Using ASP with recent extensions for causal explanations

We examine the practicality for a user of using Answer Set Programming (ASP) for representing logical formalisms. We choose as an example a formalism aiming at capturing causal explanations from causal information. We provide an implementation, showing the naturalness and relative efficiency of this translation job. We are interested in the ease for writing an ASP program, in accordance with the claimed ``declarative'' aspect of ASP. Limitations of the earlier systems (poor data structure and difficulty in reusing pieces of programs) made that in practice, the ``declarative aspect'' was more theoretical than practical. We show how recent improvements in working ASP systems facilitate a lot the translation, even if a few improvements could still be useful

QuantUM: Quantitative Safety Analysis of UML Models

When developing a safety-critical system it is essential to obtain an assessment of different design alternatives. In particular, an early safety assessment of the architectural design of a system is desirable. In spite of the plethora of available formal quantitative analysis methods it is still difficult for software and system architects to integrate these techniques into their every day work. This is mainly due to the lack of methods that can be directly applied to architecture level models, for instance given as UML diagrams. Also, it is necessary that the description methods used do not require a profound knowledge of formal methods. Our approach bridges this gap and improves the integration of quantitative safety analysis methods into the development process. All inputs of the analysis are specified at the level of a UML model. This model is then automatically translated into the analysis model, and the results of the analysis are consequently represented on the level of the UML model. Thus the analysis model and the formal methods used during the analysis are hidden from the user. We illustrate the usefulness of our approach using an industrial strength case study.Comment: In Proceedings QAPL 2011, arXiv:1107.074

Metatheory of actions: beyond consistency

Consistency check has been the only criterion for theory evaluation in logic-based approaches to reasoning about actions. This work goes beyond that and contributes to the metatheory of actions by investigating what other properties a good domain description in reasoning about actions should have. We state some metatheoretical postulates concerning this sore spot. When all postulates are satisfied together we have a modular action theory. Besides being easier to understand and more elaboration tolerant in McCarthy's sense, modular theories have interesting properties. We point out the problems that arise when the postulates about modularity are violated and propose algorithmic checks that can help the designer of an action theory to overcome them

The Complexity of Planning Revisited - A Parameterized Analysis

The early classifications of the computational complexity of planning under various restrictions in STRIPS (Bylander) and SAS+ (Baeckstroem and Nebel) have influenced following research in planning in many ways. We go back and reanalyse their subclasses, but this time using the more modern tool of parameterized complexity analysis. This provides new results that together with the old results give a more detailed picture of the complexity landscape. We demonstrate separation results not possible with standard complexity theory, which contributes to explaining why certain cases of planning have seemed simpler in practice than theory has predicted. In particular, we show that certain restrictions of practical interest are tractable in the parameterized sense of the term, and that a simple heuristic is sufficient to make a well-known partial-order planner exploit this fact.Comment: (author's self-archived copy