of models by a subset of characteristic models. More specifically, we examine model-based representations of Horn theories, and show that there are large Horn theories that can be exactly represented by an exponentially smaller set of characteristic models. We show that deduction based on a set of characteristic models requires only polynomial time, as it does using Horn theories. More surprisingly, abduction can be performed in polynomial time using a set of characteristic models, whereas abduction using Horn theories is NP-complete. Finally, we discuss algorithms for generating efficient representations of the Horn theory that best approximates a general set of models. 1 Introduction Logical formulas are...

The Learning to Reason framework combines the study of Learning and Reasoning into a single task. Within it, learning is done specifically for the purpose of reasoning with the learned knowledge. Computational considerations show that this is a useful paradigm; in some cases learning and reasoning problems that are intractable when studied separately become tractable when performed as a task of Learning to Reason. In this paper we study Learning to Reason problems where the interaction with the world supplies the learner only partial information in the form of partial assignments. Several natural interpretations of partial assignments are considered and learning and reasoning algorithms using these are developed. The results presented exhibit a tradeoff between learnability, the strength of the oracles used in the interface, and the range of reasoning queries the learner is guaranteed to answer correctly.

We investigate the space e#ciency of a Propositional Knowledge Representation (PKR) formalism. Intuitively, the space e#ciency of a formalism F in representing a certain piece of knowledge #, is the size of the shortest formula of F that represents #. In this paper we assume that knowledge is either a set of propositional interpretations (models) or a set of propositional formulae (theorems). We provide a formal way of talking about the relative ability of PKR formalisms to compactly represent a set of models or a set of theorems. We introduce two new compactness measures, the corresponding classes, and show that the relative space e#ciency of a PKR formalism in representing models/theorems is directly related to such classes. In particular, we consider formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning, such as circumscription and default logic, as well as belief revision operators and the stable model semantics for logic programs with negation. One interesting result is that formalisms ...

Characteristic models are an alternative, model based, representation for Horn expressions. It has been shown that these two representations are incomparable and each has its advantages over the other. It is therefore natural to ask what is the cost of translating, back and forth, between these representations. Interestingly, the same translation questions arise in database theory, where it has applications to the design of relational databases. We study the complexity of these problems and prove some positive and negative results. Our main result is that the two translation problems are equivalent under polynomial reductions, and that they are equivalent to the corresponding decision problem. Namely, translating is equivalent to deciding whether a given set a models is the set of characteristic models for a given Horn expression. We also relate these problems to translating between the CNF and DNF representations of monotone functions, a well known problem for which no pol...