On Equivalence of Infinitary Formulas under the Stable Model Semantics

Propositional formulas that are equivalent in intuitionistic logic, or in its extension known as the logic of here-and-there, have the same stable models. We extend this theorem to propositional formulas with infinitely long conjunctions and disjunctions and show how to apply this generalization to proving properties of aggregates in answer set programming. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

On the Semantics of Gringo

Input languages of answer set solvers are based on the mathematically simple concept of a stable model. But many useful constructs available in these languages, including local variables, conditional literals, and aggregates, cannot be easily explained in terms of stable models in the sense of the original definition of this concept and its straightforward generalizations. Manuals written by designers of answer set solvers usually explain such constructs using examples and informal comments that appeal to the user's intuition, without references to any precise semantics. We propose to approach the problem of defining the semantics of gringo programs by translating them into the language of infinitary propositional formulas. This semantics allows us to study equivalent transformations of gringo programs using natural deduction in infinitary propositional logic.Comment: Proceedings of Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms (ASPOCP 2013), 6th International Workshop, August 25, 2013, Istanbul, Turke

A Tarskian Informal Semantics for Answer Set Programming

In their seminal papers on stable model semantics, Gelfond and Lifschitz introduced ASP by casting programs as epistemic theories, in which rules represent statements about the knowledge of a rational agent. To the best of our knowledge, theirs is still the only published systematic account of the intuitive meaning of rules and programs under the stable semantics. In current ASP practice, however, we find numerous applications in which rational agents no longer seem to play any role. Therefore, we propose here an alternative explanation of the intuitive meaning of ASP programs, in which they are not viewed as statements about an agent\u27s beliefs, but as objective statements about the world. We argue that this view is more natural for a large part of current ASP practice, in particular the so-called Generate-Define-Test programs

What is answer set programming to propositional satisfiability

Propositional satisfiability (or satisfiability) and answer set programming are two closely related subareas of Artificial Intelligence that are used to model and solve difficult combinatorial search problems. Satisfiability solvers and answer set solvers are the software systems that find satisfying interpretations and answer sets for given propositional formulas and logic programs, respectively. These systems are closely related in their common design patterns. In satisfiability, a propositional formula is used to encode problem specifications in a way that its satisfying interpretations correspond to the solutions of the problem. To find solutions to a problem it is then sufficient to use a satisfiability solver on a corresponding formula. Niemelä, Marek, and Truszczyński coined answer set programming paradigm in 1999: in this paradigm a logic program encodes problem specifications in a way that the answer sets of a logic program represent the solutions of the problem. As a result, to find solutions to a problem it is sufficient to use an answer set solver on a corresponding program. These parallels that we just draw between paradigms naturally bring up a question: what is a fundamental difference between the two? This paper takes a close look at this question