Knowledge Representation and Reasoning is a central, longstanding, and active area of Artificial Intelligence. Over the years it has evolved significantly; more recently it has been challenged and complemented by research in areas such as machine learning and reasoning under uncertainty. In July 2022 a Dagstuhl Perspectives workshop was held on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. The goal of the workshop was to describe the state of the art in the field, including its relation with other areas, its shortcomings and strengths, together with recommendations for future progress. We developed this manifesto based on the presentations, panels, working groups, and discussions that took place at the Dagstuhl Workshop. It is a declaration of our views on Knowledge Representation: its origins, goals, milestones, and current foci; its relation to other disciplines, especially to Artificial Intelligence; and on its challenges, along with key priorities for the next decade.

We consider learning problems of an intuitive and concise preference model, called lexicographic preference lists (LP-lists). Given a set of examples that are pairwise ordinal preferences over a universe of objects built of attributes of discrete values, we want to learn (1) an optimal LP-list that decides the maximum number of these examples, or (2) a near-optimal LP-list that decides as many examples as it can. To this end, we introduce a dynamic programming based algorithm and a genetic algorithm for these two learning problems, respectively. Furthermore, we empirically demonstrate that the sub-optimal models computed by the genetic algorithm very well approximate the de facto optimal models computed by our dynamic programming based algorithm, and that the genetic algorithm outperforms the baseline greedy heuristic with higher accuracy predicting new preferences.

In this work, we present a novel human-in-the-loop framework to help the human user understand the decision making process that involves choosing preferred options. We focus on qualitative preference models over alternatives from combinatorial domains. This framework is interactive: the user provides her behavioral data to the framework, and the framework explains the learned model to the user. It is iterative: the framework collects feedback on the learned model from the user and tries to improve it accordingly till the user terminates the iteration. In order to communicate the learned preference model to the user, we develop visualization of intuitive and explainable graphic models, such as lexicographic preference trees and forests, and conditional preference networks. To this end, we discuss key aspects of our framework for lexicographic preference models.

We consider learning problems of an intuitive and concise preference model, called lexicographic preference lists (LP-lists). Given a set of examples that are pair- wise ordinal preferences over a universe of objects built of attributes of discrete values, we want to learn (1) an optimal LP-list that decides the maximum number of these examples, or (2) a near-optimal LP-list that decides as many examples as it can. To this end, we introduce a dynamic programming based algorithm and a genetic algorithm for these two learning problems, respectively. Furthermore, we empirically demonstrate that the sub-optimal models computed by the genetic algorithm very well approximate the de facto optimal models computed by our dynamic programming based algorithm, and that the genetic algorithm outperforms the existing greedy heuristic with higher accuracy predicting new preferences.

In this work, we present a novel human-in-the-loop framework to help the agent understand the decision making process that involves choosing preferred options. We focus on qualitative preference models over alternatives from combinatorial domains. This framework is interactive: e.g., the agent provides her behavioral data to the framework, and the framework ex- plains the learned model to the agent. It is iterative: the framework collects feedback on the learned model from the agent and tries to improve it accordingly until the agent terminates the iteration. In order to communicate the learned preference model to the agent, we focus on visualizing some of the intuitive and explain- able graphic models, such as lexicographic preference trees and forests, and conditional preference networks. To this end, we discuss key aspects of our framework, and demonstrate our prototype ready for lexicographic preference models.

We give an overview of the multifaceted relationship between nonmonotonic logics and preferences. We discuss how the nonmonotonicity of reasoning itself is closely tied to preferences reasoners have on models of the world or, as we often say here, possible belief sets. Selecting extended logic programming with answer-set semantics as a generic nonmonotonic logic, we show how that logic defines preferred belief sets and how preferred belief sets allow us to represent and interpret normative statements. Conflicts among program rules (more generally, defaults) give rise to alternative preferred belief sets. We discuss how such conflicts can be resolved based on implicit specificity or on explicit rankings of defaults.

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 the lessons learned so far. The main goal of ASP is to provide a versatile declarative modeling framework with many attractive characteristics. These features allow turning -- with little to no effort -- problem statements of computationally hard problems into executable formal specifications, also called answer set programs.

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.

We investigate the problem of reasoning in the propositional fragment of MBNF, the logic of minimal belief and negation as failure introduced by Lifschitz, which can be considered as a unifying framework for several nonmonotonic formalisms, including default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, epistemic queries, and logic programming. We characterize the complexity and provide algorithms for reasoning in propositional MBNF. In particular, we show that entailment in propositional MBNF lies at the third level of the polynomial hierarchy, hence it is harder than reasoning in all the above mentioned propositional formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning. We also prove the exact correspondence between negation as failure in MBNF and negative introspection in Moore's autoepistemic logic.