Pub Date : 2022-05-16DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000229
Thomas Eiter, N. Higuera, J. Oetsch, Michael Pritz
Abstract We present a neuro-symbolic visual question answering (VQA) pipeline for CLEVR, which is a well-known dataset that consists of pictures showing scenes with objects and questions related to them. Our pipeline covers (i) training neural networks for object classification and bounding-box prediction of the CLEVR scenes, (ii) statistical analysis on the distribution of prediction values of the neural networks to determine a threshold for high-confidence predictions, and (iii) a translation of CLEVR questions and network predictions that pass confidence thresholds into logic programmes so that we can compute the answers using an answer-set programming solver. By exploiting choice rules, we consider deterministic and non-deterministic scene encodings. Our experiments show that the non-deterministic scene encoding achieves good results even if the neural networks are trained rather poorly in comparison with the deterministic approach. This is important for building robust VQA systems if network predictions are less-than perfect. Furthermore, we show that restricting non-determinism to reasonable choices allows for more efficient implementations in comparison with related neuro-symbolic approaches without losing much accuracy.
{"title":"A Neuro-Symbolic ASP Pipeline for Visual Question Answering","authors":"Thomas Eiter, N. Higuera, J. Oetsch, Michael Pritz","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000229","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We present a neuro-symbolic visual question answering (VQA) pipeline for CLEVR, which is a well-known dataset that consists of pictures showing scenes with objects and questions related to them. Our pipeline covers (i) training neural networks for object classification and bounding-box prediction of the CLEVR scenes, (ii) statistical analysis on the distribution of prediction values of the neural networks to determine a threshold for high-confidence predictions, and (iii) a translation of CLEVR questions and network predictions that pass confidence thresholds into logic programmes so that we can compute the answers using an answer-set programming solver. By exploiting choice rules, we consider deterministic and non-deterministic scene encodings. Our experiments show that the non-deterministic scene encoding achieves good results even if the neural networks are trained rather poorly in comparison with the deterministic approach. This is important for building robust VQA systems if network predictions are less-than perfect. Furthermore, we show that restricting non-determinism to reasonable choices allows for more efficient implementations in comparison with related neuro-symbolic approaches without losing much accuracy.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42327834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-16DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000278
V. Lifschitz
Abstract In answer set programming, two groups of rules are considered strongly equivalent if they have the same meaning in any context. In some cases, strong equivalence of programs in the input language of the grounder gringo can be established by deriving rules of each program from rules of the other. The possibility of such proofs has been demonstrated for a subset of that language that includes comparisons, arithmetic operations, and simple choice rules, but not aggregates. This method is extended here to a class of programs in which some uses of the #count aggregate are allowed.
{"title":"Strong Equivalence of Logic Programs with Counting","authors":"V. Lifschitz","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000278","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000278","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In answer set programming, two groups of rules are considered strongly equivalent if they have the same meaning in any context. In some cases, strong equivalence of programs in the input language of the grounder gringo can be established by deriving rules of each program from rules of the other. The possibility of such proofs has been demonstrated for a subset of that language that includes comparisons, arithmetic operations, and simple choice rules, but not aggregates. This method is extended here to a class of programs in which some uses of the #count aggregate are allowed.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43872666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-14DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000151
Alice Tarzariol, M. Gebser, Mark Law, Konstantin Schekotihin
Abstract Many industrial applications require finding solutions to challenging combinatorial problems. Efficient elimination of symmetric solution candidates is one of the key enablers for high-performance solving. However, existing model-based approaches for symmetry breaking are limited to problems for which a set of representative and easily solvable instances is available, which is often not the case in practical applications. This work extends the learning framework and implementation of a model-based approach for Answer Set Programming to overcome these limitations and address challenging problems, such as the Partner Units Problem. In particular, we incorporate a new conflict analysis algorithm in the Inductive Logic Programming system ILASP, redefine the learning task, and suggest a new example generation method to scale up the approach. The experiments conducted for different kinds of Partner Units Problem instances demonstrate the applicability of our approach and the computational benefits due to the first-order constraints learned.
{"title":"Efficient Lifting of Symmetry Breaking Constraints for Complex Combinatorial Problems","authors":"Alice Tarzariol, M. Gebser, Mark Law, Konstantin Schekotihin","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000151","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000151","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many industrial applications require finding solutions to challenging combinatorial problems. Efficient elimination of symmetric solution candidates is one of the key enablers for high-performance solving. However, existing model-based approaches for symmetry breaking are limited to problems for which a set of representative and easily solvable instances is available, which is often not the case in practical applications. This work extends the learning framework and implementation of a model-based approach for Answer Set Programming to overcome these limitations and address challenging problems, such as the Partner Units Problem. In particular, we incorporate a new conflict analysis algorithm in the Inductive Logic Programming system ILASP, redefine the learning task, and suggest a new example generation method to scale up the approach. The experiments conducted for different kinds of Partner Units Problem instances demonstrate the applicability of our approach and the computational benefits due to the first-order constraints learned.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46948267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-13DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000187
M. Hanus
Abstract Logic programming is a flexible programming paradigm due to the use of predicates without a fixed data flow. To extend logic languages with the compact notation of functional programming, there are various proposals to map evaluable functions into predicates in order to stay in the logic programming framework. Since amalgamated functional logic languages offer flexible as well as efficient evaluation strategies, we propose an opposite approach in this paper. By mapping logic programs into functional logic programs with a transformation based on inferring functional dependencies, we develop a fully automatic transformation which keeps the flexibility of logic programming but can improve computations by reducing infinite search spaces to finite ones.
{"title":"From Logic to Functional Logic Programs","authors":"M. Hanus","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000187","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000187","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Logic programming is a flexible programming paradigm due to the use of predicates without a fixed data flow. To extend logic languages with the compact notation of functional programming, there are various proposals to map evaluable functions into predicates in order to stay in the logic programming framework. Since amalgamated functional logic languages offer flexible as well as efficient evaluation strategies, we propose an opposite approach in this paper. By mapping logic programs into functional logic programs with a transformation based on inferring functional dependencies, we develop a fully automatic transformation which keeps the flexibility of logic programming but can improve computations by reducing infinite search spaces to finite ones.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41828128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-12DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000175
E. DE ANGELIS, M. Proietti, F. Fioravanti, A. Pettorossi
Abstract We address the problem of verifying that the functions of a program meet their contracts, specified by pre/postconditions. We follow an approach based on constrained Horn clauses (CHCs) by which the verification problem is reduced to the problem of checking satisfiability of a set of clauses derived from the given program and contracts. We consider programs that manipulate algebraic data types (ADTs) and a class of contracts specified by catamorphisms, that is, functions defined by simple recursion schemata on the given ADTs. We show by several examples that state-of-the-art CHC satisfiability tools are not effective at solving the satisfiability problems obtained by direct translation of the contracts into CHCs. To overcome this difficulty, we propose a transformation technique that removes the ADT terms from CHCs and derives new sets of clauses that work on basic sorts only, such as integers and booleans. Thus, when using the derived CHCs there is no need for induction rules on ADTs. We prove that the transformation is sound, that is, if the derived set of CHCs is satisfiable, then so is the original set. We also prove that the transformation always terminates for the class of contracts specified by catamorphisms. Finally, we present the experimental results obtained by an implementation of our technique when verifying many non-trivial contracts for ADT manipulating programs.
{"title":"Verifying Catamorphism-Based Contracts using Constrained Horn Clauses","authors":"E. DE ANGELIS, M. Proietti, F. Fioravanti, A. Pettorossi","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000175","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We address the problem of verifying that the functions of a program meet their contracts, specified by pre/postconditions. We follow an approach based on constrained Horn clauses (CHCs) by which the verification problem is reduced to the problem of checking satisfiability of a set of clauses derived from the given program and contracts. We consider programs that manipulate algebraic data types (ADTs) and a class of contracts specified by catamorphisms, that is, functions defined by simple recursion schemata on the given ADTs. We show by several examples that state-of-the-art CHC satisfiability tools are not effective at solving the satisfiability problems obtained by direct translation of the contracts into CHCs. To overcome this difficulty, we propose a transformation technique that removes the ADT terms from CHCs and derives new sets of clauses that work on basic sorts only, such as integers and booleans. Thus, when using the derived CHCs there is no need for induction rules on ADTs. We prove that the transformation is sound, that is, if the derived set of CHCs is satisfiable, then so is the original set. We also prove that the transformation always terminates for the class of contracts specified by catamorphisms. Finally, we present the experimental results obtained by an implementation of our technique when verifying many non-trivial contracts for ADT manipulating programs.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47885655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-11DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000254
Paul Tarau
Abstract With help of a compact Prolog-based theorem prover for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic, we synthesize minimal assumptions under which a given formula formula becomes a theorem. After applying our synthesis algorithm to cover basic abductive reasoning mechanisms, we synthesize conjunctions of literals that mimic rows of truth tables in classical or intermediate logics and we abduce conditional hypotheses that turn the theorems of classical or intermediate logics into theorems in intuitionistic logic. One step further, we generalize our abductive reasoning mechanism to synthesize more expressive sequent premises using a minimal set of canonical formulas, to which arbitrary formulas in the calculus can be reduced while preserving their provability. Organized as a self-contained literate Prolog program, the paper supports interactive exploration of its content and ensures full replicability of our results.
{"title":"Abductive Reasoning in Intuitionistic Propositional Logic via Theorem Synthesis","authors":"Paul Tarau","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000254","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000254","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With help of a compact Prolog-based theorem prover for Intuitionistic Propositional Logic, we synthesize minimal assumptions under which a given formula formula becomes a theorem. After applying our synthesis algorithm to cover basic abductive reasoning mechanisms, we synthesize conjunctions of literals that mimic rows of truth tables in classical or intermediate logics and we abduce conditional hypotheses that turn the theorems of classical or intermediate logics into theorems in intuitionistic logic. One step further, we generalize our abductive reasoning mechanism to synthesize more expressive sequent premises using a minimal set of canonical formulas, to which arbitrary formulas in the calculus can be reduced while preserving their provability. Organized as a self-contained literate Prolog program, the paper supports interactive exploration of its content and ensures full replicability of our results.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46381604","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-10DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000242
A. Charalambidis, C. Nomikos, P. Rondogiannis
Abstract Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction (LPODs) extend classical logic programs with the capability of expressing preferential disjunctions in the heads of program rules. The initial semantics of LPODs, although simple and quite intuitive, is not purely model-theoretic. As a result, certain properties of programs appear non-trivial to formalize in purely logical terms. For example, the current characterization of strong equivalence for LPODs, does not coincide with logical equivalence in some specific logic. This comes in sharp contrast with the well-known characterization of strong equivalence for classical logic programs, which coincides with logical equivalence in the logic of here-and-there. In this paper we obtain a purely logical characterization of strong equivalence for LPODs as logical equivalence in a four-valued logic. Moreover, we provide a new proof of the coNP-completeness of strong equivalence for LPODs, which has an interest in its own right since it relies on the special structure of such programs. Our results are based on the recent logical semantics of LPODs, a fact which we believe indicates that this new semantics may prove to be a useful tool in the further study of LPODs.
{"title":"Strong Equivalence of Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction: A Logical Perspective","authors":"A. Charalambidis, C. Nomikos, P. Rondogiannis","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000242","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000242","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunction (LPODs) extend classical logic programs with the capability of expressing preferential disjunctions in the heads of program rules. The initial semantics of LPODs, although simple and quite intuitive, is not purely model-theoretic. As a result, certain properties of programs appear non-trivial to formalize in purely logical terms. For example, the current characterization of strong equivalence for LPODs, does not coincide with logical equivalence in some specific logic. This comes in sharp contrast with the well-known characterization of strong equivalence for classical logic programs, which coincides with logical equivalence in the logic of here-and-there. In this paper we obtain a purely logical characterization of strong equivalence for LPODs as logical equivalence in a four-valued logic. Moreover, we provide a new proof of the coNP-completeness of strong equivalence for LPODs, which has an interest in its own right since it relies on the special structure of such programs. Our results are based on the recent logical semantics of LPODs, a fact which we believe indicates that this new semantics may prove to be a useful tool in the further study of LPODs.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41939339","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-09DOI: 10.1017/S1471068422000230
David Geleßus, M. Leuschel
Abstract Even though the core of the Prolog programming language has been standardized by ISO since 1995, it remains difficult to write complex Prolog programs that can run unmodified on multiple Prolog implementations. Indeed, implementations sometimes deviate from the ISO standard and the standard itself fails to cover many features that are essential in practice. Most Prolog applications thus have to rely on nonstandard features, often making them dependent on one particular Prolog implementation and incompatible with others. We examine one such Prolog application: ProB, which has been developed for over 20 years in SICStus Prolog. The article describes how we managed to refactor the codebase of ProB to also support SWI-Prolog, with the goal of verifying ProB’s results using two independent toolchains. This required a multitude of adjustments, ranging from extending the SICStus emulation in SWI-Prolog on to better modularizing the monolithic ProB codebase. We also describe notable compatibility issues and other differences that we encountered in the process, and how we were able to deal with them with few major code changes.
{"title":"Making ProB Compatible with SWI-Prolog","authors":"David Geleßus, M. Leuschel","doi":"10.1017/S1471068422000230","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068422000230","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Even though the core of the Prolog programming language has been standardized by ISO since 1995, it remains difficult to write complex Prolog programs that can run unmodified on multiple Prolog implementations. Indeed, implementations sometimes deviate from the ISO standard and the standard itself fails to cover many features that are essential in practice. Most Prolog applications thus have to rely on nonstandard features, often making them dependent on one particular Prolog implementation and incompatible with others. We examine one such Prolog application: ProB, which has been developed for over 20 years in SICStus Prolog. The article describes how we managed to refactor the codebase of ProB to also support SWI-Prolog, with the goal of verifying ProB’s results using two independent toolchains. This required a multitude of adjustments, ranging from extending the SICStus emulation in SWI-Prolog on to better modularizing the monolithic ProB codebase. We also describe notable compatibility issues and other differences that we encountered in the process, and how we were able to deal with them with few major code changes.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49204178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-03DOI: 10.1017/s1471068422000114
JORGE FANDINNO, LUIS FARIÑAS DEL CERRO
In this work, we show that both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks can be interpreted in terms of Nelson’s constructive logic N4. We do so by formalising, in this logic, two principles that we call noncontradictory inference and strengthened closed world assumption: the first states that no belief can be held based on contradictory evidence while the latter forces both unknown and contradictory evidence to be regarded as false. Using these principles, both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks are translated into constructive logic in a modular way and using the object language. Logic programming implication and abstract argumentation supports become, in the translation, a new implication connective following the noncontradictory inference principle. Attacks are then represented by combining this new implication with strong negation. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).
{"title":"Abstract Argumentation and Answer Set Programming: Two Faces of Nelson’s Logic","authors":"JORGE FANDINNO, LUIS FARIÑAS DEL CERRO","doi":"10.1017/s1471068422000114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1471068422000114","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this work, we show that both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks can be interpreted in terms of Nelson’s constructive logic N4. We do so by formalising, in this logic, two principles that we call noncontradictory inference and strengthened closed world assumption: the first states that no belief can be held based on contradictory evidence while the latter forces both unknown and contradictory evidence to be regarded as false. Using these principles, both logic programming and abstract argumentation frameworks are translated into constructive logic in a modular way and using the object language. Logic programming implication and abstract argumentation supports become, in the translation, a new implication connective following the noncontradictory inference principle. Attacks are then represented by combining this new implication with strong negation. <span>Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).</span></p>","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138540389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-28DOI: 10.1017/s1471068422000023
Paul Fodor, M. Montali
This special issue of Theory and Practice of Logic Programming consists of extended versions of five selected papers from the 3rd International Joint Conference on Rules and Reasoning (RuleML+RR 2019). RuleML+RR 2019 was held in conjunction with the 5th Global Conference on Artificial Intelligence, GCAI 2019, as part of the Bolzano Rules and Artificial INtelligence Summit in Bolzano, Italy, from 17 to 19 of September 2019.
{"title":"Introduction to the Special Issue on the International Joint Conference on Rules and Reasoning, RuleML+RR 2019","authors":"Paul Fodor, M. Montali","doi":"10.1017/s1471068422000023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1471068422000023","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This special issue of Theory and Practice of Logic Programming consists of extended versions of five selected papers from the 3rd International Joint Conference on Rules and Reasoning (RuleML+RR 2019). RuleML+RR 2019 was held in conjunction with the 5th Global Conference on Artificial Intelligence, GCAI 2019, as part of the Bolzano Rules and Artificial INtelligence Summit in Bolzano, Italy, from 17 to 19 of September 2019.","PeriodicalId":49436,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Logic Programming","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84505037","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：