Abduction is an important form of nonmonotonic reasoning allowing one to find explanations for certain symptoms or manifestations. When the application domain is described by a logical theory, we speak about logic-based abduction. Candidates for abductive explanations are usually subjected to minimality criteria such as subsetminimality, minimal cardinality, minimal weight, or minimality under prioritization of individual hypotheses. This paper presents a comprehensive complexity analysis of relevant decision and search problems related to abduction on propositional theories. Our results indicate that abduction is harder than deduction. In particular, we show that with the most basic forms of abduction the relevant decision problems are complete for complexity classes at the second level of the polynomial hierarchy, while the use of prioritization raises the complexity to the third level in certain cases.

In this paper, we address the issue of how Gelfond and Lifschitz's answer set semantics for extended logic programs can be suitably modified to handle prioritized programs. In such programs an ordering on the program rules is used to express preferences. We show how this ordering can be used to define preferred answer sets and thus to increase the set of consequences of a program. We define a strong and a weak notion of preferred answer sets. The first takes preferences more seriously, while the second guarantees the existence of a preferred answer set for programs possessing at least one answer set. Adding priorities

Circumscription and the closed world assumption with its variants are well-known nonmonotonic techniques for reasoning with incomplete knowledge. Their complexity in the propositional case has been studied in detail for fragments of propositional logic. One open problem is whether the deduction problem for arbitrary propositional theories under the extended closed world assumption or under circumscription is $\Pi^P_2$-complete, i.e., complete for a class of the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. We answer this question by proving these problems $\Pi^P_2$-complete, and we show how this result applies to other variants of closed world reasoning.

We show that polynomial time truth-table reducibility via Boolean circuits to SAT is the same as logspace truth-table reducibility via Boolean formulas to SAT and the same as logspace Turing reducibility to SAT . In addition, we prove that a constant number of rounds of parallel queries to SAT is equivalent to one round of parallel queries.

: We investigate here NP optimization problems from a logical definability standpoint. We show that the class of optimization problems whose optimum is definable using first-order formulae coincides with the class of polynomially bounded NP optimization problems on finite structures. After this, we analyze the relative expressive power of various classes of optimization problems that arise in this framework. Some of our results show that logical definability has different implications for NP maximization problems than it has for NP minimization problems, in terms of both expressive power and approximation properties. To appear in Information and Computation. Research partially supported by NSF Grants CCR8905038 and CCR-9108631. y e-mail addresses: kolaitis@cse.ucsc.edu, thakur@cse.ucsc.edu z supersedes Technical report UCSC-CRL-90-48 1 Introduction and Summary of Results It is well known that optimization problems had a major influence on the development of the theory of NP-co...

In 1876, Lewis Carroll proposed a voting system in which the winner is the candidate who with the fewest changes in voters' preferences becomes a Condorcet winner---a candidate who beats all other candidates in pairwise majority-rule elections. Bartholdi, Tovey, and Trick provided a lower bound--- NP-hardness---on the computational complexity of determining the election winner in Carroll's system. We provide a stronger lower bound and an upper bound that matches our lower bound. In particular, determining the winner in Carroll's system is complete for parallel access to NP, i.e., it is complete for \Theta p 2 , for which it becomes the most natural complete problem known. It follows that determining the winner in Carroll's elections is not NP-complete unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses. Email: edith@bamboo.lemoyne.edu. Supported in part by grant NSF-INT-9513368/DAAD-315-PROfo -ab. Work done in part while visiting Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat Jena and the University of Amst...

We prove that the Minimum Equivalent DNF problem is \Sigma p 2 -complete, resolving a conjecture due to Stockmeyer. The proof involves as an intermediate step a variant of a related problem in logic minimization, namely, that of finding the shortest implicant of a Boolean function. We also obtain certain results concerning the complexity of the Shortest Implicant problem that may be of independent interest. When the input is a formula, the Shortest Implicant problem is \Sigma p 2 - complete, and \Sigma p 2 -hard to approximate to within an n 1=2\Gammaffl factor. When the input is a circuit, approximation is \Sigma p 2 - hard to within an n 1\Gammaffl factor. However, when the input is a DNF formula, the Shortest Implicant problem cannot be \Sigma p 2 -complete unless \Sigma p 2 = NP[log 2 n] NP . 1. Introduction Two-level (DNF) logic minimization is a central practical problem in logic synthesis and also one of the more natural problems in the polynomial hierarchy....

If a new piece of information contradicts our previously held beliefs, we have to revise our beliefs. This problem of belief revision arises in a number of areas in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, e.g., in updating logical database, in hypothetical reasoning, and in machine learning. Most of the research in this area is influenced by work in philosophical logic, in particular by Gardenfors and his colleagues, who developed the theory of belief revision. Here we will focus on the computational aspects of this theory, surveying results that address the issue of the computational complexity of belief revision.

A set A is p-terse (p-superterse) if, for all q, it is not possible to answer q queries to A by making only q \Gamma 1 queries to A (any set X). Formally, let PF A q-tt be the class of functions reducible to A via a polynomial-time truthtable reduction of norm q, and let PF A q-T be the class of functions reducible to A via a polynomial-time Turing reduction that makes at most q queries. A set A is p-terse if PF A q-tt 6` PF A (q\Gamma1)-T for all constants q. A is p-superterse if PF A q-tt 6` PF X q-T for all constants q and sets X . We show that all NP-hard sets (under p tt -reductions) are p-superterse, unless it is possible to distinguish uniquely satisfiable formulas from satisfiable formulas in polynomial time. Consequently, all NP-complete sets are psuperterse unless P = UP (one-way functions fail to exist), R = NP (there exist randomized polynomial-time algorithms for all problems in NP), and the polynomial-time hierarchy collapses. This mostly solves the main open...

We analyze the computational complexity of causal relationships in Pearl's structural models, where we focus on causality between variables, event causality, and probabilistic causality. In particular, we analyze the complexity of the sophisticated notions of weak and actual causality by Halpern and Pearl. In the course of this, we also prove an open conjecture by Halpern and Pearl, and establish other semantic results. To our knowledge, no complexity aspects of causal relationships have been considered so far, and our results shed light on this issue. 1