The Answer Set Programming (ASP) Competition is a biannual event for evaluating declarative knowledge representation systems on hard and demanding AI problems. The competition consists of two main tracks: the ASP system track and the model and solve track. The traditional system track compares dedicated answer set solvers on ASP benchmarks, while the model and solve track invites any researcher and developer of declarative knowledge representation systems to participate in an open challenge for solving sophisticated AI problems with their tools of choice. This article provides an overview of the ASP competition series, reviews its origins and history, giving insights on organizing and running such an elaborate event, and briefly discusses about the lessons learned so far.

Boolean satisfiability (SAT) as a canonical NP-complete decision problem is one of the most important problems in computer science. In practice, real-world SAT sentences are drawn from a distribution that may result in efficient algorithms for their solution. Such SAT instances are likely to have shared characteristics and substructures. This work approaches the exploration of a family of SAT solvers as a learning problem. In particular, we relate polynomial time solvability of a SAT subset to a notion of margin between sentences mapped by a feature function into a Hilbert space. Provided this mapping is based on polynomial time computable statistics of a sentence, we show that the existance of a margin between these data points implies the existance of a polynomial time solver for that SAT subset based on the Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland algorithm. Furthermore, we show that a simple perceptron-style learning rule will find an optimal SAT solver with a bounded number of training updates. We derive a linear time computable set of features and show analytically that margins exist for important polynomial special cases of SAT. Empirical results show an order of magnitude improvement over a state-of-the-art SAT solver on a hardware verification task.

A fundamental question in systems biology is the construction and training to data of mathematical models. Logic formalisms have become very popular to model signaling networks because their simplicity allows us to model large systems encompassing hundreds of proteins. An approach to train (Boolean) logic models to high-throughput phospho-proteomics data was recently introduced and solved using optimization heuristics based on stochastic methods. Here we demonstrate how this problem can be solved using Answer Set Programming (ASP), a declarative problem solving paradigm, in which a problem is encoded as a logical program such that its answer sets represent solutions to the problem. ASP has significant improvements over heuristic methods in terms of efficiency and scalability, it guarantees global optimality of solutions as well as provides a complete set of solutions. We illustrate the application of ASP with in silico cases based on realistic networks and data.

In the recent years, we have linked a large corpus of formal mathematics with automated theorem proving (ATP) tools, and started to develop combined AI/ATP systems working in this setting. In this paper we first relate this project to the earlier large-scale automated developments done by Quaife with McCune's Otter system, and to the discussions of the QED project about formalizing a significant part of mathematics. Then we summarize our adventure so far, argue that the QED dreams were right in anticipating the creation of a very interesting semantic AI field, and discuss its further research directions.

Recently, it has been emphasized that the possibility theory framework allows us to distinguish between i) what is possible because it is not ruled out by the available knowledge, and ii) what is possible for sure. This distinction may be useful when representing knowledge, for modelling values which are not impossible because they are consistent with the available knowledge on the one hand, and values guaranteed to be possible because reported from observations on the other hand. It is also of interest when expressing preferences, to point out values which are positively desired among those which are not rejected. This distinction can be encoded by two types of constraints expressed in terms of necessity measures and in terms of guaranteed possibility functions, which induce a pair of possibility distributions at the semantic level. A consistency condition should ensure that what is claimed to be guaranteed as possible is indeed not impossible. The present paper investigates the representation of this bipolar view, including the case when it is stated by means of conditional measures, or by means of comparative context-dependent constraints. The interest of this bipolar framework, which has been recently stressed for expressing preferences, is also pointed out in the representation of diagnostic knowledge.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a declarative problem solving approach, initially tailored to modeling problems in the area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KRR). More recently, its attractive combination of a rich yet simple modeling language with high-performance solving capacities has sparked interest in many other areas even beyond KRR. This book presents a practical introduction to ASP, aiming at using ASP languages and systems for solving application problems. Starting from the essential formal foundations, it introduces ASP's solving technology, modeling language and methodology, while illustrating the overall solving process by practical examples.

Soft Constraint Logic Programming is a natural and flexible declarative programming formalism, which allows to model and solve real-life problems involving constraints of different types. In this paper, after providing a slightly more general and elegant presentation of the framework, we show how we can apply it to the e-mobility problem of coordinating electric vehicles in order to overcome both energetic and temporal constraints and so to reduce their running cost. In particular, we focus on the journey optimization sub-problem, considering sequences of trips from a user's appointment to another one. Solutions provide the best alternatives in terms of time and energy consumption, including route sequences and possible charging events.

In this paper we propose an extension of Defeasible Logic to represent and compute three concepts of defeasible permission. In particular, we discuss different types of explicit permissive norms that work as exceptions to opposite obligations. Moreover, we show how strong permissions can be represented both with, and without introducing a new consequence relation for inferring conclusions from explicit permissive norms. Finally, we illustrate how a preference operator applicable to contrary-to-duty obligations can be combined with a new operator representing ordered sequences of strong permissions which derogate from prohibitions. The logical system is studied from a computational standpoint and is shown to have liner computational complexity. The concept of permission plays an important role in many normative domains in that it may be crucial in characterising notions such as those of authorisation and derogation [11,30,33]. For example, sometimes it may happen that we mistakenly drive to a building site, or a roadwork restricted area, with signs out saying "No admittance.

We analyse the computational complexity of three problems in judgment aggregation: (1) computing a collective judgment from a profile of individual judgments (the winner determination problem); (2) deciding whether a given agent can influence the outcome of a judgment aggregation procedure in her favour by reporting insincere judgments (the strategic manipulation problem); and (3) deciding whether a given judgment aggregation scenario is guaranteed to result in a logically consistent outcome, independently from what the judgments supplied by the individuals are (the problem of the safety of the agenda). We provide results both for specific aggregation procedures (the quota rules, the premise-based procedure, and a distance-based procedure) and for classes of aggregation procedures characterised in terms of fundamental axioms.

Pseudo-Boolean constraints are omnipresent in practical applications, and thus a significant effort has been devoted to the development of good SAT encoding techniques for them. Some of these encodings first construct a Binary Decision Diagram (BDD) for the constraint, and then encode the BDD into a propositional formula. These BDD-based approaches have some important advantages, such as not being dependent on the size of the coefficients, or being able to share the same BDD for representing many constraints. We first focus on the size of the resulting BDDs, which was considered to be an open problem in our research community. We report on previous work where it was proved that there are Pseudo-Boolean constraints for which no polynomial BDD exists. We also give an alternative and simpler proof assuming that NP is different from Co-NP. More interestingly, here we also show how to overcome the possible exponential blowup of BDDs by \emph{coefficient decomposition}. This allows us to give the first polynomial generalized arc-consistent ROBDD-based encoding for Pseudo-Boolean constraints. Finally, we focus on practical issues: we show how to efficiently construct such ROBDDs, how to encode them into SAT with only 2 clauses per node, and present experimental results that confirm that our approach is competitive with other encodings and state-of-the-art Pseudo-Boolean solvers.