Complexity and expressive power of logic programming
Abstract
This article surveys various complexity and expressiveness 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Compared to definite programs, the main advantage of Datalog is decidability.
“Compared to definite programs, the main advantage of Datalog is decidability (Dantsin et al., 2001).”
From Inductive Logic Programming At 30: A New Introduction (2022) · cites this paper as Dantsin et al., 2001
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Machine learning: a review of classification and combining techniques
Kotsiantis, S. B., Zaharakis, I. D., & Pintelas, P. E. (2006) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-007-9052-3 · Cited by 1,582 · see citing works
Inductive Logic Programming At 30: A New Introduction
Cropper, A., & Dumančić, S. (2022) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.13507 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Logical reduction of metarules
Cropper, A., & Tourret, S. (2020) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-019-05834-x · Cited by 29 · see citing works
First-order answer set programming as constructive proof search
Schubert, A., & Urzyczyn, P. (2018) · EasyChair Preprints · doi:10.29007/9qvn · Cited by 17
- Authors
- Dantsin, E., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., & Voronkov, A.
- Affiliations
- Roosevelt University (US)
- TU Wien (AT)
- University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 2001-09
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 374-425
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W1969965298
- Cited by
- 739
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 39
- FWCI
- 24.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Computing Surveys (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Graph Theory Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, programming, and type systems
- Keywords
- logic programming, computational complexity, expressiveness, Datalog, negation, disjunctive logic programming, constraint logic programming, function symbols
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
