Golog and ConGolog are languages defined in the situation calculus for cognitive robotics. Given a Golog program \delta, its semantics is defined by a macro Do(\delta,s,s') that expands to a logical sentence that captures the conditions under which performing \delta in s can terminate in s'. A similarmacro is defined for ConGolog programs. In general, the logical sentences that these macros expand to are second-order, and in the case of ConGolog, may involve quantification over programs. In this paper, we show that by making use of the foundational axioms in the situation calculus, in particular, the second-order closure axiom about the space of situations, these macro expressions can actually be defined using first-order sentences.

Golog and ConGolog are languages defined in the situation calculus for cognitive robotics. Given a Golog program \delta, its semantics is defined by a macro Do(\delta,s,s') that expands to a logical sentence that captures the conditions under which performing \delta in s can terminate in s'. A similarmacro is defined for ConGolog programs. In general, the logical sentences that these macros expand to are second-order, and in the case of ConGolog, may involve quantification over programs. In this paper, we show that by making use of the foundational axioms in the situation calculus, in particular, the second-order closure axiom about the space of situations, these macro expressions can actually be defined using first-order sentences.

Golog and ConGolog are languages defined in the situation calculus for cognitive robotics. Given a Golog program \delta, its semantics is defined by a macro Do(\delta,s,s') that expands to a logical sentence that captures the conditions under which performing \delta in s can terminate in s'. A similarmacro is defined for ConGolog programs. In general, the logical sentences that these macros expand to are second-order, and in the case of ConGolog, may involve quantification over programs. In this paper, we show that by making use of the foundational axioms in the situation calculus, in particular, the second-order closure axiom about the space of situations, these macro expressions can actually be defined using first-order sentences.

Golog and ConGolog are languages defined in the situation calculus for cognitive robotics. Given a Golog program \delta, its semantics is defined by a macro Do(\delta,s,s') that expands to a logical sentence that captures the conditions under which performing \delta in s can terminate in s'. A similarmacro is defined for ConGolog programs. In general, the logical sentences that these macros expand to are second-order, and in the case of ConGolog, may involve quantification over programs. In this paper, we show that by making use of the foundational axioms in the situation calculus, in particular, the second-order closure axiom about the space of situations, these macro expressions can actually be defined using first-order sentences.

Golog and ConGolog are languages defined in the situation calculus for cognitive robotics. Given a Golog program \delta, its semantics is defined by a macro Do(\delta,s,s') that expands to a logical sentence that captures the conditions under which performing \delta in s can terminate in s'. A similarmacro is defined for ConGolog programs. In general, the logical sentences that these macros expand to are second-order, and in the case of ConGolog, may involve quantification over programs. In this paper, we show that by making use of the foundational axioms in the situation calculus, in particular, the second-order closure axiom about the space of situations, these macro expressions can actually be defined using first-order sentences.

Extensional higher-order logic programming has been recently proposed as an interesting extension of classical logic programming. An important characteristic of the new paradigm is that it preserves all the well-known properties oftraditional logic programming. In this paper we enhance extensional higher-order logic programming with constructive negation. We argue that the main ideas underlying constructive negation are quite close to the existing proof procedurefor extensional higher-order logic programming and for this reason the two notions amalgamate quite conveniently. We demonstrate the soundness of the resulting proof procedure and describe an actual implementation of a language that embodies the above ideas. In this way we obtain the first (to our knowledge) higher-order logic programming language supporting constructive negation and offering a new style of programming that genuinely extends that of traditional logic programming.

In this paper we present SmartPM, a model and a prototype Process Management System featuring a set of techniques providing support for automated adaptation of knowledge-intensive processes at run-time. Such techniques are able to automatically adapt process instances without explicitly defining policies to recover from exceptions and without the intervention of domain experts at run-time, aiming at reducing error-prone and costly manual ad-hoc changes, and thus at relieving users from complex adaptations tasks. To accomplish this, we make use of well-established techniques and frameworks from Artificial Intelligence, such as situation calculus, IndiGolog and classical planning.

Boolean games are a framework for reasoning about the rational behaviour of agents, whose goals are formalized using propositional formulas. They offer an attractive alternative to normal-form games, because they allow for a more intuitive and more compact encoding. Unfortunately, however, there is currently no general, tailor-made method available to compute the equilibria of Boolean games. In this paper, we introduce a method for finding the pure Nash equilibria based on disjunctive answer set programming. Our method is furthermore capable of finding the core elements and the Pareto optimal equilibria, and can easily be modified to support other forms of optimality, thanks to the declarative nature of disjunctive answer set programming. Experimental results clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

Forgetting has been addressed in various areas in KR, including classical logic, logic programming, modal logic, and description logics. Here, we view forgetting as an abstract operator, independent of the underlying logic. We argue that forgetting amounts to a reduction in the signature of a language of a logic, and that the result of forgetting elements of a signature in a theory is the set of logical consequences over the reduced language. This definition offers several advantages. It provides a uniform approach to forgetting, applicable to any logic with a well-defined consequence relation. Obtained results are thus applicable to all subsumed formal systems, and typically are obtained much more straightforwardly. The approach also leads to insights with respect to specific logics: forgetting in first-order logic is somewhat different from the accepted approach; and the definition applied to logic programs yields a new syntax-independent notion of forgetting.

Among the most frequent reasoning tasks in the situation calculus are projection queries that query the truth of conditions in a future state of affairs. However, in long running action sequences solving the projection problem is complex. The main contribution of this work is a new technique which allows the length of the action sequences to be reduced by reordering independent actions and removing dominated actions; maintaining semantic equivalence with respect to the original action theory. This transformation allows for the removal of actions that are problematic with respect to progression, allowing for periodical update of the action theory to reflect the current state of affairs. We provide the logical framework for the general case and give specific methods for two important classes of action theories. The work provides the basis for handling more expressive cases, such as the reordering of sensing actions in order to delay progression, and forms an important step towards facilitating ongoing planning and reasoning by long-running agents. It provides a mechanism for minimising the need for keeping the action history while appealing to both regression and progression.