See [1] for a general description and references. The goal of the current contribution is to present some ongoing work regarding two different, but related, important improvements of GeoGebra Discovery. One, to visualize the different steps that GG Discovery performs with a given geometric statement until it declares its truth (or failure). Two, to test, through different elementary examples, the suitability of an original proposal to evaluate the interest, complexity or difficulty of a given statement. Let us advance that our proposal involves the notion of syzygy of a set of polynomials. The relevance of showing details about each of the steps performed by our automated reasoning algorithms implemented in GG Discovery is quite evident. In fact, as a consequence of the result in [2], describing the formalization of the arithmetization of Euclidean plane geometry, proofs of geometric statements obtained using algebraic geometry algorithms are also valid on the synthetic geometry realm.

Automated theorem provers take as input the formal statement of a conjecture in a theory described by axioms and lemmas, and try to generate a proof or a counter-example for this conjecture. In the field of geometry, several efficient automated theorem proving approaches have been developed, including algebraic ones such as Wu's method, Gröbner bases method, and semi-synthetic methods such as the area method. In these approaches, typically, the conjecture and the axioms being considered are fixed. However, in mathematical practice, in the context of education and also in mathematical research, the conjecturing and proving activities are not separated but interleaved. The practitioner may try to prove a statement which is valid only assuming some implicit or unknown assumptions, while the list of lemmas and theorem which can be used may not be complete.

The pursue of what are properties that can be identified to permit an automated reasoning program to generate and find new and interesting theorems is an interesting research goal (pun intended). The automatic discovery of new theorems is a goal in itself, and it has been addressed in specific areas, with different methods. The separation of the "weeds", uninteresting, trivial facts, from the "wheat", new and interesting facts, is much harder, but is also being addressed by different authors using different approaches. In this paper we will focus on geometry. We present and discuss different approaches for the automatic discovery of geometric theorems (and properties), and different metrics to find the interesting theorems among all those that were generated. After this description we will introduce the first result of this article: an undecidability result proving that having an algorithmic procedure that decides for every possible Turing Machine that produces theorems, whether it is able to produce also interesting theorems, is an undecidable problem. Consequently, we will argue that judging whether a theorem prover is able to produce interesting theorems remains a non deterministic task, at best a task to be addressed by program based in an algorithm guided by heuristics criteria. Therefore, as a human, to satisfy this task two things are necessary: an expert survey that sheds light on what a theorem prover/finder of interesting geometric theorems is, and - to enable this analysis - other surveys that clarify metrics and approaches related to the interestingness of geometric theorems. In the conclusion of this article we will introduce the structure of two of these surveys - the second result of this article - and we will discuss some future work.

In this work, we propose a novel approach for the continuous-time control synthesis of nonlinear systems under nested signal temporal logic (STL) specifications. While the majority of existing literature focuses on control synthesis for STL specifications without nested temporal operators, addressing nested temporal operators poses a notably more challenging scenario and requires new theoretical advancements. Our approach hinges on the concepts of signal temporal logic tree (sTLT) and control barrier function (CBF). Specifically, we detail the construction of an sTLT from a given STL formula and a continuous-time dynamical system, the sTLT semantics (i.e., satisfaction condition), and the equivalence or under-approximation relation between sTLT and STL. Leveraging the fact that the satisfaction condition of an sTLT is essentially keeping the state within certain sets during certain time intervals, it provides explicit guidelines for the CBF design. The resulting controller is obtained through the utilization of an online CBF-based program coupled with an event-triggered scheme for online updating the activation time interval of each CBF, with which the correctness of the system behavior can be established by construction. We demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed method for single-integrator and unicycle models under nested STL formulas.

Planning and reasoning about actions and processes, in addition to reasoning about propositions, are important issues in recent logical and computer science studies. The widespread use of actions in everyday life such as IoT, semantic web services, etc., and the limitations and issues in the action formalisms are two factors that lead us to study how actions are represented. Since 2007, there have been some ideas to integrate Description Logic (DL) and action formalisms for representing both static and dynamic knowledge. Meanwhile, time is an important factor in dynamic situations, and actions change states over time. In this study, on the one hand, we examined related logical structures such as extensions of description logics (DLs), temporal formalisms, and action formalisms. On the other hand, we analyzed possible tools for designing and developing the Knowledge and Action Base (KAB). For representation and reasoning about actions, we embedded actions into DLs (such as Dynamic-ALC and its extensions). We propose a terminable algorithm for action projection, planning, checking the satisfiability, consistency, realizability, and executability, and also querying from KAB. Actions in this framework were modeled with SPIN and added to state space. This framework has also been implemented as a plugin for the Prot\'eg\'e ontology editor. During the last two decades, various algorithms have been presented, but due to the high computational complexity, we face many problems in implementing dynamic ontologies. In addition, an algorithm to detect the inconsistency of actions' effects was not explicitly stated. In the proposed strategy, the interactions of actions with other parts of modeled knowledge, and a method to check consistency between the effects of actions are presented. With this framework, the ramification problem can be well handled in future works.

In temporal extensions of Answer Set Programming (ASP) based on linear-time, the behavior of dynamic systems is captured by sequences of states. While this representation reflects their relative order, it abstracts away the specific times associated with each state. In many applications, however, timing constraints are important like, for instance, when planning and scheduling go hand in hand. We address this by developing a metric extension of linear-time Dynamic Equilibrium Logic, in which dynamic operators are constrained by intervals over integers. The resulting Metric Dynamic Equilibrium Logic provides the foundation of an ASP-based approach for specifying qualitative and quantitative dynamic constraints. As such, it constitutes the most general among a whole spectrum of temporal extensions of Equilibrium Logic. In detail, we show that it encompasses Temporal, Dynamic, Metric, and regular Equilibrium Logic, as well as its classic counterparts once the law of the excluded middle is added.

ADG is a forum to exchange ideas and views, to present research results and progress, and to demonstrate software tools at the intersection between geometry and automated deduction. The conference is held every two years. The previous editions of ADG were held in Hagenberg in 2021 (online, postponed from 2020 due to COVID-19), Nanning in 2018, Strasbourg in 2016, Coimbra in 2014, Edinburgh in 2012, Munich in 2010, Shanghai in 2008, Pontevedra in 2006, Gainesville in 2004, Hagenberg in 2002, Zurich in 2000, Beijing in 1998, and Toulouse in 1996. The 14th edition, ADG 2023, was held in Belgrade, Serbia, in September 20-22, 2023. This edition of ADG had an additional special focus topic, Deduction in Education. Invited Speakers: Julien Narboux, University of Strasbourg, France "Formalisation, arithmetization and automatisation of geometry"; Filip Mari\'c, University of Belgrade, Serbia, "Automatization, formalization and visualization of hyperbolic geometry"; Zlatan Magajna, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, "Workshop OK Geometry"

We study the problem of deciding whether a given language is directed. A language $L$ is \emph{directed} if every pair of words in $L$ have a common (scattered) superword in $L$. Deciding directedness is a fundamental problem in connection with ideal decompositions of downward closed sets. Another motivation is that deciding whether two \emph{directed} context-free languages have the same downward closures can be decided in polynomial time, whereas for general context-free languages, this problem is known to be coNEXP-complete. We show that the directedness problem for regular languages, given as NFAs, belongs to $AC^1$, and thus polynomial time. Moreover, it is NL-complete for fixed alphabet sizes. Furthermore, we show that for context-free languages, the directedness problem is PSPACE-complete.

We consider transformer encoders with hard attention (in which all attention is focused on exactly one position) and strict future masking (in which each position only attends to positions strictly to its left), and prove that the class of languages recognized by these networks is exactly the star-free languages. Adding position embeddings increases the class of recognized languages to other well-studied classes. A key technique in these proofs is Boolean RASP, a variant of RASP that is restricted to Boolean values. Via the star-free languages, we relate transformers to first-order logic, temporal logic, and algebraic automata theory.

Some of the most successful knowledge graph embedding (KGE) models for link prediction -- CP, RESCAL, TuckER, ComplEx -- can be interpreted as energy-based models. Under this perspective they are not amenable for exact maximum-likelihood estimation (MLE), sampling and struggle to integrate logical constraints. This work re-interprets the score functions of these KGEs as circuits -- constrained computational graphs allowing efficient marginalisation. Then, we design two recipes to obtain efficient generative circuit models by either restricting their activations to be non-negative or squaring their outputs. Our interpretation comes with little or no loss of performance for link prediction, while the circuits framework unlocks exact learning by MLE, efficient sampling of new triples, and guarantee that logical constraints are satisfied by design. Furthermore, our models scale more gracefully than the original KGEs on graphs with millions of entities.