We investigates the concept of strong equivalence within the extended framework of Answer Set Programming with constraints. Two groups of rules are considered strongly equivalent if, informally speaking, they have the same meaning in any context. We demonstrate that, under certain assumptions, strong equivalence between rule sets in this extended setting can be precisely characterized by their equivalence in the logic of Here-and-There with constraints. Furthermore, we present a translation from the language of several clingo-based answer set solvers that handle constraints into the language of Here-and-There with constraints. This translation enables us to leverage the logic of Here-and-There to reason about strong equivalence within the context of these solvers. We also explore the computational complexity of determining strong equivalence in this context.

Neural networks, as currently designed, fall short of achieving true logical intelligence. Modern AI models rely on standard neural computation-inner-product-based transformations and nonlinear activations-to approximate patterns from data. While effective for inductive learning, this architecture lacks the structural guarantees necessary for deductive inference and logical consistency. As a result, deep networks struggle with rule-based reasoning, structured generalization, and interpretability without extensive post-hoc modifications. This position paper argues that standard neural layers must be fundamentally rethought to integrate logical reasoning. We advocate for Logical Neural Units (LNUs)-modular components that embed differentiable approximations of logical operations (e.g., AND, OR, NOT) directly within neural architectures. We critique existing neurosymbolic approaches, highlight the limitations of standard neural computation for logical inference, and present LNUs as a necessary paradigm shift in AI. Finally, we outline a roadmap for implementation, discussing theoretical foundations, architectural integration, and key challenges for future research.

Quantitative information flow analyses (QIF) are a class of techniques for measuring the amount of confidential information leaked by a program to its public outputs. Shannon entropy is an important method to quantify the amount of leakage in QIF. This paper focuses on the programs modeled in Boolean constraints and optimizes the two stages of the Shannon entropy computation to implement a scalable precise tool PSE. In the first stage, we design a knowledge compilation language called \ADDAND that combines Algebraic Decision Diagrams and conjunctive decomposition. \ADDAND avoids enumerating possible outputs of a program and supports tractable entropy computation. In the second stage, we optimize the model counting queries that are used to compute the probabilities of outputs. We compare PSE with the state-of-the-art probably approximately correct tool EntropyEstimation, which was shown to significantly outperform the existing precise tools. The experimental results demonstrate that PSE solved 55 more benchmarks compared to EntropyEstimation in a total of 441. For 98% of the benchmarks that both PSE and EntropyEstimation solved, PSE is at least $10\times$ as efficient as EntropyEstimation.

The goal of inductive logic programming (ILP) is to find a set of logical rules that generalises training examples and background knowledge. We introduce an ILP approach that identifies pointless rules. A rule is pointless if it contains a redundant literal or cannot discriminate against negative examples. We show that ignoring pointless rules allows an ILP system to soundly prune the hypothesis space. Our experiments on multiple domains, including visual reasoning and game playing, show that our approach can reduce learning times by 99% whilst maintaining predictive accuracies.

The IC3 algorithm, also known as PDR, is a SAT-based model checking algorithm that has significantly influenced the field in recent years due to its efficiency, scalability, and completeness. It utilizes SAT solvers to solve a series of SAT queries associated with relative induction. In this paper, we introduce several optimizations for the SAT solver in IC3 based on our observations of the unique characteristics of these SAT queries. By observing that SAT queries do not necessarily require decisions on all variables, we compute a subset of variables that need to be decided before each solving process while ensuring that the result remains unaffected. Additionally, noting that the overhead of binary heap operations in VSIDS is non-negligible, we replace the binary heap with buckets to achieve constant-time operations. Furthermore, we support temporary clauses without the need to allocate a new activation variable for each solving process, thereby eliminating the need to reset solvers. We developed a novel lightweight CDCL SAT solver, GipSAT, which integrates these optimizations. A comprehensive evaluation highlights the performance improvements achieved by GipSAT. Specifically, the GipSAT-based IC3 demonstrates an average speedup of 3.61 times in solving time compared to the IC3 implementation based on MiniSat.

Classical planning asks for a sequence of operators reaching a given goal. While the most common case is to compute a plan, many scenarios require more than that. However, quantitative reasoning on the plan space remains mostly unexplored. A fundamental problem is to count plans, which relates to the conditional probability on the plan space. Indeed, qualitative and quantitative approaches are well-established in various other areas of automated reasoning. We present the first study to quantitative and qualitative reasoning on the plan space. In particular, we focus on polynomially bounded plans. On the theoretical side, we study its complexity, which gives rise to rich reasoning modes. Since counting is hard in general, we introduce the easier notion of facets, which enables understanding the significance of operators. On the practical side, we implement quantitative reasoning for planning. Thereby, we transform a planning task into a propositional formula and use knowledge compilation to count different plans. This framework scales well to large plan spaces, while enabling rich reasoning capabilities such as learning pruning functions and explainable planning.

Inter-organisational data exchange is regulated by norms originating from sources ranging from (inter)national laws, to processing agreements, and individual consent. Verifying norm compliance is complex because laws (e.g., GDPR) distribute responsibility and require accountability. Moreover, in some application domains (e.g., healthcare), privacy requirements extend the norms (e.g., patient consent). In contrast, existing solutions such as smart contracts, access- and usage-control assume policies to be public, or otherwise, statically partition policy information at the cost of accountability and flexibility. Instead, our framework prescribes how decentralised agents justify their actions with policy fragments that the agents autonomously create, gossip, and assemble. Crucially, the permission of actions is always reproducible by any observer, even with a partial view of all the dynamic policies. Actors can be sure that future auditors will confirm their permissions. Systems centralise control by (re)configuring externally synchronised agreements, the bases of all justifications. As a result, control is centralised only to the extent desired by the agents. In this paper, we define the JustAct framework, detail its implementation in a particular data-processing system, and design a suitable policy language based on logic programming. A case study reproduces Brane - an existing policy-regulated, inter-domain, medical data processing system - and serves to demonstrate and assess the qualities of the framework.

The paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the European AI Act in terms of its logical modalities, with the aim of preparing its formal representation, for example, within the logic-pluralistic Knowledge Engineering Framework and Methodology (LogiKEy). LogiKEy develops computational tools for normative reasoning based on formal methods, employing Higher-Order Logic (HOL) as a unifying meta-logic to integrate diverse logics through shallow semantic embeddings. This integration is facilitated by Isabelle/HOL, a proof assistant tool equipped with several automated theorem provers. The modalities within the AI Act and the logics suitable for their representation are discussed. For a selection of these logics, embeddings in HOL are created, which are then used to encode sample paragraphs. Initial experiments evaluate the suitability of these embeddings for automated reasoning, and highlight key challenges on the way to more robust reasoning capabilities.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a prominent problem-modeling and solving framework, whose solutions are called answer sets. Epistemic logic programs (ELP) extend ASP to reason about all or some answer sets. Solutions to an ELP can be seen as consequences over multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. While the complexity of propositional programs is well studied, the non-ground case remains open. This paper establishes the complexity of non-ground ELPs. We provide a comprehensive picture for well-known program fragments, which turns out to be complete for the class NEXPTIME with access to oracles up to \Sigma^P_2. In the quantitative setting, we establish complexity results for counting complexity beyond #EXP. To mitigate high complexity, we establish results in case of bounded predicate arity, reaching up to the fourth level of the polynomial hierarchy. Finally, we provide ETH-tight runtime results for the parameter treewidth, which has applications in quantitative reasoning, where we reason on (marginal) probabilities of epistemic literals.

Probabilistic neurosymbolic learning seeks to integrate neural networks with symbolic programming. Many state-of-the-art systems rely on a reduction to the Probabilistic Weighted Model Counting Problem (PWMC), which requires computing a Boolean formula called the logical provenance.However, PWMC is \\#P-hard, and the number of clauses in the logical provenance formula can grow exponentially, creating a major bottleneck that significantly limits the applicability of PNL solutions in practice.We propose a new approach centered around an exact algorithm DPNL, that enables bypassing the computation of the logical provenance.The DPNL approach relies on the principles of an oracle and a recursive DPLL-like decomposition in order to guide and speed up logical inference.Furthermore, we show that this approach can be adapted for approximate reasoning with $\epsilon$ or $(\epsilon, \delta)$ guarantees, called ApproxDPNL.Experiments show significant performance gains.DPNL enables scaling exact inference further, resulting in more accurate models.Further, ApproxDPNL shows potential for advancing the scalability of neurosymbolic programming by incorporating approximations even further, while simultaneously ensuring guarantees for the reasoning process.