Results 1  10
of
97
The first answer set programming system competition
 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR 2007, LNAI
, 2007
"... Abstract. This paper gives a summary of the First Answer Set Programming System Competition that was held in conjunction with the Ninth International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. The aims of the competition were twofold: first, to collect challenging benchmark problems ..."
Abstract

Cited by 44 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. This paper gives a summary of the First Answer Set Programming System Competition that was held in conjunction with the Ninth International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. The aims of the competition were twofold: first, to collect challenging benchmark problems, and second, to provide a platform to assess a broad variety of Answer Set Programming systems. The competition was inspired by similar events in neighboring fields, where regular benchmarking has been a major factor behind improvements in the developed systems and their ability to address practical applications. 1
Modularity Aspects of Disjunctive Stable Models
, 2007
"... Practically all programming languages used in software engineering allow to split a program into several modules. For fully declarative and nonmonotonic logic programming languages, however, the modular structure of programs is hard to realise, since the output of an entire program cannot in general ..."
Abstract

Cited by 43 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Practically all programming languages used in software engineering allow to split a program into several modules. For fully declarative and nonmonotonic logic programming languages, however, the modular structure of programs is hard to realise, since the output of an entire program cannot in general be composed from the output of its component programs in a direct manner. In this paper, we consider these aspects for the stablemodel semantics of disjunctive logic programs (DLPs). We define the notion of a DLPfunction, where a welldefined input/output interface is provided, and establish a novel module theorem enabling a suitable compositional semantics for modules. The module theorem extends the wellknown splittingset theorem and allows also a generalisation of a shifting technique for splitting shared disjunctive rules among components.
Revision Programming
 THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
, 1994
"... In this paper we introduce revision programming  a logicbased framework for describing constraints on databases and providing a computational mechanism to enforce them. Revision programming captures those constraints that can be stated in terms of the membership (presence or absence) of items (re ..."
Abstract

Cited by 40 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In this paper we introduce revision programming  a logicbased framework for describing constraints on databases and providing a computational mechanism to enforce them. Revision programming captures those constraints that can be stated in terms of the membership (presence or absence) of items (records) in a database. Each such constraint is represented by a revision rule ff / ff 1 ; : : : ; ff k , where ff and all ff i are of the form in(a) and out(b). Collections of revision rules form revision programs. Similarly as logic programs, revision programs admit both declarative and imperative (procedural) interpretations. In our paper, we introduce a semantics that reflects both interpretations. Given a revision program, this semantics assigns to any database B a collection (possibly empty) of Pjustified revisions of B. The paper contains a thorough study of revision programming. We exhibit several fundamental properties of revision programming. We study the relationship of revision programming to logic programming. We investigate complexity of reasoning with revision programs as well as algorithms to compute P justified revisions. Most importantly from the practical database perspective, we identify two classes of revision programs, safe and stratified, with a desirable property that they determine for each initial database a unique revision.
On Solution Correspondences in Answer Set Programming
 In Proc. of 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 97–102
, 2005
"... We introduce a general framework for specifying program correspondence under the answerset semantics. The framework allows to define different kinds of equivalence notions, including previously defined notions like strong and uniform equivalence, in which programs are extended with rules from a giv ..."
Abstract

Cited by 37 (22 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We introduce a general framework for specifying program correspondence under the answerset semantics. The framework allows to define different kinds of equivalence notions, including previously defined notions like strong and uniform equivalence, in which programs are extended with rules from a given context, and correspondence is determined by means of a binary relation. In particular, refined equivalence notions based on projected answer sets can be defined within this framework, where not all parts of an answer set are of relevance. We study general characterizations of inclusion and equivalence problems, introducing novel semantical structures. Furthermore, we deal with the issue of determining counterexamples for a given correspondence problem, and we analyze the computational complexity of correspondence checking. 1
Consistent Query Answers in Virtual Data Integration Systems
 IN INCONSISTENCY TOLERANCE, SPRINGER LNCS 3300
, 2005
"... When data sources are virtually integrated there is no common and centralized mechanism for maintaining global consistency. In consequHHj9 it is likely that inconsistencies with respect to certain global integrity constraints (ICs)will occu; In this chapter we consider the problem of defining ..."
Abstract

Cited by 36 (19 self)
 Add to MetaCart
When data sources are virtually integrated there is no common and centralized mechanism for maintaining global consistency. In consequHHj9 it is likely that inconsistencies with respect to certain global integrity constraints (ICs)will occu; In this chapter we consider the problem of defining andcompu2;) those answers that are consistent wrt the global ICs when global qubal) are posed tovirtuM data integration systems whosesou)33 are specified following the localasview approach.
OpenRuleBench: An analysis of the performance of rule engines
 In WWW: Semantic Data Track
, 2009
"... The Semantic Web initiative has led to an upsurge of the interest in rules as a general and powerful way of processing, combining, and analyzing semantic information. Since several of the technologies underlying rulebased systems are already quite mature, it is important to understand how such syst ..."
Abstract

Cited by 29 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The Semantic Web initiative has led to an upsurge of the interest in rules as a general and powerful way of processing, combining, and analyzing semantic information. Since several of the technologies underlying rulebased systems are already quite mature, it is important to understand how such systems might perform on the Web scale. OpenRuleBench is a suite of benchmarks for analyzing the performance and scalability of different rule engines. Currently the study spans five different technologies and eleven systems, but OpenRuleBench is an open community resource, and contributions from the community are welcome. In this paper, we describe the tested systems and technologies, the methodology used in testing, and analyze the results.
Answer sets for logic programs with arbitrary abstract constraint atoms
 J. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH
, 2007
"... In this paper, we present two alternative approaches to defining answer sets for logic programs with arbitrary types of abstract constraint atoms (catoms). These approaches generalize the fixpointbased and the level mapping based answer set semantics of normal logic programs to the case of logic p ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In this paper, we present two alternative approaches to defining answer sets for logic programs with arbitrary types of abstract constraint atoms (catoms). These approaches generalize the fixpointbased and the level mapping based answer set semantics of normal logic programs to the case of logic programs with arbitrary types of catoms. The results are four different answer set definitions which are equivalent when applied to normal logic programs. The standard fixpointbased semantics of logic programs is generalized in two directions, called answer set by reduct and answer set by complement. These definitions, which differ from each other in the treatment of negationasfailure (naf) atoms, make use of an immediate consequence operator to perform answer set checking, whose definition relies on the notion of conditional satisfaction of catoms w.r.t. a pair of interpretations. The other two definitions, called strongly and weakly wellsupported models, are generalizations of the notion of wellsupported models of normal logic programs to the case of programs with catoms. As for the case of fixpointbased semantics, the difference between these two definitions is rooted in the treatment of naf atoms. We prove that answer sets by reduct (resp. by complement) are equivalent to weakly (resp. strongly) wellsupported models of a program, thus generalizing the theorem on the correspondence between stable models and wellsupported models of a normal logic program to the class of programs with catoms. We show that the newly defined semantics coincide with previously introduced semantics for logic programs with monotone catoms, and they extend the original answer set semantics of normal logic programs. We also study some properties of answer sets of programs with catoms, and relate our definitions to several semantics for logic programs with aggregates presented in the literature.
Logic programs with abstract constraint atoms
 In Proceedings of the 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI04
, 2004
"... We propose and study extensions of logic programming with constraints represented as generalized atoms of the form C(X), where X is a finite set of atoms and C is an abstract constraint (formally, a collection of sets of atoms). Atoms C(X) are satisfied by an interpretation (set of atoms) M, if M ∩ ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose and study extensions of logic programming with constraints represented as generalized atoms of the form C(X), where X is a finite set of atoms and C is an abstract constraint (formally, a collection of sets of atoms). Atoms C(X) are satisfied by an interpretation (set of atoms) M, if M ∩ X ∈ C. We focus here on monotone constraints, that is, those collections C that are closed under the superset. They include, in particular, weight (or pseudoboolean) constraints studied both by the logic programming and SAT communities. We show that key concepts of the theory of normal logic programs such as the onestep provability operator, the semantics of supported and stable models, as well as several of their properties including complexity results, can be lifted to such case.
Some (in)translatability results for normal logic programs and propositional theories
 Journal of Applied NonClassical Logics
, 2006
"... ABSTRACT. In this article, we compare the expressive powers of classes of normal logic programs that are obtained by constraining the number of positive subgoals (n) in the bodies of rules. The comparison is based on the existence/nonexistence of polynomial, faithful, and modular (PFM) translation f ..."
Abstract

Cited by 25 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
ABSTRACT. In this article, we compare the expressive powers of classes of normal logic programs that are obtained by constraining the number of positive subgoals (n) in the bodies of rules. The comparison is based on the existence/nonexistence of polynomial, faithful, and modular (PFM) translation functions between the classes. As a result, we obtain a strict ordering among the classes under consideration. Binary programs (n ≤ 2) are shown to be as expressive as unconstrained programs but strictly more expressive than unary programs (n ≤ 1) which, in turn, are strictly more expressive than atomic programs (n = 0). We also take propositional theories into consideration and prove them to be strictly less expressive than atomic programs. In spite of the gap in expressiveness, we develop a faithful but nonmodular translation function from normal programs to propositional theories. We consider this as a breakthrough due to subquadratic time complexity (of the order of P   × log 2 Hb(P)). Furthermore, we present a prototype implementation of the translation function and demonstrate its promising performance with SAT solvers using three benchmark problems.
DomainDependent Knowledge in Answer Set Planning
, 2002
"... In this paper we consider three different kinds of domain dependent control knowledge (temporal, procedural and HTNbased) that are useful in planning. Our approach is declarative and relies on the language of logic programming with answer set semantics (LPASS). We show that the addition of these th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 23 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we consider three different kinds of domain dependent control knowledge (temporal, procedural and HTNbased) that are useful in planning. Our approach is declarative and relies on the language of logic programming with answer set semantics (LPASS). We show that the addition of these three kinds of control knowledge only involves adding a few more rules to a planner written in LPASS that can plan without any control knowledge. Thus domain dependent control knowledge can be modularly added to (or removed from) a planning problem without the need of modifying the planner. We formally prove the correctness of our planner, both in the absence and presence of the control knowledge. Finally, we do some initial experimentation that shows the reduction in planning time when procedural domain knowledge is used and the plan length is big.