Logic programs with ordered disjunction (LPODs) (Brewka 2002) generalize normal logic programs by combining alternative and ranked options in the heads of rules. It has been showed that LPODs are useful in a number of areas including game theory, policy languages, planning and argumentations. In this paper, we extend propositional LPODs to the first-order case, where a classical second-order formula is defined to capture the stable model semantics of the underlying first-order LPODs. We then develop a progression semantics that is equivalent to the stable model semantics but naturally represents the reasoning procedure of LPODs. We show that on finite structures, every LPOD can be translated to a first order sentence, which provides a basis for computing stable models of LPODs. We further study the complexity and expressiveness of LPODs and prove that almost positive LPODs precisely capture first-order normal logic programs, which indicates that ordered disjunction itself and constraints are sufficient to represent negation as failure.

In this paper we consider a logical treatment for the ordered disjunction operator 'x' introduced by Brewka, Niemel\"a and Syrj\"anen in their Logic Programs with Ordered Disjunctions (LPOD). LPODs are used to represent preferences in logic programming under the answer set semantics. Their semantics is defined by first translating the LPOD into a set of normal programs (called split programs) and then imposing a preference relation among the answer sets of these split programs. We concentrate on the first step and show how a suitable translation of the ordered disjunction as a derived operator into the logic of Here-and-There allows capturing the answer sets of the split programs in a direct way. We use this characterisation not only for providing an alternative implementation for LPODs, but also for checking several properties (under strongly equivalent transformations) of the 'x' operator, like for instance, its distributivity with respect to conjunction or regular disjunction. We also make a comparison to an extension proposed by K\"arger, Lopes, Olmedilla and Polleres, that combines 'x' with regular disjunction.