Logic & Formal Reasoning
First Order Logic with Inductive Definitions for Model-Based Problem Solving
Bruynooghe, Maurice (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) | Denecker, Marc (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) | Truszczynski, Miroslaw
In answer-set programming (ASP), programs can be viewed as specifications of finite Herbrand structures. Other logics can be (and, in fact, were) used towards the same end and can be taken as the basis of declarative programming systems of similar functionality as ASP. We discuss here one such logic, the logic FO(ID), and its implementation IDP3. The choice is motivated by notable similarities between ASP and FO(ID), even if both approaches trace back to different origins
Applications of Answer Set Programming
Erdem, Esra (Sabanci University) | Gelfond, Michael (Texas Tech University) | Leone, Nicola (University of Calabria)
The answer sets for the given program can then be computed by special software systems called answer set solvers, such as DLV, Smodels, or clasp. It is especially relevant to language processing and understanding, learning, reasoning with so called defaults -- statements of the theory update/revision, preferences, diagnosis, form "Normally (typically, as a rule) elements of class description logics, semantic web, multicontext systems, C have property P." We all learn rather early in life and argumentation. Other areas that include that parents normally love their children, citizens are applications of ASP are, for instance, computational normally required to pay taxes, and so forth. We also biology, systems biology, bioinformatics, automatic learn, however, that these rules are not absolute and music composition, assisted living, software engineering, allow various types of exceptions. It is natural to bounded model checking, and robotics. Learning correct ways to decision support systems (Nogueira et al. 2001) (used reason with defaults and their exceptions is necessary by United Space Alliance), automated product configuration for building an agent capable of using such a KB. One (Tiihonen, Soininen, and Sulonen 2003) of the best available solutions to this problem uses (used by Variantum Oy), intelligent call routing the knowledge representation language CR-Prolog (Leone and Ricca 2015) (used by Italia Telecom) and (Balduccini and Gelfond 2003) -- a simple extension configuration and reconfiguration of railway safety of the original ASP language of logic programs with systems (Aschinger et al. 2011) (used by Siemens).
Systems, Engineering Environments, and Competitions
Lierler, Yuliya (University of Nebraska at Omaha) | Maratea, Marco (University of Genoa) | Ricca, Francesco (University of Calabria)
The goal of this article is threefold. First, we trace the history of the development of answer set solvers, by accounting for more than a dozen of them. Second, we discuss development tools and environments that facilitate the use of answer set programming technology in practical applications. Last, we present the evolution of the answer set programming competitions, prime venues for tracking advances in answer set solving technology.
Modeling and Language Extensions
Gebser, Martin (University of Potsdam) | Schaub, Torsten (University of Potsdam)
Answer set programming (ASP) has emerged as an approach to declarative problem solving based on the stable model semantics for logic programs. The basic idea is to represent a computational problem by a logic program, formulating constraints in terms of rules, such that its answer sets correspond to problem solutions. To this end, ASP combines an expressive language for high-level modeling with powerful low-level reasoning capacities, provided by off-the-shelf tools. Compact problem representations take advantage of genuine modeling features of ASP, including (first-order) variables, negation by default, and recursion. In this article, we demonstrate the ASP methodology on two example scenarios, illustrating basic as well as advanced modeling and solving concepts. We also discuss mechanisms to represent and implement extended kinds of preferences and optimization. An overview of further available extensions concludes the article.
Grounding and Solving in Answer Set Programming
Kaufmann, Benjamin (University of Potsdam) | Leone, Nicola (University of Calabria) | Perri, Simona (University of Calabria) | Schaub, Torsten (University of Potsdam)
At first, a problem is expressed as a logic program. ASP's success is largely due to the availability of a rich modeling language (Gebser and Schaub 2016) along with effective systems. Early ASP solvers SModels (Simons, Niemelä, and Soininen 2002) and DLV (Leone et al. 2006) were followed by SAT DLV (Faber, Leone, and Perri 2012) or GrinGo (Gebser ground rules, corresponding to the number of net al. 2011) are based on seminaive database evaluation tuples, over a set of two elements. For more details techniques (Ullman 1988) for avoiding duplicate about complexity of ASP the reader may refer to work during grounding. Grounding is seen as an iterative Dantsin et al. (2001).
The Answer Set Programming Paradigm
Janhunen, Tomi (Aalto University) | Nimelä, Ilkka (Aalto University)
In addition, we illustrate the potential of ASP including molecular biology (Gebser et computational hardness of our application problem al. 2010a, 2010b), decision support system for space by explaining its connection to the NPcomplete shuttle controllers (Balduccini, Gelfond, and decision problem Exact-3-SAT.
Answer Sets and the Language of Answer Set Programming
Lifschitz, Vladimir (University of Texas at Austin)
Its main ideas are described in the article by Janhunen and Niemelä (2016) and in other contributions to this special issue. In this introductory article my goal is to discuss the concept of an answer set, or stable model, which defines the semantics of ASP languages. The answer sets of a logic program are sets of atomic formulas without variables ("ground atoms"), and they were introduced in the course of research on the semantics of negation in Prolog. For this reason, I will start with examples illustrating the relationship between answer sets and Prolog and the relationship between answer set solvers and Prolog systems. Then I will review the mathematical definition of an answer set and discuss some extensions of the basic language of ASP.
Answer Set Programming: An Introduction to the Special Issue
Brewka, Gerhard (University of Leipzig) | Eiter, Thomas (Technischen Universität Wien) | Truszczynski, Miroslaw (University of Kentucky)
What distinguishes ASP from other declarative paradigms, like satisfiability (SAT) or constraint solving (CSP), is its underlying modeling language and the semantics involved. Problems are specified using logic programminglike rules, with some convenient extensions facilitating compact and readable problem descriptions. Sets of such rules, or answer set programs, come with an intuitive, well-defined and, by now, well-accepted semantics. This semantics has its roots in research in knowledge representation, in particular nonmonotonic reasoning, and avoids the pitfalls of earlier attempts such as the procedural semantics of Prolog based on negation as finite failure. This semantics was originally called the stable-model semantics and was defined for normal logic programs only, that is, programs consisting of rules with a single atom in the head and any finite number of atoms, possibly preceded by default negation, not, in the body. Stable models were later generalized to broader classes of programs, where the semantics can no longer be defined in terms of sets of atoms, which is a natural representation of classical models. Instead, it was defined by means of some sets of literals. For this reason the term answer set was adopted as more adequate (although answer sets also have a straightforward interpretation as models, albeit three-valued ones). Over the last decade or so, ASP has evolved into a vibrant and active research area that produced not only theoretical insights, but also highly effective and useful software tools and interesting and promising applications.
Inductive Coherence
Garrabrant, Scott, Fallenstein, Benya, Demski, Abram, Soares, Nate
While probability theory is normally applied to external environments, there has been some recent interest in probabilistic modeling of the outputs of computations that are too expensive to run. Since mathematical logic is a powerful tool for reasoning about computer programs, we consider this problem from the perspective of integrating probability and logic. Recent work on assigning probabilities to mathematical statements has used the concept of coherent distributions, which satisfy logical constraints such as the probability of a sentence and its negation summing to one. Although there are algorithms which converge to a coherent probability distribution in the limit, this yields only weak guarantees about finite approximations of these distributions. In our setting, this is a significant limitation: Coherent distributions assign probability one to all statements provable in a specific logical theory, such as Peano Arithmetic, which can prove what the output of any terminating computation is; thus, a coherent distribution must assign probability one to the output of any terminating computation. To model uncertainty about computations, we propose to work with approximations to coherent distributions. We introduce inductive coherence, a strengthening of coherence that provides appropriate constraints on finite approximations, and propose an algorithm which satisfies this criterion.