ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The treatment of negation in logic programs for representing legislation
Full text PdfPdf (489 KB)
Source International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law table of contents
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Pages: 11 - 15  
Year of Publication: 1989
ISBN:0-89791-322-1
Author
R. Kowalski  Imperial College, London
Sponsor
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 14,   Citation Count: 4
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/74014.74016
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Logic programs represent knowledge in the form of implications A if B1 and … Bn, n ≥ 0 where the conclusion A is an atomic formula and each condition Bi is either an atomic formula or the negation of an atomic formula. Any variables are assumed to be universally quantified, with a scope which is the entire sentence. A negated condition “not Ai” is deemed to hold if the corresponding positive condition Ai can be shown to fail to hold. This interpretation of negative conditions is called negation by failure (NBF) [Cl 78]. It has the characteristic that only the positive “if-half” of a definition needs to be given explicity. The negative “only-if” half is given implicitly by NBF. The obvious problem with NBF is that it supplies the only-if halves of implications, whether or not they are intended. I shall discuss a possible solution to this problem in the context of discussing the more general problem of representing negative conclusions. I shall focus on examples taken from our formalisation of the 1981 British Nationality Act (BNA) [SSKKHC 86]. I shall argue that many negative sentences can be regarded as integrity constraints and consequently can be eliminated by transformations such as those developed by Asirelli et al [ASM 85] and Kowalski and Sadri [KS 88]. Among such sentences are ones expressing prohibitions. The interpretation of prohibitions as integrity constraints suggests a possible approach to the treatment of deontic modalities.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
ASM 85
 
CI 78
Clark, K. L. {1978}: "Negation as failure", in "Logic and Databases", Gallaire, H. and Minker, J. {Eds}, Plenum Press, pp. 293- 322.
 
CGM 88
 
EK 89
Eshghi, K. and Kowalski, R. A. {1989}: "Abduction Compared with Negation by Failure", Proceedings of the Sixth International Logic Programming Conference. MIT Press.
 
KS 88
Kowalski, R.A. and Sadri, F., {1988}: "Knowledge Representation without Integrity Constraints", Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London.
 
LST 86
R89
 
SK 88
SSKKHC 86