Data originating from the Web, sensor readings and social media result in increasingly huge datasets. The so called Big Data comes with new scientific and technological challenges while creating new opportunities, hence the increasing interest in academia and industry. Traditionally, logic programming has focused on complex knowledge structures/programs, so the question arises whether and how it can work in the face of Big Data. In this paper, we examine how the well-founded semantics can process huge amounts of data through mass parallelization. More specifically, we propose and evaluate a parallel approach using the MapReduce framework. Our experimental results indicate that our approach is scalable and that well-founded semantics can be applied to billions of facts. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that addresses large scale nonmonotonic reasoning without the restriction of stratification for predicates of arbitrary arity. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

Cause-effect relations are an important part of human knowledge. In real life, humans often reason about complex causes linked to complex effects. By comparison, existing formalisms for representing knowledge about causal relations are quite limited in the kind of specifications of causes and effects they allow. In this paper, we present the new language C-Log, which offers a significantly more expressive representation of effects, including such features as the creation of new objects. We show how C-Log integrates with first-order logic, resulting in the language FO(C). We also compare FO(C) with several related languages and paradigms, including inductive definitions, disjunctive logic programming, business rules and extensions of Datalog.

Abductive logic programs offer a formalism to declaratively represent and reason about problems in a variety of areas: diagnosis, decision making, hypothetical reasoning, etc. On the other hand, logic program updates allow us to express knowledge changes, be they internal (or self) and external (or world) changes. Abductive logic programs and logic program updates thus naturally coexist in problems that are susceptible to hypothetical reasoning about change. Taking this as a motivation, in this paper we integrate abductive logic programs and logic program updates by jointly exploiting tabling features of logic programming. The integration is based on and benefits from the two implementation techniques we separately devised previously, viz., tabled abduction and incremental tabling for query-driven propagation of logic program updates. A prototype of the integrated system is implemented in XSB Prolog.

Dialogue games are a two-player semantics for a variety of logics, including intuitionistic and classical logic. Dialogues can be viewed as a kind of analytic calculus not unlike tableaux. Can dialogue games be an effective foundation for proof search in intuitionistic logic (both first-order and propositional)? We announce Kuno, an automated theorem prover for intuitionistic first-order logic based on dialogue games.

We design temporal description logics suitable for reasoning about temporal conceptual data models and investigate their computational complexity. Our formalisms are based on DL-Lite logics with three types of concept inclusions (ranging from atomic concept inclusions and disjointness to the full Booleans), as well as cardinality constraints and role inclusions. In the temporal dimension, they capture future and past temporal operators on concepts, flexible and rigid roles, the operators `always' and `some time' on roles, data assertions for particular moments of time and global concept inclusions. The logics are interpreted over the Cartesian products of object domains and the flow of time (Z,<), satisfying the constant domain assumption. We prove that the most expressive of our temporal description logics (which can capture lifespan cardinalities and either qualitative or quantitative evolution constraints) turn out to be undecidable. However, by omitting some of the temporal operators on concepts/roles or by restricting the form of concept inclusions we obtain logics whose complexity ranges between PSpace and NLogSpace. These positive results were obtained by reduction to various clausal fragments of propositional temporal logic, which opens a way to employ propositional or first-order temporal provers for reasoning about temporal data models.

Attributing a cyber-operation through the use of multiple pieces of technical evidence (i.e., malware reverse-engineering and source tracking) and conventional intelligence sources (i.e., human or signals intelligence) is a difficult problem not only due to the effort required to obtain evidence, but the ease with which an adversary can plant false evidence. In this paper, we introduce a formal reasoning system called the InCA (Intelligent Cyber Attribution) framework that is designed to aid an analyst in the attribution of a cyber-operation even when the available information is conflicting and/or uncertain. Our approach combines argumentation-based reasoning, logic programming, and probabilistic models to not only attribute an operation but also explain to the analyst why the system reaches its conclusions.

Recently, belief change within the framework of fragments of propositional logic has gained increasing attention. Previous works focused on belief contraction and belief revision on the Horn fragment. However, the problem of belief merging within fragments of propositional logic has been neglected so far. This paper presents a general approach to define new merging operators derived from existing ones such that the result of merging remains in the fragment under consideration. Our approach is not limited to the case of Horn fragment but applicable to any fragment of propositional logic characterized by a closure property on the sets of models of its formulae. We study the logical properties of the proposed operators in terms of satisfaction of merging postulates, considering in particular distance-based merging operators for Horn and Krom fragments.

We consider the problem of bottom-up compilation of knowledge bases, which is usually predicated on the existence of a polytime function for combining compilations using Boolean operators (usually called an Apply function). While such a polytime Apply function is known to exist for certain languages (e.g., OBDDs) and not exist for others (e.g., DNNF), its existence for certain languages remains unknown. Among the latter is the recently introduced language of Sentential Decision Diagrams (SDDs), for which a polytime Apply function exists for unreduced SDDs, but remains unknown for reduced ones (i.e. canonical SDDs). We resolve this open question in this paper and consider some of its theoretical and practical implications. Some of the findings we report question the common wisdom on the relationship between bottom-up compilation, language canonicity and the complexity of the Apply function.

General game players are computer systems able to play strategy games based solely on formal game descriptions supplied at "runtime" (n other words, they don't know the rules until the game starts). Unlike specialized game players, such as Deep Blue, general game players cannot rely on algorithms designed in advance for specific games; they must discover such algorithms themselves. General game playing expertise depends on intelligence on the part of the game player and not just intelligence of the programmer of the game player. GGP is an interesting application in its own right. It is intellectually engaging and more than a little fun.

This paper provides a gentle introduction to problem solving with the IDP3 system. The core of IDP3 is a finite model generator that supports first order logic enriched with types, inductive definitions, aggregates and partial functions. It offers its users a modeling language that is a slight extension of predicate logic and allows them to solve a wide range of search problems. Apart from a small introductory example, applications are selected from problems that arose within machine learning and data mining research. These research areas have recently shown a strong interest in declarative modeling and constraint solving as opposed to algorithmic approaches. The paper illustrates that the IDP3 system can be a valuable tool for researchers with such an interest. The first problem is in the domain of stemmatology, a domain of philology concerned with the relationship between surviving variant versions of text. The second problem is about a somewhat related problem within biology where phylogenetic trees are used to represent the evolution of species. The third and final problem concerns the classical problem of learning a minimal automaton consistent with a given set of strings. For this last problem, we show that the performance of our solution comes very close to that of a state-of-the art solution. For each of these applications, we analyze the problem, illustrate the development of a logic-based model and explore how alternatives can affect the performance.