We present an epistemic action theory for tractable epistemic reasoning as an extension to the h-approximation (HPX) theory. In contrast to existing tractable approaches, the theory supports functional fluents and postdictive reasoning with static causal laws. We argue that this combination is particularly synergistic because it allows one not only to perform direct postdiction about the conditions of actions, but also indirect postdiction about the conditions of static causal laws. We show that despite the richer expressiveness, the temporal projection problem remains tractable (polynomial), and therefore the planning problem remains in NP. We present the operational semantics of our theory as well as its formulation as Answer Set Programming.

We study the hardness of approximation of clause minimum and literal minimum representations of pure Horn functions in $n$ Boolean variables. We show that unless P=NP, it is not possible to approximate in polynomial time the minimum number of clauses and the minimum number of literals of pure Horn CNF representations to within a factor of $2^{\log^{1-o(1)} n}$. This is the case even when the inputs are restricted to pure Horn 3-CNFs with $O(n^{1+\varepsilon})$ clauses, for some small positive constant $\varepsilon$. Furthermore, we show that even allowing sub-exponential time computation, it is still not possible to obtain constant factor approximations for such problems unless the Exponential Time Hypothesis turns out to be false.

This paper proposes the meeting of fuzzy logic with paraconsistency in a very precise and foundational way. Specifically, in this paper we introduce expansions of the fuzzy logic MTL by means of primitive operators for consistency and inconsistency in the style of the so-called Logics of Formal Inconsistency (LFIs). The main novelty of the present approach is the definition of postulates for this type of operators over MTL-algebras, leading to the definition and axiomatization of a family of logics, expansions of MTL, whose degree-preserving counterpart are paraconsistent and moreover LFIs.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is an increasingly popular framework for declarative programming that admits the description of problems by means of rules and constraints that form a disjunctive logic program. In particular, many AI problems such as reasoning in a nonmonotonic setting can be directly formulated in ASP. Although the main problems of ASP are of high computational complexity, located at the second level of the Polynomial Hierarchy, several restrictions of ASP have been identified in the literature, under which ASP problems become tractable. In this paper we use the concept of backdoors to identify new restrictions that make ASP problems tractable. Small backdoors are sets of atoms that represent "clever reasoning shortcuts" through the search space and represent a hidden structure in the problem input. The concept of backdoors is widely used in the areas of propositional satisfiability and constraint satisfaction. We show that it can be fruitfully adapted to ASP. We demonstrate how backdoors can serve as a unifying framework that accommodates several tractable restrictions of ASP known from the literature. Furthermore, we show how backdoors allow us to deploy recent algorithmic results from parameterized complexity theory to the domain of answer set programming.

HEX-programs extend logic programs under the answer set semantics with external computations through external atoms. As reasoning from ground Horn programs with nonmonotonic external atoms of polynomial complexity is already on the second level of the polynomial hierarchy, minimality checking of answer set candidates needs special attention. To this end, we present an approach based on unfounded sets as a generalization of related techniques for ASP programs. The unfounded set detection is expressed as a propositional SAT problem, for which we provide two different encodings and optimizations to them. We then integrate our approach into a previously developed evaluation framework for HEX-programs, which is enriched by additional learning techniques that aim at avoiding the reconstruction of the same or related unfounded sets. Furthermore, we provide a syntactic criterion that allows one to skip the minimality check in many cases. An experimental evaluation shows that the new approach significantly decreases runtime.

A general game player is a system that can play previously unknown games just by being given their rules. For this purpose, the Game Description Language (GDL) has been developed as a high-level knowledge representation formalism to communicate game rules to players. In this paper, we address a fundamental limitation of state-of-the-art methods and systems for General Game Playing, namely, their being confined to deterministic games with complete information about the game state. We develop a simple yet expressive extension of standard GDL that allows for formalising the rules of arbitrary finite, n-player games with randomness and incomplete state knowledge. In the second part of the paper, we address the intricate reasoning challenge for general game-playing systems that comes with the new description language. We develop a full embedding of extended GDL into the Situation Calculus augmented by Scherl and Levesque's knowledge fluent. We formally prove that this provides a sound and complete reasoning method for players' knowledge about game states as well as about the knowledge of the other players.

The survey propagation (SP) algorithm has been shown to work well on large instances of the random 3-SAT problem near its phase transition. It was shown that SP estimates marginals over covers that represent clusters of solutions. The SP-y algorithm generalizes SP to work on the maximum satisfiability (Max-SAT) problem, but the cover interpretation of SP does not generalize to SP-y. In this paper, we formulate the relaxed survey propagation (RSP) algorithm, which extends the SP algorithm to apply to the weighted Max-SAT problem. We show that RSP has an interpretation of estimating marginals over covers violating a set of clauses with minimal weight. This naturally generalizes the cover interpretation of SP. Empirically, we show that RSP outperforms SP-y and other state-of-the-art Max-SAT solvers on random Max-SAT instances. RSP also outperforms state-of-the-art weighted Max-SAT solvers on random weighted Max-SAT instances.

We present DCL-PC: a logic for reasoning about how the abilities of agents and coalitions of agents are altered by transferring control from one agent to another. The logical foundation of DCL-PC is CL-PC, a logic for reasoning about cooperation in which the abilities of agents and coalitions of agents stem from a distribution of atomic Boolean variables to individual agents -- the choices available to a coalition correspond to assignments to the variables the coalition controls. The basic modal constructs of DCL-PC are of the form coalition C can cooperate to bring about phi. DCL-PC extends CL-PC with dynamic logic modalities in which atomic programs are of the form agent i gives control of variable p to agent j; as usual in dynamic logic, these atomic programs may be combined using sequence, iteration, choice, and test operators to form complex programs. By combining such dynamic transfer programs with cooperation modalities, it becomes possible to reason about how the power of agents and coalitions is affected by the transfer of control. We give two alternative semantics for the logic: a direct semantics, in which we capture the distributions of Boolean variables to agents; and a more conventional Kripke semantics. We prove that these semantics are equivalent, and then present an axiomatization for the logic. We investigate the computational complexity of model checking and satisfiability for DCL-PC, and show that both problems are PSPACE-complete (and hence no worse than the underlying logic CL-PC). Finally, we investigate the characterisation of control in DCL-PC. We distinguish between first-order control -- the ability of an agent or coalition to control some state of affairs through the assignment of values to the variables under the control of the agent or coalition -- and second-order control -- the ability of an agent to exert control over the control that other agents have by transferring variables to other agents. We give a logical characterisation of second-order control.

The recently introduced series of description logics under the common moniker'DL-Lite' has attracted attention of the description logic and semantic web communities due to the low computational complexity of inference, on the one hand, and the ability to represent conceptual modeling formalisms, on the other. The main aim of this article is to carry out a thorough and systematic investigation of inference in extensions of the original DL-Lite logics along five axes: by (i) adding the Boolean connectives and (ii) number restrictions to concept constructs, (iii) allowing role hierarchies, (iv) allowing role disjointness, symmetry, asymmetry, reflexivity, irreflexivity and transitivity constraints, and (v) adopting or dropping the unique name assumption. We analyze the combined complexity of satisfiability for the resulting logics, as well as the data complexity of instance checking and answering positive existential queries. Our approach is based on embedding DL-Lite logics in suitable fragments of the one-variable first-order logic, which provides useful insights into their properties and, in particular, computational behavior.

We present a novel reasoning calculus for the description logic SHOIQ^+---a knowledge representation formalism with applications in areas such as the Semantic Web. Unnecessary nondeterminism and the construction of large models are two primary sources of inefficiency in the tableau-based reasoning calculi used in state-of-the-art reasoners. In order to reduce nondeterminism, we base our calculus on hypertableau and hyperresolution calculi, which we extend with a blocking condition to ensure termination. In order to reduce the size of the constructed models, we introduce anywhere pairwise blocking. We also present an improved nominal introduction rule that ensures termination in the presence of nominals, inverse roles, and number restrictions---a combination of DL constructs that has proven notoriously difficult to handle. Our implementation shows significant performance improvements over state-of-the-art reasoners on several well-known ontologies.