On Relation between Constraint Answer Set Programming and Satisfiability Modulo Theories

Constraint answer set programming is a promising research direction that integrates answer set programming with constraint processing. It is often informally related to the field of satisfiability modulo theories. Yet, the exact formal link is obscured as the terminology and concepts used in these two research areas differ. In this paper, we connect these two research areas by uncovering the precise formal relation between them. We believe that this work will booster the cross-fertilization of the theoretical foundations and the existing solving methods in both areas. As a step in this direction we provide a translation from constraint answer set programs with integer linear constraints to satisfiability modulo linear integer arithmetic that paves the way to utilizing modern satisfiability modulo theories solvers for computing answer sets of constraint answer set programs.Comment: Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP

The EZSMT Solver: Constraint Answer Set Solving meets SMT

Constraint answer set programming is a promising research direction that integrates answer set programming with constraint processing. It is often informally related to the field of Satisfiability Modulo Theories. Yet, the exact formal link is obscured as the terminology and concepts used in these two research areas differ. In this thesis, by connecting these two areas, we begin the cross-fertilization of not only of the theoretical foundations of both areas but also of the existing solving technologies. We present the system EZSMT, one of the first solvers of this nature, which is able to take a large class of constraint answer set programs and rewrite them into Satisfiability Modulo Theories programs so that Satisfiability Modulo Theories technology can be used to process these programs

Inductive logic programming as satisfiability modulo theories

At the intersection of machine learning, program synthesis and automated reasoning lies the field of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP). The aim of ILP is to automatically learn relational programs from input/output examples, typically through logic-based techniques. Inspired by Karl Popper’s falsification perspective on science, this dissertation sets out a new approach to ILP: Learning From Failures (LFF). In science, starting from a huge set of a priori viable hypotheses, we select a hypothesis to test. This hypothesis typically gets falsified due to failing in some specific way. By examining the failure we learn that an entire space of related hypotheses is now ruled out. Having thus reduced our set of viable hypotheses, we subsequently select from just those that remain. LFF applies this methodology to program induction, codifying it as a three-stage loop. The generate stage maintains a formula whose satisfying assignments correspond to the set of viable hypotheses. The test stage takes a satisfying assignment, interprets it as a logic program and tests it against training examples – imperfect fit is considered a failure. The constrain stage turns a failure into constraints to add to the generate stage’s formula, thereby eliminating a class of hypotheses which will fail for the same reason. The thesis of this dissertation is three-fold. The first claim is that LFF frames the ILP problem as one of Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT). With the search for viable hypotheses handed-off to a SAT-solver, the test stage can be regarded as a theory solver collaborating with the SAT-solver, effectively making ILP’s notion of background knowledge into a (Horn) background theory. The second claim is that LFF’s three-stage loop is an effective basis for falsification-based program induction. Chapter 4 develops the above correspondence into a feature-rich and flexible three-stage ILP system. Experimental evidence is provided for this system going beyond the state-of-the-art in ILP, e.g., by supporting large hypothesis spaces and large domains. The third claim is that the LFF-as-SMT-perspective helps apply satisfiability solving techniques to ILP, in particular to reduce hypothesis space exploration. In Chapter 5, we show that SMT-based techniques for explaining conflicts have a natural analog in terms of explaining which parts of a hypothesis are responsible for its failure. In Chapter 6, we incorporate other theory solvers alongside the test stage to reason about the (satisfiability of) over-approximating properties of hypotheses. We show that both of these techniques can significantly reduce the number of iterations of the three-stage loop

SMT-Based Constraint Answer Set Solver EZSMT (System Description)

Constraint answer set programming is a promising research direction that integrates answer set programming with constraint processing. Recently, the formal link between this research area and satisfiability modulo theories (or SMT) was established. This link allows the cross-fertilization between traditionally different solving technologies. The paper presents the system ezsmt, one of the first SMT-based solvers for constraint answer set programming. It also presents the comparative analysis of the performance of ezsmt in relation to its peers including solvers EZCSP, CLINGCON, and MINGO. Experimental results demonstrate that SMT is a viable technology for constraint answer set programming

On Deciding Local Theory Extensions via E-matching

Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solvers incorporate decision procedures for theories of data types that commonly occur in software. This makes them important tools for automating verification problems. A limitation frequently encountered is that verification problems are often not fully expressible in the theories supported natively by the solvers. Many solvers allow the specification of application-specific theories as quantified axioms, but their handling is incomplete outside of narrow special cases. In this work, we show how SMT solvers can be used to obtain complete decision procedures for local theory extensions, an important class of theories that are decidable using finite instantiation of axioms. We present an algorithm that uses E-matching to generate instances incrementally during the search, significantly reducing the number of generated instances compared to eager instantiation strategies. We have used two SMT solvers to implement this algorithm and conducted an extensive experimental evaluation on benchmarks derived from verification conditions for heap-manipulating programs. We believe that our results are of interest to both the users of SMT solvers as well as their developers

Optimal Planning Modulo Theories

Planning for real-world applications requires algorithms and tools with the ability to handle the complexity such scenarios entail. However, meeting the needs of such applications poses substantial challenges, both representational and algorithmic. On the one hand, expressive languages are needed to build faithful models. On the other hand, efficient solving techniques that can support these languages need to be devised. A response to this challenge is underway, and the past few years witnessed a community effort towards more expressive languages, including decidable fragments of first-order theories. In this work we focus on planning with arithmetic theories and propose Optimal Planning Modulo Theories, a framework that attempts to provide efficient means of dealing with such problems. Leveraging generic Optimization Modulo Theories (OMT) solvers, we first present domain-specific encodings for optimal planning in complex logistic domains. We then present a more general, domain- independent formulation that allows to extend OMT planning to a broader class of well-studied numeric problems in planning. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time OMT procedures are employed in domain-independent planning

Concept logics

Concept languages (as used in BACK, KL-ONE, KRYPTON, LOOM) are employed as knowledge representation formalisms in Artificial Intelligence. Their main purpose is to represent the generic concepts and the taxonomical hierarchies of the domain to be modeled. This paper addresses the combination of the fast taxonomical reasoning algorithms (e.g. subsumption, the classifier etc.) that come with these languages and reasoning in first order predicate logic. The interface between these two different modes of reasoning is accomplished by a new rule of inference, called constrained resolution. Correctness, completeness as well as the decidability of the constraints (in a restricted constraint language) are shown