Answer Set Programming (ASP) is often hindered by the grounding bottleneck: large Herbrand universes generate ground programs so large that solving becomes difficult. Many methods employ ad-hoc heuristics to improve grounding performance, motivating the need for a more formal and generalizable strategy. We introduce the notion of diminution, defined as a selected subset of the Herbrand universe used to generate a reduced ground program before solving. We give a formal definition of diminution, analyze its key properties, and study the complexity of identifying it. We use a specific encoding that enables off-the-shelf ASP solver to evaluate candidate subsets. Our approach integrates seamlessly with existing grounders via domain predicates. In extensive experiments on five benchmarks, applying diminutions selected by our strategy yields significant performance improvements, reducing grounding time by up to 70% on average and decreasing the size of grounding files by up to 85%. These results demonstrate that leveraging diminutions constitutes a robust and general-purpose approach for alleviating the grounding bottleneck in ASP.

Extensions of Answer Set Programming with language constructs from temporal logics, such as temporal equilibrium logic over finite traces (TELf), provide an expressive computational framework for modeling dynamic applications. In this paper, we study the so-called past-present syntactic subclass, which consists of a set of logic programming rules whose body references to the past and head to the present. Such restriction ensures that the past remains independent of the future, which is the case in most dynamic domains. We extend the definitions of completion and loop formulas to the case of past-present formulas, which allows capturing the temporal stable models of a set of past-present temporal programs by means of an LTLf expression.

Recently Ferraris, Lee and Lifschitz proposed a new definition of stable models that does not refer to grounding, which applies to the syntax of arbitrary first-order sentences. We show its relation to the idea of loop formulas with variables by Chen, Lin, Wang and Zhang, and generalize their loop formulas to disjunctive programs and to arbitrary first-order sentences. We also extend the syntax of logic programs to allow explicit quantifiers, and define its semantics as a subclass of the new language of stable models by Ferraris et al. Such programs inherit from the general language the ability to handle nonmonotonic reasoning under the stable model semantics even in the absence of the unique name and the domain closure assumptions, while yielding more succinct loop formulas than the general language due to the restricted syntax. We also show certain syntactic conditions under which query answering for an extended program can be reduced to entailment checking in first-order logic, providing a way to apply first-order theorem provers to reasoning about non-Herbrand stable models.

By introducing the concepts of a loop and a loop formula, Lin and Zhao showed that the answer sets of a nondisjunctive logic program are exactly the models of its Clark's completion that satisfy the loop formulas of all loops. Recently, Gebser and Schaub showed that the Lin-Zhao theorem remains correct even if we restrict loop formulas to a special class of loops called ``elementary loops.'' In this paper, we simplify and generalize the notion of an elementary loop, and clarify its role. We propose the notion of an elementary set, which is almost equivalent to the notion of an elementary loop for nondisjunctive programs, but is simpler, and, unlike elementary loops, can be extended to disjunctive programs without producing unintuitive results. We show that the maximal unfounded elementary sets for the ``relevant'' part of a program are exactly the minimal sets among the nonempty unfounded sets. We also present a graph-theoretic characterization of elementary sets for nondisjunctive programs, which is simpler than the one proposed in (Gebser & Schaub 2005). Unlike the case of nondisjunctive programs, we show that the problem of deciding an elementary set is coNP-complete for disjunctive programs.

We propose an end-to-end approach for answer set programming (ASP) and linear algebraically compute stable models satisfying given constraints. The idea is to implement Lin-Zhao's theorem \cite{Lin04} together with constraints directly in vector spaces as numerical minimization of a cost function constructed from a matricized normal logic program, loop formulas in Lin-Zhao's theorem and constraints, thereby no use of symbolic ASP or SAT solvers involved in our approach. We also propose precomputation that shrinks the program size and heuristics for loop formulas to reduce computational difficulty. We empirically test our approach with programming examples including the 3-coloring and Hamiltonian cycle problems. As our approach is purely numerical and only contains vector/matrix operations, acceleration by parallel technologies such as many-cores and GPUs is expected.

This paper proposes an alternative definition of elementary loops and extends the notion of proper loops for disjunctive logic programs. Different from normal logic programs, the computational complexities of recognizing elementary loops and proper loops for disjunctive programs are coNP-complete. To address this problem, we introduce weaker versions of both elementary loops and proper loops and provide polynomial time algorithms for identifying them respectively. On the other hand, based on the notion of elementary loops, the class of Head-Elementary-loop-Free (HEF) programs was presented, which can be turned into equivalent normal logic programs by shifting head atoms into bodies. However, the problem of recognizing an HEF program is coNP-complete. Then we present a subclass of HEF programs which generalizes the class of Head-Cycle-Free programs and provide a polynomial time algorithm to identify them. At last, some experiments show that both elementary loops and proper loops could be replaced by their weak versions in practice.

Lifschitz and Turner introduced the notion of the splitting set and provided a method to divide a logic program into two parts. They showed that the task of computing the answer sets of the program can be converted into the tasks of computing the answer sets of these parts. However, the empty set and the set of all atoms are the only two splitting sets for many programs, then these programs cannot be divided by the splitting method. In this paper, we extend Lifschitz and Turner's splitting set theorem to allow the program to be split by an arbitrary set of atoms, while some new atoms may be introduced in the process. To illustrate the usefulness of the result, we show that for some typical programs the splitting process is efficient and the program simplification problem can be investigated using the concept of splitting.

The notions of loops and loop formulas play an important role in answer set computation. However, there would be an exponential number of loops in the worst case. Gebser and Schaub characterized a subclass elementary loops and showed that they are sufficient for selecting answer sets from models of a logic program. This paper proposes an alternative definition of elementary loops and identify a subclass of elementary loops, called proper loops. By applying a special form of their loop formulas, proper loops are also sufficient for the SAT-based answer set computation. A polynomial algorithm to recognize a proper loop is given and shows that for certain logic programs, identifying all proper loops of a program is more efficient than that of elementary loops. Furthermore, we prove that, by considering the structure of the positive body-head dependency graph of a program, a large number of loops could be ignored for identifying proper loops. We provide another algorithm for identifying all proper loops of a program. The experiments show that, for certain programs whose dependency graphs consisting of sets of components that are densely connected inside and sparsely connected outside, the new algorithm is more efficient.

Lin and Zhao's theorem on loop formulas states that in the propositional case the stable model semantics of a logic program can be completely characterized by propositional loop formulas, but this result does not fully carry over to the first-order case. We investigate the precise relationship between the first-order stable model semantics and first-order loop formulas, and study conditions under which the former can be represented by the latter. In order to facilitate the comparison, we extend the definition of a first-order loop formula which was limited to a nondisjunctive program, to a disjunctive program and to an arbitrary first-order theory. Based on the studied relationship we extend the syntax of a logic program with explicit quantifiers, which allows us to do reasoning involving non-Herbrand stable models using first-order reasoners. Such programs can be viewed as a special class of first-order theories under the stable model semantics, which yields more succinct loop formulas than the general language due to their restricted syntax.

One criticism often advanced against abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs), is that these consider only one form of interaction between atomic arguments: specifically that an argument attacks another. Attempts to broaden the class of relationships include bipolar frameworks, where arguments support others, and abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs). The latter, allow "acceptance'' of an argument, x, to be predicated on a given propositional function, C_x, dependent on the corresponding acceptance of its parents, i.e. those y for which occurs. Although offering a richly expressive formalism subsuming both standard and bipolar AFs, an issue that arises with ADFs is whether this expressiveness is achieved in a manner that would be infeasible within standard AFs. Can the semantics used in ADFs be mapped to some AF semantics? How many arguments are needed in an AF to "simulate'' an ADF? We show that (in a formally defined sense) any ADF can be simulated by an AF of similar size and that this translation can be realised by a polynomial time algorithm.