In the contexts of automated reasoning and formal verification, important decision problems are effectively encoded into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT). In the last decade efficient SMT solvers have been developed for several theories of practical interest (e.g., linear arithmetic, arrays, bit-vectors). Surprisingly, very few work has been done to extend SMT to deal with optimization problems; in particular, we are not aware of any work on SMT solvers able to produce solutions which minimize cost functions over arithmetical variables. This is unfortunate, since some problems of interest require this functionality. In this paper we start filling this gap. We present and discuss two general procedures for leveraging SMT to handle the minimization of LA(Q) cost functions, combining SMT with standard minimization techniques. We have implemented the procedures within the MathSAT SMT solver. Due to the absence of competitors in AR and SMT domains, we have experimentally evaluated our implementation against state-of-the-art tools for the domain of linear generalized disjunctive programming (LGDP), which is closest in spirit to our domain, on sets of problems which have been previously proposed as benchmarks for the latter tools. The results show that our tool is very competitive with, and often outperforms, these tools on these problems, clearly demonstrating the potential of the approach.

Seven years on from OWL becoming a W3C recommendation, and two years on from the more recent OWL 2 W3C recommendation, OWL has still experienced only patchy uptake on the Web. Although certain OWL features (like owl:sameAs) are very popular, other features of OWL are largely neglected by publishers in the Linked Data world. This may suggest that despite the promise of easy implementations and the proposal of tractable profiles suggested in OWL's second version, there is still no "right" standard fragment for the Linked Data community. In this paper, we (1) analyse uptake of OWL on the Web of Data, (2) gain insights into the OWL fragment that is actually used/usable on the Web, where we arrive at the conclusion that this fragment is likely to be a simplified profile based on OWL RL, (3) propose and discuss such a new fragment, which we call OWL LD (for Linked Data).

We develop a conceptually clear, intuitive, and feasible decision procedure for testing satisfiability in the full multi-agent epistemic logic CMAEL(CD) with operators for common and distributed knowledge for all coalitions of agents mentioned in the language. To that end, we introduce Hintikka structures for CMAEL(CD) and prove that satisfiability in such structures is equivalent to satisfiability in standard models. Using that result, we design an incremental tableau-building procedure that eventually constructs a satisfying Hintikka structure for every satisfiable input set of formulae of CMAEL(CD) and closes for every unsatisfiable input set of formulae.

Paul Bernays and David Hilbert carefully avoided overspecification of Hilbert's epsilon-operator and axiomatized only what was relevant for their proof-theoretic investigations. Semantically, this left the epsilon-operator underspecified. In the meanwhile, there have been several suggestions for semantics of the epsilon as a choice operator. After reviewing the literature on semantics of Hilbert's epsilon operator, we propose a new semantics with the following features: We avoid overspecification (such as right-uniqueness), but admit indefinite choice, committed choice, and classical logics. Moreover, our semantics for the epsilon supports proof search optimally and is natural in the sense that it does not only mirror some cases of referential interpretation of indefinite articles in natural language, but may also contribute to philosophy of language. Finally, we ask the question whether our epsilon within our free-variable framework can serve as a paradigm useful in the specification and computation of semantics of discourses in natural language.

Probabilistic logics are receiving a lot of attention today because of their expressive power for knowledge representation and learning. However, this expressivity is detrimental to the tractability of inference, when done at the propositional level. To solve this problem, various lifted inference algorithms have been proposed that reason at the first-order level, about groups of objects as a whole. Despite the existence of various lifted inference approaches, there are currently no completeness results about these algorithms. The key contribution of this paper is that we introduce a formal definition of lifted inference that allows us to reason about the completeness of lifted inference algorithms relative to a particular class of probabilistic models. We then show how to obtain a completeness result using a first-order knowledge compilation approach for theories of formulae containing up to two logical variables.

Interpolation is an important property of classical and many non-classical logics that has been shown to have interesting applications in computer science and AI. Here we study the Interpolation Property for the the non-monotonic system of equilibrium logic, establishing weaker or stronger forms of interpolation depending on the precise interpretation of the inference relation. These results also yield a form of interpolation for ground logic programs under the answer sets semantics. For disjunctive logic programs we also study the property of uniform interpolation that is closely related to the concept of variable forgetting. The first-order version of equilibrium logic has analogous Interpolation properties whenever the collection of equilibrium models is (first-order) definable. Since this is the case for so-called safe programs and theories, it applies to the usual situations that arise in practical answer set programming.

Some of the applications of OWL and RDF (e.g. biomedical knowledge representation and semantic policy formulation) call for extensions of these languages with nonmonotonic constructs such as inheritance with overriding. Nonmonotonic description logics have been studied for many years, however no practical such knowledge representation languages exist, due to a combination of semantic difficulties and high computational complexity. Independently, low-complexity description logics such as DL-lite and EL have been introduced and incorporated in the OWL standard. Therefore, it is interesting to see whether the syntactic restrictions characterizing DL-lite and EL bring computational benefits to their nonmonotonic versions, too. In this paper we extensively investigate the computational complexity of Circumscription when knowledge bases are formulated in DL-lite_R, EL, and fragments thereof. We identify fragments whose complexity ranges from P to the second level of the polynomial hierarchy, as well as fragments whose complexity raises to PSPACE and beyond.

Hybrid MKNF knowledge bases are one of the most prominent tightly integrated combinations of open-world ontology languages with closed-world (non-monotonic) rule paradigms. The definition of Hybrid MKNF is parametric on the description logic (DL) underlying the ontology language, in the sense that non-monotonic rules can extend any decidable DL language. Two related semantics have been defined for Hybrid MKNF: one that is based on the Stable Model Semantics for logic programs and one on the Well-Founded Semantics (WFS). Under WFS, the definition of Hybrid MKNF relies on a bottom-up computation that has polynomial data complexity whenever the DL language is tractable. Here we define a general query-driven procedure for Hybrid MKNF that is sound with respect to the stable model-based semantics, and sound and complete with respect to its WFS variant. This procedure is able to answer a slightly restricted form of conjunctive queries, and is based on tabled rule evaluation extended with an external oracle that captures reasoning within the ontology. Such an (abstract) oracle receives as input a query along with knowledge already derived, and replies with a (possibly empty) set of atoms, defined in the rules, whose truth would suffice to prove the initial query. With appropriate assumptions on the complexity of the abstract oracle, the general procedure maintains the data complexity of the WFS for Hybrid MKNF knowledge bases. To illustrate this approach, we provide a concrete oracle for EL+, a fragment of the light-weight DL EL++. Such an oracle has practical use, as EL++ is the language underlying OWL 2 EL, which is part of the W3C recommendations for the Semantic Web, and is tractable for reasoning tasks such as subsumption. We show that query-driven Hybrid MKNF preserves polynomial data complexity when using the EL+ oracle and WFS.

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.

Logic programs with aggregates (LPA) are one of the major linguistic extensions to Logic Programming (LP). In this work, we propose a generalization of the notions of unfounded set and well-founded semantics for programs with monotone and antimonotone aggregates (LPAma programs). In particular, we present a new notion of unfounded set for LPAma programs, which is a sound generalization of the original definition for standard (aggregate-free) LP. On this basis, we define a well-founded operator for LPAma programs, the fixpoint of which is called well-founded model (or well-founded semantics) for LPAma programs. The most important properties of unfounded sets and the well-founded semantics for standard LP are retained by this generalization, notably existence and uniqueness of the well-founded model, together with a strong relationship to the answer set semantics for LPAma programs. We show that one of the D-well-founded semantics, defined by Pelov, Denecker, and Bruynooghe for a broader class of aggregates using approximating operators, coincides with the well-founded model as defined in this work on LPAma programs. We also discuss some complexity issues, most importantly we give a formal proof of tractable computation of the well-founded model for LPA programs. Moreover, we prove that for general LPA programs, which may contain aggregates that are neither monotone nor antimonotone, deciding satisfaction of aggregate expressions with respect to partial interpretations is coNP-complete. As a consequence, a well-founded semantics for general LPA programs that allows for tractable computation is unlikely to exist, which justifies the restriction on LPAma programs. Finally, we present a prototype system extending DLV, which supports the well-founded semantics for LPAma programs, at the time of writing the only implemented system that does so. Experiments with this prototype show significant computational advantages of aggregate constructs over equivalent aggregate-free encodings.