110 research outputs found

    Tight Logic Programs

    Full text link
    This note is about the relationship between two theories of negation as failure -- one based on program completion, the other based on stable models, or answer sets. Francois Fages showed that if a logic program satisfies a certain syntactic condition, which is now called ``tightness,'' then its stable models can be characterized as the models of its completion. We extend the definition of tightness and Fages' theorem to programs with nested expressions in the bodies of rules, and study tight logic programs containing the definition of the transitive closure of a predicate.Comment: To appear in Special Issue of the Theory and Practice of Logic Programming Journal on Answer Set Programming, 200

    Relating Weight Constraint and Aggregate Programs: Semantics and Representation

    Full text link
    Weight constraint and aggregate programs are among the most widely used logic programs with constraints. In this paper, we relate the semantics of these two classes of programs, namely the stable model semantics for weight constraint programs and the answer set semantics based on conditional satisfaction for aggregate programs. Both classes of programs are instances of logic programs with constraints, and in particular, the answer set semantics for aggregate programs can be applied to weight constraint programs. We show that the two semantics are closely related. First, we show that for a broad class of weight constraint programs, called strongly satisfiable programs, the two semantics coincide. When they disagree, a stable model admitted by the stable model semantics may be circularly justified. We show that the gap between the two semantics can be closed by transforming a weight constraint program to a strongly satisfiable one, so that no circular models may be generated under the current implementation of the stable model semantics. We further demonstrate the close relationship between the two semantics by formulating a transformation from weight constraint programs to logic programs with nested expressions which preserves the answer set semantics. Our study on the semantics leads to an investigation of a methodological issue, namely the possibility of compact representation of aggregate programs by weight constraint programs. We show that almost all standard aggregates can be encoded by weight constraints compactly. This makes it possible to compute the answer sets of aggregate programs using the ASP solvers for weight constraint programs. This approach is compared experimentally with the ones where aggregates are handled more explicitly, which show that the weight constraint encoding of aggregates enables a competitive approach to answer set computation for aggregate programs.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), 2011. 30 page

    (Co-)Inductive semantics for Constraint Handling Rules

    Full text link
    In this paper, we address the problem of defining a fixpoint semantics for Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) that captures the behavior of both simplification and propagation rules in a sound and complete way with respect to their declarative semantics. Firstly, we show that the logical reading of states with respect to a set of simplification rules can be characterized by a least fixpoint over the transition system generated by the abstract operational semantics of CHR. Similarly, we demonstrate that the logical reading of states with respect to a set of propagation rules can be characterized by a greatest fixpoint. Then, in order to take advantage of both types of rules without losing fixpoint characterization, we present an operational semantics with persistent. We finally establish that this semantics can be characterized by two nested fixpoints, and we show the resulting language is an elegant framework to program using coinductive reasoning.Comment: 17 page

    On Relation between Constraint Answer Set Programming and Satisfiability Modulo Theories

    Full text link
    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

    Experiments with SAT-based Answer Set Programming

    Get PDF
    Answer Set Programming (ASP) emerged in the late 1990s as a new logic programming paradigm which has been successfully applied in various application domains. Propositional satisfiability (SAT) is one of the most studied problems in Computer Science. ASP and SAT are closely related: Recent works have studied their relation, and efficient SAT-based ASP solvers (like assat and Cmodels) exist. In this paper we report about (i) the extension of the basic procedures in Cmodels in order to incorporate the most popular SAT reasoning strategies, and (ii) an extensive comparative analysis involving also other state-of-the-art answer set solvers. The experimental analysis points out, besides the fact that Cmodels is highly competitive, that the reasoning strategies that work best on “small but hard” problems are ineffective on “big but easy” problems and vice-versa

    SMT-Based Answer Set Solver CMODELS(DIFF) (System Description)

    Get PDF
    Many answer set solvers utilize Satisfiability solvers for search. Satisfiability Modulo Theory solvers extend Satisfiability solvers. This paper presents the CMODELS(DIFF) system that uses Satisfiability Modulo Theory solvers to find answer sets of a logic program. Its theoretical foundation is based on Niemala\u27s characterization of answer sets of a logic program via so called level rankings. The comparative experimental analysis demonstrates that CMODELS(DIFF) is a viable answer set solver

    Set Unification

    Full text link
    The unification problem in algebras capable of describing sets has been tackled, directly or indirectly, by many researchers and it finds important applications in various research areas--e.g., deductive databases, theorem proving, static analysis, rapid software prototyping. The various solutions proposed are spread across a large literature. In this paper we provide a uniform presentation of unification of sets, formalizing it at the level of set theory. We address the problem of deciding existence of solutions at an abstract level. This provides also the ability to classify different types of set unification problems. Unification algorithms are uniformly proposed to solve the unification problem in each of such classes. The algorithms presented are partly drawn from the literature--and properly revisited and analyzed--and partly novel proposals. In particular, we present a new goal-driven algorithm for general ACI1 unification and a new simpler algorithm for general (Ab)(Cl) unification.Comment: 58 pages, 9 figures, 1 table. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP

    Computing Answer Sets of a Logic Program via-enumeration of SAT certificates

    Get PDF
    Answer set programming is a new programming paradigm proposed based on the answer set semantics of Prolog. It is well known that an answer set for a logic program is also a model of the program\u27s completion. The converse is true when the logic program is tight . Lin and Zhao showed that for non-tight programs the models of completion which do not correspond to answer sets can be eliminated by adding to the completion what they called loop formulas . Nevertheless, their solver ASSAT 1 has some disadvantages: it can work only with basic rules, and it can compute only one answer set. Answer set solver CMODELS-1 is a system that computes answer sets for logic programs that are tight or can be transformed into tight programs, and does not suffer from these limitations. We are going to present a new system CMODELS-2 , that is able to fix ASSAT\u27s disadvantages. Another attractive feature of the new system is that it organizes the search process more efficiently then ASSAT, because it does not explore the same part of the search tree more than once. In the rest of the paper we will omit number 2 in the name of the system
    • …
    corecore