Search

In temporal extensions of Answer Set Programming (ASP) based on linear-time, the behavior of dynamic systems is captured by sequences of states. While this representation reflects their relative order, it abstracts away the specific times associated with each state. In many applications, however, timing constraints are important like, for instance, when planning and scheduling go hand in hand. We address this by developing a metric extension of linear-time Dynamic Equilibrium Logic, in which dynamic operators are constrained by intervals over integers. The resulting Metric Dynamic Equilibrium Logic provides the foundation of an ASP-based approach for specifying qualitative and quantitative dynamic constraints. As such, it constitutes the most general among a whole spectrum of temporal extensions of Equilibrium Logic. In detail, we show that it encompasses Temporal, Dynamic, Metric, and regular Equilibrium Logic, as well as its classic counterparts once the law of the excluded middle is added., Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2304.14778

In this note, we introduce the notion of support graph to define explanations for any model of a logic program. An explanation is an acyclic support graph that, for each true atom in the model, induces a proof in terms of program rules represented by labels. A classical model may have zero, one or several explanations: when it has at least one, it is called a justified model. We prove that all stable models are justified whereas, in general, the opposite does not hold, at least for disjunctive programs. We also provide a meta-programming encoding in Answer Set Programming that generates the explanations for a given stable model of some program. We prove that the encoding is sound and complete, that is, there is a one-to-one correspondence between each answer set of the encoding and each explanation for the original stable model.

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.

In temporal extensions of Answer Set Programming (ASP) based on linear-time, the behavior of dynamic systems is captured by sequences of states. While this representation reflects their relative order, it abstracts away the specific times associated with each state. However, timing constraints are important in many applications like, for instance, when planning and scheduling go hand in hand. We address this by developing a metric extension of linear-time temporal equilibrium logic, in which temporal operators are constrained by intervals over natural numbers. The resulting Metric Equilibrium Logic provides the foundation of an ASP-based approach for specifying qualitative and quantitative dynamic constraints. To this end, we define a translation of metric formulas into monadic first-order formulas and give a correspondence between their models in Metric Equilibrium Logic and Monadic Quantified Equilibrium Logic, respectively. Interestingly, our translation provides a blue print for implementation in terms of ASP modulo difference constraints., Comment: Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

In this work, we present a flexible method for explaining, in human readable terms, the predictions made by decision trees used as decision support in liver transplantation. The decision trees have been obtained through machine learning applied on a dataset collected at the liver transplantation unit at the Coru\~na University Hospital Center and are used to predict long term (five years) survival after transplantation. The method we propose is based on the representation of the decision tree as a set of rules in a logic program (LP) that is further annotated with text messages. This logic program is then processed using the tool xclingo (based on Answer Set Programming) that allows building compound explanations depending on the annotation text and the rules effectively fired when a given input is provided. We explore two alternative LP encodings: one in which rules respect the tree structure (more convenient to reflect the learning process) and one where each rule corresponds to a (previously simplified) tree path (more readable for decision making)., Comment: 5 pages, 7 listings, two tables

We explore different ways of implementing temporal constraints expressed in an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with language constructs from dynamic logic. Foremost, we investigate how automata can be used for enforcing such constraints. The idea is to transform a dynamic constraint into an automaton expressed in terms of a logic program that enforces the satisfaction of the original constraint. What makes this approach attractive is its independence of time stamps and the potential to detect unsatisfiability. On the one hand, we elaborate upon a transformation of dynamic formulas into alternating automata that relies on meta-programming in ASP. This is the first application of reification applied to theory expressions in gringo. On the other hand, we propose two transformations of dynamic formulas into monadic second-order formulas. These can then be used by off-the-shelf tools to construct the corresponding automata. We contrast both approaches empirically with the one of the temporal ASP solver telingo that directly maps dynamic constraints to logic programs. Since this preliminary study is restricted to dynamic formulas in integrity constraints, its implementations and (empirical) results readily apply to conventional linear dynamic logic, too.

Over the last decades the development of ASP has brought about an expressive modeling language powered by highly performant systems. At the same time, it gets more and more difficult to provide semantic underpinnings capturing the resulting constructs and inferences. This is even more severe when it comes to hybrid ASP languages and systems that are often needed to handle real-world applications. We address this challenge and introduce the concept of abstract and structured theories that allow us to formally elaborate upon their integration with ASP. We then use this concept to make precise the semantic characterization of CLINGO's theory-reasoning framework and establish its correspondence to the logic of Here-and-there with constraints. This provides us with a formal framework in which we can elaborate formal properties of existing hybridizations of CLINGO such as CLINGCON, CLINGOM[DL], and CLINGO[LP]., Comment: 29 pages

Multi-Context Systems (MCS) model in Computational Logic distributed systems composed of heterogeneous sources, or "contexts", interacting via special rules called "bridge rules". In this paper, we consider how to enhance flexibility and generality in bridge-rules definition and application. In particular, we introduce and discuss some formal extensions of MCSs useful for a practical use in dynamic environments, and we try to provide guidelines for implementations, Comment: 35 pages 2 figures

We present xclingo, a tool for generating explanations from ASP programs annotated with text and labels. These annotations allow tracing the application of rules or the atoms derived by them. The input of xclingo is a markup language written as ASP comment lines, so the programs annotated in this way can still be accepted by a standard ASP solver. xclingo translates the annotations into additional predicates and rules and uses the ASP solver clingo to obtain the extension of those auxiliary predicates. This information is used afterwards to construct derivation trees containing textual explanations. The language allows selecting which atoms to explain and, in its turn, which atoms or rules to include in those explanations. We illustrate the basic features through a diagnosis problem from the literature., Comment: In Proceedings ICLP 2020, arXiv:2009.09158

We present an overview on Temporal Logic Programming under the perspective of its application for Knowledge Representation and declarative problem solving. Such programs are the result of combining usual rules with temporal modal operators, as in Linear-time Temporal Logic (LTL). We focus on recent results of the non-monotonic formalism called Temporal Equilibrium Logic (TEL) that is defined for the full syntax of LTL, but performs a model selection criterion based on Equilibrium Logic, a well known logical characterization of Answer Set Programming (ASP). We obtain a proper extension of the stable models semantics for the general case of arbitrary temporal formulas. We recall the basic definitions for TEL and its monotonic basis, the temporal logic of Here-and-There (THT), and study the differences between infinite and finite traces. We also provide other useful results, such as the translation into other formalisms like Quantified Equilibrium Logic or Second-order LTL, and some techniques for computing temporal stable models based on automata. In a second part, we focus on practical aspects, defining a syntactic fragment called temporal logic programs closer to ASP, and explain how this has been exploited in the construction of the solver TELINGO., Comment: 55 pages, 5 figures, 4 tables, lots of theorems

We describe eclingo, a solver for epistemic logic programs under Gelfond 1991 semantics built upon the Answer Set Programming system clingo. The input language of eclingo uses the syntax extension capabilities of clingo to define subjective literals that, as usual in epistemic logic programs, allow for checking the truth of a regular literal in all or in some of the answer sets of a program. The eclingo solving process follows a guess and check strategy. It first generates potential truth values for subjective literals and, in a second step, it checks the obtained result with respect to the cautious and brave consequences of the program. This process is implemented using the multi-shot functionalities of clingo. We have also implemented some optimisations, aiming at reducing the search space and, therefore, increasing eclingo's efficiency in some scenarios. Finally, we compare the efficiency of eclingo with two state-of-the-art solvers for epistemic logic programs on a pair of benchmark scenarios and show that eclingo generally outperforms their obtained results. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP., Comment: Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2019), University Of Calabria, Rende (CS), Italy, September 2020, 16 pages

We elaborate upon the theoretical foundations of a metric temporal extension of Answer Set Programming. In analogy to previous extensions of ASP with constructs from Linear Temporal and Dynamic Logic, we accomplish this in the setting of the logic of Here-and-There and its non-monotonic extension, called Equilibrium Logic. More precisely, we develop our logic on the same semantic underpinnings as its predecessors and thus use a simple time domain of bounded time steps. This allows us to compare all variants in a uniform framework and ultimately combine them in a common implementation., Comment: Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2019), University Of Calabria, Rende (CS), Italy, September 2020, 28 pages

In this paper, we study the problem of formal verification for Answer Set Programming (ASP), namely, obtaining a formal proof showing that the answer sets of a given (non-ground) logic program P correctly correspond to the solutions to the problem encoded by P, regardless of the problem instance. To this aim, we use a formal specification language based on ASP modules, so that each module can be proved to capture some informal aspect of the problem in an isolated way. This specification language relies on a novel definition of (possibly nested, first order) program modules that may incorporate local hidden atoms at different levels. Then, verifying the logic program P amounts to prove some kind of equivalence between P and its modular specification. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP., Comment: Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2019), University Of Calabria, Rende (CS), Italy, September 2020, 16 pages

Characterizing hybrid ASP solving in a generic way is difficult since one needs to abstract from specific theories. Inspired by lazy SMT solving, this is usually addressed by treating theory atoms as opaque. Unlike this, we propose a slightly more transparent approach that includes an abstract notion of a term. Rather than imposing a syntax on terms, we keep them abstract by stipulating only some basic properties. With this, we further develop a semantic framework for hybrid ASP solving and provide aggregate functions for theory variables that adhere to different semantic principles, show that they generalize existing aggregate semantics in ASP and how we can rely on off-the-shelf hybrid solvers for implementation.

We introduce an implementation of an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with language constructs from dynamic (and temporal) logic that provides an expressive computational framework for modeling dynamic applications. Starting from logical foundations, provided by dynamic and temporal equilibrium logics over finite linear traces, we develop a translation of dynamic formulas into temporal logic programs. This provides us with a normal form result establishing the strong equivalence of formulas in different logics. Our translation relies on the introduction of auxiliary atoms to guarantee polynomial space complexity and to provide an embedding that is doomed to be impossible over the same language. Finally, the reduction of dynamic formulas to temporal logic programs allows us to extend ASP with both approaches in a uniform way and to implement both extensions via temporal ASP solvers such as telingo

We elaborate upon the formal foundations of hybrid Answer Set Programming (ASP) and extend its underlying logical framework with aggregate functions over constraint values and variables. This is achieved by introducing the construct of conditional expressions, which allow for considering two alternatives while evaluating constraints. Which alternative is considered is interpretation-dependent and chosen according to an associated condition. We put some emphasis on logic programs with linear constraints and show how common ASP aggregates can be regarded as particular cases of so-called conditional linear constraints. Finally, we introduce a polynomial-size, modular and faithful translation from our framework into regular (condition-free) Constraint ASP, outlining an implementation of conditional aggregates on top of existing hybrid ASP solvers.

In this paper we present web-liver, a rule-based system for decision support in the medical domain, focusing on its application in a liver transplantation unit for implementing policies for donor-patient matching. The rule-based system is built on top of an interpreter for logic programs with partial functions, called lppf, that extends the paradigm of Answer Set Programming (ASP) adding two main features: (1) the inclusion of partial functions and (2) the computation of causal explanations for the obtained solutions. The final goal of web-liver is assisting the medical experts in the design of new donor-patient matching policies that take into account not only the patient severity but also the transplantation utility. As an example, we illustrate the tool behaviour with a set of rules that implement the utility index called SOFT., Comment: In Proceedings ICLP 2019, arXiv:1909.07646

A common feature in Answer Set Programming is the use of a second negation, stronger than default negation and sometimes called explicit, strong or classical negation. This explicit negation is normally used in front of atoms, rather than allowing its use as a regular operator. In this paper we consider the arbitrary combination of explicit negation with nested expressions, as those defined by Lifschitz, Tang and Turner. We extend the concept of reduct for this new syntax and then prove that it can be captured by an extension of Equilibrium Logic with this second negation. We study some properties of this variant and compare to the already known combination of Equilibrium Logic with Nelson's strong negation. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP., Comment: Paper presented at the 35th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2019), Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA, 20-25 September 2019, 16 pages

Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) is a family of multimodal logics that has proved to be very successful for epistemic reasoning in planning tasks. In this logic, the agent's knowledge is captured by modal epistemic operators whereas the system evolution is described in terms of (some subset of) dynamic logic modalities in which actions are usually represented as semantic objects called event models. In this paper, we study a variant of DEL, that wecall DEL[ASP], where actions are syntactically described by using an Answer Set Programming (ASP) representation instead of event models. This representation directly inherits high level expressive features like indirect effects, qualifications, state constraints, defaults, or recursive fluents that are common in ASP descriptions of action domains. Besides, we illustrate how this approach can be applied for obtaining conditional plans in single-agent, partially observable domains where knowledge acquisition may be represented as indirect effects of actions.

Defined by Gelfond in 1991 (G91), epistemic specifications (or programs) are an extension of logic programming under stable models semantics that introducessubjective literals. A subjective literal al-lows checking whether some regular literal is true in all (or in some of) the stable models of the program, being those models collected in a setcalledworld view. One epistemic program may yield several world views but, under the original G91 semantics, some of them resulted from self-supported derivations. During the last eight years, several alternative approaches have been proposed to get rid of these self-supported worldviews. Unfortunately, their success could only be measured by studying their behaviour on a set of common examples in the literature, since no formal property of "self-supportedness" had been defined. To fill this gap, we extend in this paper the idea of unfounded set from standard logic programming to the epistemic case. We define when a world view is founded with respect to some program and propose the foundedness property for any semantics whose world views are always founded. Using counterexamples, we explain that the previous approaches violate foundedness, and proceed to propose a new semantics based on a combination of Moore's Autoepistemic Logic and Pearce's Equilibrium Logic. The main result proves that this new semantics precisely captures the set of founded G91 world views.

Spatial puzzles composed of rigid objects, flexible strings and holes offer interesting domains for reasoning about spatial entities that are common in the human daily-life's activities. The goal of this work is to investigate the automated solution of this kind of puzzles adapting an algorithm that combines Answer Set Programming (ASP) with Markov Decision Process (MDP), algorithm oASP(MDP), to use heuristics accelerating the learning process. ASP is applied to represent the domain as an MDP, while a Reinforcement Learning algorithm (Q-Learning) is used to find the optimal policies. In this work, the heuristics were obtained from the solution of relaxed versions of the puzzles. Experiments were performed on deterministic, non-deterministic and non-stationary versions of the puzzles. Results show that the proposed approach can accelerate the learning process, presenting an advantage when compared to the non-heuristic versions of oASP(MDP) and Q-Learning., Comment: Submitted to Journal of Heuristics

Epistemic logic programs constitute an extension of the stable models semantics to deal with new constructs called subjective literals. Informally speaking, a subjective literal allows checking whether some regular literal is true in all stable models or in some stable model. As it can be imagined, the associated semantics has proved to be non-trivial, as the truth of the subjective literal may interfere with the set of stable models it is supposed to query. As a consequence, no clear agreement has been reached and different semantic proposals have been made in the literature. Unfortunately, comparison among these proposals has been limited to a study of their effect on individual examples, rather than identifying general properties to be checked. In this paper, we propose an extension of the well-known splitting property for logic programs to the epistemic case. To this aim, we formally define when an arbitrary semantics satisfies the epistemic splitting property and examine some of the consequences that can be derived from that, including its relation to conformant planning and to epistemic constraints. Interestingly, we prove (through counterexamples) that most of the existing proposals fail to fulfill the epistemic splitting property, except the original semantics proposed by Gelfond in 1991., Comment: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming

In this paper, we propose a variant of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with evaluable functions that extends their application to sets of objects, something that allows a fully logical treatment of aggregates. Formally, we start from the syntax of First Order Logic with equality and the semantics of Quantified Equilibrium Logic with evaluable functions (QELF). Then, we proceed to incorporate a new kind of logical term, intensional set (a construct commonly used to denote the set of objects characterised by a given formula), and to extend QELF semantics for this new type of expression. In our extended approach, intensional sets can be arbitrarily used as predicate or function arguments or even nested inside other intensional sets, just as regular first-order logical terms. As a result, aggregates can be naturally formed by the application of some evaluable function (count, sum, maximum, etc) to a set of objects expressed as an intensional set. This approach has several advantages. First, while other semantics for aggregates depend on some syntactic transformation (either via a reduct or a formula translation), the QELF interpretation treats them as regular evaluable functions, providing a compositional semantics and avoiding any kind of syntactic restriction. Second, aggregates can be explicitly defined now within the logical language by the simple addition of formulas that fix their meaning in terms of multiple applications of some (commutative and associative) binary operation. For instance, we can use recursive rules to define sum in terms of integer addition. Last, but not least, we prove that the semantics we obtain for aggregates coincides with the one defined by Gelfond and Zhang for the Alog language, when we restrict to that syntactic fragment. (Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP), Comment: Paper presented at the 34nd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2018), Oxford, UK, July 14 to July 17, 2018 16 pages, LaTeX, 0 PDF figures (arXiv:)

In this paper, we introduce an alternative approach to Temporal Answer Set Programming that relies on a variation of Temporal Equilibrium Logic (TEL) for finite traces. This approach allows us to even out the expressiveness of TEL over infinite traces with the computational capacity of (incremental) Answer Set Programming (ASP). Also, we argue that finite traces are more natural when reasoning about action and change. As a result, our approach is readily implementable via multi-shot ASP systems and benefits from an extension of ASP's full-fledged input language with temporal operators. This includes future as well as past operators whose combination offers a rich temporal modeling language. For computation, we identify the class of temporal logic programs and prove that it constitutes a normal form for our approach. Finally, we outline two implementations, a generic one and an extension of clingo., Comment: Paper presented at the 34nd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2018), Oxford, UK, July 14 to July 17, 2018 15 pages, LaTeX, 0 PDF figures (arXiv:YYMM.NNNNN)

In this note we consider the problem of introducing variables in temporal logic programs under the formalism of "Temporal Equilibrium Logic" (TEL), an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) for dealing with linear-time modal operators. To this aim, we provide a definition of a first-order version of TEL that shares the syntax of first-order Linear-time Temporal Logic (LTL) but has a different semantics, selecting some LTL models we call "temporal stable models". Then, we consider a subclass of theories (called "splittable temporal logic programs") that are close to usual logic programs but allowing a restricted use of temporal operators. In this setting, we provide a syntactic definition of "safe variables" that suffices to show the property of "domain independence" -- that is, addition of arbitrary elements in the universe does not vary the set of temporal stable models. Finally, we present a method for computing the derivable facts by constructing a non-temporal logic program with variables that is fed to a standard ASP grounder. The information provided by the grounder is then used to generate a subset of ground temporal rules which is equivalent to (and generally smaller than) the full program instantiation., Comment: Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

In this paper we present an extension of Peirce's existential graphs to provide a diagrammatic representation of expressions in Quantified Equilibrium Logic (QEL). Using this formalisation, logical connectives are replaced by encircled regions (circles and squares) and quantified variables are represented as "identity" lines. Although the expressive power is equivalent to that of QEL, the new representation can be useful for illustrative or educational purposes., Comment: Paper presented at the 9th Workshop on Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms (ASPOCP 2016), New York City, USA, 16 October 2016

In this paper, we study an extension of the stable model semantics for disjunctive logic programs where each true atom in a model is associated with an algebraic expression (in terms of rule labels) that represents its justifications. As in our previous work for non-disjunctive programs, these justifications are obtained in a purely semantic way, by algebraic operations (product, addition and application) on a lattice of causal values. Our new definition extends the concept of causal stable model to disjunctive logic programs and satisfies that each (standard) stable model corresponds to a disjoint class of causal stable models sharing the same truth assignments, but possibly varying the obtained explanations. We provide a pair of illustrative examples showing the behaviour of the new semantics and discuss the need of introducing a new type of rule, which we call causal-choice. This type of rule intuitively captures the idea of "$A$ may cause $B$" and, when causal information is disregarded, amounts to a usual choice rule under the standard stable model semantics. (Under consideration for publication in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming), Comment: Paper presented at the 32nd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2016), New York City, USA, 16-21 October 2016, 15 pages, LaTeX

To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). In this paper we propose an extension of logic programming (LP) where each default literal derived from the well-founded model is associated to a justification represented as an algebraic expression. This expression contains both causal explanations (in the form of proof graphs built with rule labels) and terms under the scope of negation that stand for conditions that enable or disable the application of causal rules. Using some examples, we discuss how these new conditions, we respectively call "enablers" and "inhibitors", are intimately related to default negation and have an essentially different nature from regular cause-effect relations. The most important result is a formal comparison to the recent algebraic approaches for justifications in LP: "Why-not Provenance" (WnP) and "Causal Graphs" (CG). We show that the current approach extends both WnP and CG justifications under the Well-Founded Semantics and, as a byproduct, we also establish a formal relation between these two approaches.

In this paper we provide an alternative semantics for Equilibrium Logic and its monotonic basis, the logic of Here-and-There (also known as G\"odel's G3 logic) that relies on the idea of "denotation" of a formula, that is, a function that collects the set of models of that formula. Using the three-valued logic G3 as a starting point and an ordering relation (for which equilibrium/stable models are minimal elements) we provide several elementary operations for sets of interpretations. By analysing structural properties of the denotation of formulas, we show some expressiveness results for G3 such as, for instance, that conjunction is not expressible in terms of the other connectives. Moreover, the denotational semantics allows us to capture the set of equilibrium models of a formula with a simple and compact set expression. We also use this semantics to provide several formal definitions for entailment relations that are usual in the literature, and further introduce a new one called "strong entailment". We say that $\alpha$ strongly entails $\beta$ when the equilibrium models of $\alpha \wedge \gamma$ are also equilibrium models of $\beta \wedge \gamma$ for any context $\gamma$. We also provide a characterisation of strong entailment in terms of the denotational semantics, and give an example of a sufficient condition that can be applied in some cases.