This paper surveys various complexity results on different forms of logic programming. The main focus is on decidable forms of logic programming, in particular, propositional logic programming and datalog, but we also mention general logic programming with function symbols. Next to classical results on plain logic programming (pure Horn clause programs), more recent results on various important extensions of logic programming are surveyed. These include logic programming with different forms of negation, disjunctive logic programming, logic programming with equality, and constraint logic programming. The complexity of the unification problem is also addressed.

In this paper, we review recent work aimed at the application of declarative logic programming to knowledge representation in artificial intelligence. We consider exten- sions of the language of definite logic programs by classical (strong) negation, disjunc- tion, and some modal operators and show how each of the added features extends the representational power of the language.

We study the complexity of several recently proposed methods for updating or revising propositional knowledge bases. In particular, we derive complexity results for the following problem: given a knowledge base T , an update p, and a formula q, decide whether q is derivable from T p, the updated (or revised) knowledge base. This problem amounts to evaluating the counterfactual p > q over T . Besides the general case, also subcases are considered, in particular where T is a conjunction of Horn clauses, or where the size of p is bounded by a constant.

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.

This paper addresses complexity issues for important problems arising with disjunctive logic programming. In particular, the complexity of deciding whether a disjunctive logic program is consistent is investigated for a variety of well-known semantics, as well as the complexity of deciding whether a propositional formula is satised by all models according to a given semantics. We concentrate on nite propositional disjunctive programs with as wells as without integrity constraints, i.e., clauses with empty heads; the problems are located in appropriate slots of the polynomial hierarchy. In particular, we show that the consistency check is P 2 -complete for the disjunctive stable model semantics (in the total as well as partial version), the iterated closed world assumption, and the perfect model semantics, and we show that the inference problem for these semantics is P 2 -complete; analogous results are derived for the an

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

This paper surveys the main results appeared in the literature on the computational complexity of non-monotonic inference tasks. We not only give results about the tractability/intractability of the individual problems but we also analyze sources of complexity and explain intuitively the nature of easy/hard cases. We focus mainly on non-monotonic formalisms, like default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, closed-world reasoning and abduction, whose relations with logic programming are clear and well studied. Complexity as well as recursion-theoretic results are surveyed. Work partially supported by the ESPRIT Basic Research Action COMPULOG and the Progetto Finalizzato Informatica of the CNR (Italian Research Council). The first author is supported by a CNR scholarship 1 Introduction Non-monotonic logics and negation as failure in logic programming have been defined with the goal of providing formal tools for the representation of default information. One of the ideas und...

Logic programs with ordered disjunction (LPODs) combine ideas underlying Qualitative Choice Logic (Brewka, Benferhat, & Le Berre 2002) and answer set programming. Logic programming under answer set semantics is extended with a new connective called ordered disjunction. The new connective allows us to represent alternative, ranked options for problem solutions in the heads of rules: A × B intuitively means: if possible A, but if A is not possible then at least B. The semantics of logic programs...

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

. The paper studies the automation of minimal model inference, i.e., determining whether a formula is true in every minimal model of the premises. A novel tableau calculus for propositional minimal model reasoning is presented in two steps. First an analytic clausal tableau calculus employing a restricted cut rule is introduced. Then the calculus is extended to handle minimal model inference by employing a groundedness property of minimal models. A decision procedure based on the basic calculus is devised and then it is extended to minimal model inference. The basic decision procedure and its extension enjoy some interesting properties. When deciding logical consequence, the basic procedure explores the search space of counter-models with a preference to minimal models and each counter-model is not generated more than once. The procedures can be implemented to run in polynomial space, and they provide polynomial time decision procedures for Horn clauses. The extended decision procedure...