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).

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).

In this paper we propose an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP), and in particular, of its most general logical counterpart, Quantified Equilibrium Logic (QEL), to deal with partial functions. Although the treatment of equality in QEL can be established in different ways, we first analyse the choice of decidable equality with complete functions and Herbrand models, recently proposed in the literature. We argue that this choice yields some counterintuitive effects from a logic programming and knowledge representation point of view. We then propose a variant called QELF where the set of functions is partitioned into partial and Herbrand functions (we also call constructors). In the rest of the paper, we show a direct connection to Scott's Logic of Existence and present a practical application, proposing an extension of normal logic programs to deal with partial functions and equality, so that they can be translated into function-free normal programs, being possible in this way to compute their answer sets with any standard ASP solver.

Recently, Argumentation Mechanism Design (ArgMD) was introduced as a new paradigm for studying argumentation among self-interested agents using game-theoretic techniques. Preliminary results showed a condition under which a direct mechanism based on Dung's grounded semantics is strategy-proof (i.e. truth enforcing). But these early results dealt with a highly restricted form of agent preferences, and assumed agents can only hide, but not lie about, arguments. In this paper, we characterise strategy-proofness under grounded semantics for a more realistic preference class (namely, focal arguments). We also provide the first analysis of the case where agents can lie.

We present a method to decompose a declarative knowledge base, given by a logic program under Answer Set Semantics with access to external sources. It overcomes the ineffectiveness of current methods due to a lack of structural information about these sources, viewed as black boxes, by exploiting independency information in accesses to them.  To this end, we develop a generic notion of domain independence that allows to restrict the evaluation domain and, as a consequence, to prune unnecessary dependency assumptions between atoms. This leads to increased decomposability, which we demonstrate by an evaluation method for HEX-programs based on program rewriting. Experiments show that this may yield large performance gains. While developed for a particular formalism, the notions and ideas of this  paper might be adapted to related formalisms as well.