Pathfinding for a single agent is the problem of planning a route from an initial location to a goal location in an environment, going around obstacles. Pathfinding for multiple agents also aims to plan such routes for each agent, subject to different constraints, such as restrictions on the length of each path or on the total length of paths, no self-intersecting paths, no intersection of paths/plans, no crossing/meeting each other. It also has variations for finding optimal solutions, e.g., with respect to the maximum path length, or the sum of plan lengths. These problems are important for many real-life applications, such as motion planning, vehicle routing, environmental monitoring, patrolling, computer games. Motivated by such applications, we introduce a formal framework that is general enough to address all these problems: we use the expressive high-level representation formalism and efficient solvers of the declarative programming paradigm Answer Set Programming. We also introduce heuristics to improve the computational efficiency and/or solution quality. We show the applicability and usefulness of our framework by experiments, with randomly generated problem instances on a grid, on a real-world road network, and on a real computer game terrain.

In many tasks related to reasoning about consequences of a logical theory, it is desirable to decompose the theory into a number of components with weakly-related or independent signatures. This facilitates reasoning when signature of a query formula belongs to only one of the components. However, an initial theory may be subject to change due to execution of actions affecting features mentioned in the theory. Having once computed a decomposition of a theory, one would like to know whether a decomposition has to be computed again for the theory obtained from taking into account the changes resulting from execution of an action. In the paper, we address this problem in the scope of the situation calculus, where change of an initial theory is related to the well-studied notion of progression. Progression provides a form of forward reasoning; it relies on forgetting values of those features which are subject to change and computing new values for them. We prove new results about properties of decomposition components under forgetting and show when a decomposition can be preserved in progression of an initial theory.

We introduce abstract preference frameworks to study general properties common across a variety of preference formalisms. In particular, we study strong equivalence in preference formalisms and their separability. We identify abstract postulates on preference frameworks, satisfied by most of the currently studied preference formalisms, that lead to characterizations of both properties of interest.

Modern science relies on simulation techniques for understanding phenomenon, exploring design options, or evaluating models. Assuring the correctness of simulators is a key problem where a multitude of solutions ranging from manual inspection to formal verification are applicable. Formal verification incorporates the rigor necessary but not all simulators are generated from formal specifications. Manual inspection is readily available but lacks the rigor and is prone to errors. In this paper, we describe an automated verification system (AVS) where the constraints that the system must adhere to are specified by the user in general purpose first-order logic. AVS translates these constraints into a verification program that scans the simulator traceand verifies that no constraints are violated. Computer microarchitecture simulations were successfully used to demonstrate the proposed approach. This paper describes the preliminary results and discusses how artificial intelligence techniques can be used to facilitate effective run-time verification of simulators.

The Sentential Decision Diagram (SDD) is a recently proposed representation of Boolean functions, containing Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams (OBDDs) as a distinguished subclass. While OBDDs are characterized by total variable orders, SDDs are characterized more generally by vtrees. As both OBDDs and SDDs have canonical representations, searching for OBDDs and SDDs of minimal size simplifies to searching for variable orders and vtrees, respectively. For OBDDs, there are effective heuristics for dynamic reordering, based on locally swapping variables. In this paper, we propose an analogous approach for SDDs which navigates the space of vtrees via two operations: one based on tree rotations and a second based on swapping children in a vtree. We propose a particular heuristic for dynamically searching the space of vtrees, showing that it can find SDDs that are an order-of-magnitude more succinct than OBDDs found by dynamic reordering.

Motivated by the problem of building a basic reasoner for general game playing with imperfect information, we address the problem of filtering with logic programs, whereby an agent updates its incomplete knowledge of a program by observations. We develop a filtering method by adapting an existing backward-chaining and abduction method for so-called open logic programs. Experimental results show that this provides a basic effective and efficient "legal" player for general imperfect-information games.

Minimal explanations of infeasibility find a wide range of uses. In the Boolean domain, these are referred to as Minimal Unsatisfiable Subsets (MUSes). In some settings, one needs to enumerate MUSes of a Boolean formula. Most often the goal is to enumerate all MUSes. In cases where this is computationally infeasible, an alternative is to enumerate some MUSes. This paper develops a novel approach for partial enumeration of MUSes, that complements existing alternatives. If the enumeration of all MUSes is viable, then existing alternatives represent the best option. However, for formulas where the enumeration of all MUSes is unrealistic, our approach provides a solution for enumerating some MUSes within a given time bound. The experimental results focus on formulas for which existing solutions are unable to enumerate MUSes, and shows that the new approach can in most cases enumerate a non-negligible number of MUSes within a given time bound.

Over the last two decades, propositional satisfiability (S AT ) has become one of the most successful and widely applied techniques for the solution of NP-complete problems. The aim of this paper is to investigate theoretically how S AT can be utilized for the efficient solution of problems that are harder than NP or co-NP. In particular, we consider the fundamental reasoning problems in propositional disjunctive answer set programming (A SP ), B RAVE R EASONING and S KEPTICA R EASONING , which ask whether a given atom is contained in at least one or in all answer sets, respectively. Both problems are located at the second level of the Polynomial Hierarchy and thus assumed to be harder than NP or co-NP. One cannot transform these two reasoning problems into S AT in polynomial time, unless the Polynomial Hierarchy collapses. We show that certain structural aspects of disjunctive logic programs can be utilized to break through this complexity barrier, using new techniques from Parameterized Complexity. In particular, we exhibit transformations from B RAVE and S KEPTICAL R EASONING to S AT that run in time $ O (2^ k n^ 2 )$ where k is a structural parameter of the instance and n the input size. In other words, the reduction is fixed-parameter tractable for parameter k . As the parameter k we take the size of a smallest backdoor with respect to the class of normal (i.e., disjunction-free) programs. Such a backdoor is a set of atoms that when deleted makes the program normal. In consequence, the combinatorial explosion, which is expected when transforming a problem from the second level of the Polynomial Hierarchy to the first level, can now be confined to the parameter k , while the running time of the reduction is polynomial in the input size n , where the order of the polynomial is independent of k . We show that such a transformation is not possible if we consider backdoors with respect to tightness instead of normality. We think that our approach is applicable to many other hard combinatorial problems that lie beyond NP or co-NP, and thus significantly enlarge the applicability of SAT.

We introduce the framework of qualitative optimization problems (or, simply, optimization problems) to represent preference theories. The formalism uses separate modules to describe the space of outcomes to be compared (the generator) and the preferences on outcomes (the selector). We consider two types of optimization problems. They differ in the way the generator, which we model by a propositional theory, is interpreted: by the standard propositional logic semantics, and by the equilibrium-model (answer-set) semantics. Under the latter interpretation of generators, optimization problems directly generalize answer-set optimization programs proposed previously. We study strong equivalence of optimization problems, which guarantees their interchangeability within any larger context. We characterize several versions of strong equivalence obtained by restricting the class of optimization problems that can be used as extensions and establish the complexity of associated reasoning tasks. Understanding strong equivalence is essential for modular representation of optimization problems and rewriting techniques to simplify them without changing their inherent properties.

One of our long term research goals is to develop systems to answer realistic questions (e.g., some mentioned in textbooks) about biological pathways that a biologist may ask. To answer such questions we need formalisms that can model pathways, simulate their execution, model intervention to those pathways, and compare simulations under different circumstances. We found Petri Nets to be the starting point of a suitable formalism for the modeling and simulation needs. However, we need to make extensions to the Petri Net model and also reason with multiple simulation runs and parallel state evolutions. Towards that end Answer Set Programming (ASP) implementation of Petri Nets would allow us to do both. In this paper we show how ASP can be used to encode basic Petri Nets in an intuitive manner. We then show how we can modify this encoding to model several Petri Net extensions by making small changes. We then highlight some of the reasoning capabilities that we will use to accomplish our ultimate research goal.