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

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

Cmodels for Tight Disjunctive Logic Programs

Disjunctive logic programming under the stable model semantics [GL91] is a new answer set programming (ASP) methodology for solving combinatorial search problems. It is a form of declarative programming related to logic programming languages, such as Prolog, where the solutions to a problem are represented by answer sets, and not by answer substitutions produced in response to a query as in convential logic programming. Instead of Prolog systems, this programming method uses answer set solvers, such as smodels1, smodelscc2, cmodels3, dlv4, and gnt1. These systems made it possible for ASP to be successfully applied in such areas as planning, bounded model checking, and space shuttle control. dlv and gnt are more general as they work with the class of disjunctive logic programs, while other systems cover nondisjunctive programs. System cmodels uses SAT solvers as search engines, which allows it to take advantage of rapid progress in the area of SAT. cmodels proved to be an efficient system in providing the solution to the wire-routing problem [EW04], and to the problem of reconstructing probable phylogenies in the area of historical linguistics [BEMR05]. In this work we extend cmodels [GLM04] to tight disjunctive programs. Complexity of finding a solution for such programs is NP, as in the case of nondisjunctive programs. Extending the syntax of the input language of cmodels to tight disjunctive programs permits the knowledge engineer to be more flexible with the encoding of the problems in the NP complexity class. Experimental analyses demonstrate that the approach is computationally promising and may advance applications of disjunctive logic programming

Strong Equivalence and Program's Structure in Arguing Essential Equivalence between Logic Programs

Answer set programming is a prominent declarative programming paradigm used in formulating combinatorial search problems and implementing distinct knowledge representation formalisms. It is common that several related and yet substantially different answer set programs exist for a given problem. Sometimes these encodings may display significantly different performance. Uncovering {\em precise formal} links between these programs is often important and yet far from trivial. This paper claims the correctness of a number of interesting program rewritings

CMODELS – SAT-based Disjunctive Answer Set Solver

Disjunctive logic programming under the stable model semantics [GL91] is a new methodology called answer set programming (ASP) for solving combinatorial search problems. This programming method uses answer set solvers, such as DLV [Lea05], GNT [Jea05], SMODELS [SS05], ASSAT [LZ02], CMODELS [Lie05a]. Systems DLV and GNT are more general as they work with the class of disjunctive logic programs, while other systems cover only normal programs. DLV is uniquely designed to find the answer sets for disjunctive logic programs. On the other hand, GNT first generates possible stable model candidates and then tests the candidate on the minimality using system SMODELS as an inference engine for both tasks. Systems CMODELS and ASSAT use SAT solvers as search engines. They are based on the relationship between the completion semantics [Cla78], loop formulas [LZ02] and answer set semantics for logic programs. Here we present the implementation of a SAT-based algorithm for finding answer sets for disjunctive logic programs within CMODELS. The work is based on the definition of completion for disjunctive programs [LL03] and the generalisation of loop formulas [LZ02] to the case of disjunctive programs [LL03].We propose the necessary modifications to the SAT based ASSAT algorithm [LZ02] as well as to the generate and test algorithmfrom [GLM04] in order to adapt them to the case of disjunctive programs. We implement the algorithms in CMODELS and demonstrate the experimental results

Abstract Answer Set Solvers with Backjumping and Learning

Nieuwenhuis et al. (2006. Solving SAT and SAT modulo theories: From an abstract Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland procedure to DPLL(T). Journal of the ACM 53(6), 937977 showed how to describe enhancements of the Davis–Putnam–Logemann–Loveland algorithm using transition systems, instead of pseudocode. We design a similar framework for several algorithms that generate answer sets for logic programs: SMODELS, SMODELScc, asp-sat with Learning (CMODELS), and a newly designed and implemented algorithm sup. This approach to describe answer set solvers makes it easier to prove their correctness, to compare them, and to design new systems

Relating Constraint Answer Set Programming Languages and Algorithms

Recently a logic programming language AC was proposed by Mellarkod et al. (2008) to integrate answer set programming and constraint logic programming. Soon after that, a CLINGCON language integrating answer set programming and finite domain constraints, as well as an EZCSP language integrating answer set programming and constraint logic programming were introduced. The development of these languages and systems constitutes the appearance of a new AI subarea called constraint answer set programming. All these languages have something in common. In particular, they aim at developing new efficient inference algorithms that combine traditional answer set programming procedures and other methods in constraint programming. Yet, the exact relation between the constraint answer set programming languages and the underlying systems is not well understood. In this paper we address this issue by formally stating the precise relation between several constraint answer set programming languages - AC, CLINGCON, EZCSP - as well as the underlying systems

Abstract Answer Set Solvers

Nieuwenhuis, Oliveras, and Tinelli showed how to describe enhancements of the Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland algorithm using transition systems, instead of pseudocode. We design a similar framework for three algorithms that generate answer sets for logic programs: SMODELS, ASP-SAT with Backtracking, and a newly designed and implemented algorithm SUP. This approach to describing answer set solvers makes it easier to prove their correctness, to compare them, and to design new systems

Disjunctive Answer Set Solvers via Templates

Answer set programming is a declarative programming paradigm oriented towards difficult combinatorial search problems. A fundamental task in answer set programming is to compute stable models, i.e., solutions of logic programs. Answer set solvers are the programs that perform this task. The problem of deciding whether a disjunctive program has a stable model is $\Sigma^P_2$-complete. The high complexity of reasoning within disjunctive logic programming is responsible for few solvers capable of dealing with such programs, namely DLV, GnT, Cmodels, CLASP and WASP. In this paper we show that transition systems introduced by Nieuwenhuis, Oliveras, and Tinelli to model and analyze satisfiability solvers can be adapted for disjunctive answer set solvers. Transition systems give a unifying perspective and bring clarity in the description and comparison of solvers. They can be effectively used for analyzing, comparing and proving correctness of search algorithms as well as inspiring new ideas in the design of disjunctive answer set solvers. In this light, we introduce a general template, which accounts for major techniques implemented in disjunctive solvers. We then illustrate how this general template captures solvers DLV, GnT and Cmodels. We also show how this framework provides a convenient tool for designing new solving algorithms by means of combinations of techniques employed in different solvers.Comment: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP