DLV2 is an AI tool for Knowledge Representation and Reasoning which supports Answer Set Programming (ASP) - a logic-based declarative formalism, successfully used in both academic and industrial applications. Given a logic program modelling a computational problem, an execution of DLV2 produces the so-called answer sets that correspond one-to-one to the solutions to the problem at hand. The computational process of DLV2 relies on the typical Ground & Solve approach where the grounding step transforms the input program into a new, equivalent ground program, and the subsequent solving step applies propositional algorithms to search for the answer sets. Recently, emerging applications in contexts such as stream reasoning and event processing created a demand for multi-shot reasoning: here, the system is expected to be reactive while repeatedly executed over rapidly changing data. In this work, we present a new incremental reasoner obtained from the evolution of DLV2 towards iterated reasoning. Rather than restarting the computation from scratch, the system remains alive across repeated shots, and it incrementally handles the internal grounding process. At each shot, the system reuses previous computations for building and maintaining a large, more general ground program, from which a smaller yet equivalent portion is determined and used for computing answer sets. Notably, the incremental process is performed in a completely transparent fashion for the user. We describe the system, its usage, its applicability and performance in some practically relevant domains. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

In imperative programming, the Domain-Driven Design methodology helps in coping with the complexity of software development by materializing in code the invariants of a domain of interest. Code is cleaner and more secure because any implicit assumption is removed in favor of invariants, thus enabling a fail fast mindset and the immediate reporting of unexpected conditions. This article introduces a notion of template for Answer Set Programming that, in addition to the don't repeat yourself principle, enforces locality of some predicates by means of a simple naming convention. Local predicates are mapped to the usual global namespace adopted by mainstream engines, using universally unique identifiers to avoid name clashes. This way, local predicates can be used to enforce invariants on the expected outcome of a template in a possibly empty context of application, independently by other rules that can be added to such a context. Template applications transpiled this way can be processed by mainstream engines and safely shared with other knowledge designers, even when they have zero knowledge of templates.

The repeated execution of reasoning tasks is desirable in many applicative scenarios, such as stream reasoning and event processing. When using answer set programming in such contexts, one can avoid the iterative generation of ground programs thus achieving a significant payoff in terms of computing time. However, this may require some additional amount of memory and/or the manual addition of operational directives in the declarative knowledge base at hand. We introduce a new strategy for generating series of monotonically growing propositional programs. The proposed overgrounded programs with tailoring (OPTs) can be updated and reused in combination with consecutive inputs. With respect to earlier approaches, our tailored simplification technique reduces the size of instantiated programs. A maintained OPT slowly grows in size from an iteration to another while the update cost decreases, especially in later iterations. In this paper we formally introduce tailored embeddings, a family of equivalence-preserving ground programs which are at the theoretical basis of OPTs and we describe their properties. We then illustrate an OPT update algorithm and report about our implementation and its performance. This paper is under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

Since the first conference held in Marseille in 1982, ICLP has been the premier international event for presenting research in logic programming. Contributions are sought in all areas of logic programming, including but not restricted to: Foundations: Semantics, Formalisms, Nonmonotonic reasoning, Knowledge representation. Languages: Concurrency, Objects, Coordination, Mobility, Higher Order, Types, Modes, Assertions, Modules, Meta-programming, Logic-based domain-specific languages, Programming Techniques. Declarative programming: Declarative program development, Analysis, Type and mode inference, Partial evaluation, Abstract interpretation, Transformation, Validation, Verification, Debugging, Profiling, Testing, Execution visualization Implementation: Virtual machines, Compilation, Memory management, Parallel/distributed execution, Constraint handling rules, Tabling, Foreign interfaces, User interfaces. Related Paradigms and Synergies: Inductive and Co-inductive Logic Programming, Constraint Logic Programming, Answer Set Programming, Interaction with SAT, SMT and CSP solvers, Logic programming techniques for type inference and theorem proving, Argumentation, Probabilistic Logic Programming, Relations to object-oriented and Functional programming. Applications: Databases, Big Data, Data integration and federation, Software engineering, Natural language processing, Web and Semantic Web, Agents, Artificial intelligence, Computational life sciences, Education, Cybersecurity, and Robotics.

Repeated executions of reasoning tasks for varying inputs are necessary in many applicative settings, such as stream reasoning. In this context, we propose an incremental grounding approach for the answer set semantics. We focus on the possibility of generating incrementally larger ground logic programs equivalent to a given non-ground one; so called overgrounded programs can be reused in combination with deliberately many different sets of inputs. Updating overgrounded programs requires a small effort, thus making the instantiation of logic programs considerably faster when grounding is repeated on a series of inputs similar to each other. Notably, the proposed approach works "under the hood", relieving designers of logic programs from controlling technical aspects of grounding engines and answer set systems. In this work we present the theoretical basis of the proposed incremental grounding technique, we illustrate the consequent repeated evaluation strategy and report about our experiments. This paper is under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

As software systems are getting increasingly connected, there is a need for equipping nonmonotonic logic programs with access to external sources that are possibly remote and may contain information in heterogeneous formats. To cater for this need, HEX programs were designed as a generalization of answer set programs with an API style interface that allows to access arbitrary external sources, providing great flexibility. Efficient evaluation of such programs however is challenging, and it requires to interleave external computation and model building; to decide when to switch between these tasks is difficult, and existing approaches have limited scalability in many real-world application scenarios. We present a new approach for the evaluation of logic programs with external source access, which is based on a configurable framework for dividing the non-ground program into possibly overlapping smaller parts called evaluation units. The latter will be processed by interleaving external evaluation and model building using an evaluation graph and a model graph, respectively, and by combining intermediate results. Experiments with our prototype implementation show a significant improvement compared to previous approaches. While designed for HEX-programs, the new evaluation approach may be deployed to related rule-based formalisms as well.

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.

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.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-established paradigm of declarative programming in close relationship with other declarative formalisms such as SAT Modulo Theories, Constraint Handling Rules, FO(.), PDDL and many others. Since its first informal editions, ASP systems have been compared in the now well-established ASP Competition. The Third (Open) ASP Competition, as the sequel to the ASP Competitions Series held at the University of Potsdam in Germany (2006-2007) and at the University of Leuven in Belgium in 2009, took place at the University of Calabria (Italy) in the first half of 2011. Participants competed on a pre-selected collection of benchmark problems, taken from a variety of domains as well as real world applications. The Competition ran on two tracks: the Model and Solve (M&S) Track, based on an open problem encoding, and open language, and open to any kind of system based on a declarative specification paradigm; and the System Track, run on the basis of fixed, public problem encodings, written in a standard ASP language. This paper discusses the format of the Competition and the rationale behind it, then reports the results for both tracks. Comparison with the second ASP competition and state-of-the-art solutions for some of the benchmark domains is eventually discussed. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

This paper summarizes our line of research about the introduction of function symbols (functions) in Answer Set Programming (ASP) – a powerful language for knowledge representation and reasoning. The undecidability of reasoning on ASP with functions, implied that functions were subject to severe restrictions or disallowed at all, drastically limiting ASP applicability. We overcame most of the technical difficulties preventing this introduction, and we singled out a highly expressive class of programs with functions (FG-programs), allowing the (possibly recursive) use of function terms in the full ASP language with disjunction and negation. Reasoning on FG-programs is decidable, and they can express any computable function (causing membership in this class to be semi-decidable). We singled out also FD-programs, a subset of FG-programs which are effectively recognizable, while keeping the computability of reasoning. We implemented all results into the DLV system, thus obtaining an ASP system allowing to encode any computable function in a rich and fully declarative KRR language, ensuring termination on every FG program. Finally, we singled out the class of DFRP programs, where decidability of reasoning is guaranteed and Prolog-like functions are allowed.