Answer Set Programming Modulo Theories (ASPMT) is a new framework of tight integration of answer set programming (ASP) and satisfiability modulo theories (SMT). Similar to the relationship between first-order logic and SMT, it is based on a recent proposal of the functional stable model semantics by fixing interpretations of background theories. Analogously to a known relationship between ASP and SA T, "tight" ASPMT programs can be translated into SMT instances. We demonstrate the usefulness of ASPMT by enhancing action language C + to handle continuous changes as well as discrete changes. We reformulate the semantics of C + in terms of ASPMT, and show that SMT solvers can be used to compute the language. We also show how the language can represent cumulative effects on continuous resources.

Action languages are formal models of parts of natural language that are designed to describe effects of actions. Many of these languages can be viewed as high level notations of answer set programs structured to represent transition systems. However, the form of answer set programs considered in the earlier work is quite limited in comparison with the modern Answer Set Programming (ASP) language, which allows several useful constructs for knowledge representation, such as choice rules, aggregates, and abstract constraint atoms. We propose a new action language called BC+, which closes the gap between action languages and the modern ASP language. The main idea is to define the semantics of BC+ in terms of general stable model semantics for propositional formulas, under which many modern ASP language constructs can be identified with shorthands for propositional formulas. Language BC+ turns out to be sufficiently expressive to encompass the best features of other action languages, such as languages B, C, C+, and BC. Computational methods available in ASP solvers are readily applicable to compute BC+, which led to an implementation of the language by extending system cplus2asp.

Splitting a logic program allows us to reduce the task of computing its stable models to similar tasks for its subprograms. This can be used to increase solving performance and prove program correctness. We generalize the conditions under which this technique is applicable, by considering not only dependencies between predicates but also their arguments and context. This allows splitting programs commonly used in practice to which previous results were not applicable.

This paper shows that the semantics of programs with aggregates implemented by the solvers clingo and dlv can be characterized as extended First-Order formulas with intensional functions in the logic of Here-and-There. Furthermore, this characterization can be used to study the strong equivalence of programs with aggregates under either semantics. We also present a transformation that reduces the task of checking strong equivalence to reasoning in classical First-Order logic, which serves as a foundation for automating this procedure.

This paper moves the first step towards automating the composition of Answer Set Programming (ASP) specifications. In particular, the following contributions are provided: (i) A dataset focused on graph-related problem specifications, designed to develop and assess tools for ASP automatic coding; (ii) A two-step architecture, implemented in the NL2ASP tool, for generating ASP programs from natural language specifications. NL2ASP uses neural machine translation to transform natural language into Controlled Natural Language (CNL) statements. Subsequently, CNL statements are converted into ASP code using the CNL2ASP tool. An experiment confirms the viability of the approach.

The sequential composition of propositional logic programs has been recently introduced. This paper studies the sequential {\em decomposition} of programs by studying Green's relations $\mathcal{L,R,J}$ -- well-known in semigroup theory -- between programs. In a broader sense, this paper is a further step towards an algebraic theory of logic programming.

In classical logic, nonBoolean fluents, such as the location of an object, can be naturally described by functions. However, this is not the case in answer set programs, where the values of functions are pre-defined, and nonmonotonicity of the semantics is related to minimizing the extents of predicates but has nothing to do with functions. We extend the first-order stable model semantics by Ferraris, Lee, and Lifschitz to allow intensional functions -- functions that are specified by a logic program just like predicates are specified. We show that many known properties of the stable model semantics are naturally extended to this formalism and compare it with other related approaches to incorporating intensional functions. Furthermore, we use this extension as a basis for defining Answer Set Programming Modulo Theories (ASPMT), analogous to the way that Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) is defined, allowing for SMT-like effective first-order reasoning in the context of ASP. Using SMT solving techniques involving functions, ASPMT can be applied to domains containing real numbers and alleviates the grounding problem. We show that other approaches to integrating ASP and CSP/SMT can be related to special cases of ASPMT in which functions are limited to non-intensional ones.

This paper continues the line of work on representing properties of actions in nonmonotonic formalisms that stresses the distinction between being "true" and being "caused", as in the system of causal logic introduced by McCain and Turner and in the action language C proposed by Giunchiglia and Lifschitz. The only fluents directly representable in language C+ are truth-valued fluents, which is often inconvenient. We show that both causal logic and language C can be extended to allow values from arbitrary nonempty sets. Our extension of language C, called C+, also makes it possible to describe actions in terms of their attributes, which is important from the perspective of elaboration tolerance. We describe an embedding of C+ in causal theories with multi-valued constants, relate C+ to Pednault's action language ADL, and show how multi-valued constants can be eliminated in favor of Boolean constants.

Safe first-order formulas generalize the concept of a safe rule, which plays an important role in the design of answer set solvers. We show that any safe sentence is equivalent, in a certain sense, to the result of its grounding -- to the variable-free sentence obtained from it by replacing all quantifiers with multiple conjunctions and disjunctions. It follows that a safe sentence and the result of its grounding have the same stable models, and that the stable models of a safe sentence can be characterized by a formula of a simple syntactic form.

Theory of stable models is the mathematical basis of answer set programming. Several results in that theory refer to the concept of the positive dependency graph of a logic program. We describe a modification of that concept and show that the new understanding of positive dependency makes it possible to strengthen some of these results.