Declarative Problem Solving Using Answer Set Semantics

2006 ◽  
pp. 459-460
Author(s):  
Martin Brain
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Answer Set

scholarly journals Better Paracoherent Answer Sets with Less Resources

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 757-772 ◽  
Author(s):  
GIOVANNI AMENDOLA ◽  
CARMINE DODARO ◽  
FRANCESCO RICCA
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Equilibrium Model ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Answer Set Programming ◽  
Evaluation Technique ◽  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Computational Resources ◽  
Answer Sets ◽  
Modeling Feature ◽  
Answer Set

AbstractAnswer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-established formalism for logic programming. Problem solving in ASP requires to write an ASP program whose answers sets correspond to solutions. Albeit the non-existence of answer sets for some ASP programs can be considered as a modeling feature, it turns out to be a weakness in many other cases, and especially for query answering. Paracoherent answer set semantics extend the classical semantics of ASP to draw meaningful conclusions also from incoherent programs, with the result of increasing the range of applications of ASP. State of the art implementations of paracoherent ASP adopt the semi-equilibrium semantics, but cannot be lifted straightforwardly to compute efficiently the (better) split semi-equilibrium semantics that discards undesirable semi-equilibrium models. In this paper an efficient evaluation technique for computing a split semi-equilibrium model is presented. An experiment on hard benchmarks shows that better paracoherent answer sets can be computed consuming less computational resources than existing methods.

scholarly journals Grounding and Solving in Answer Set Programming

AI Magazine ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 25-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Kaufmann ◽  
Nicola Leone ◽  
Simona Perri ◽  
Torsten Schaub
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Propositional Logic ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Answer Set Programming ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Answer Sets ◽  
Answer Set

Answer set programming is a declarative problem solving paradigm that rests upon a workflow involving modeling, grounding, and solving. While the former is described by Gebser and Schaub (2016), we focus here on key issues in grounding, or how to systematically replace object variables by ground terms in a effective way, and solving, or how to compute the answer sets of a propositional logic program obtained by grounding.

scholarly journals Negation as a Resource: a Novel View on Answer Set Semantics*

2015 ◽  
Vol 140 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 279-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefania Costantini ◽  
Andrea Formisano
Keyword(s):  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Answer Set

scholarly journals A decidable subclass of finitary programs

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (4-6) ◽  
pp. 481-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
SABRINA BASELICE ◽  
PIERO A. BONATTI
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Answer Set Programming ◽  
Stable Model ◽  
Unique Combination ◽  
Logic Programs ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Full Support ◽  
Odd Cycles ◽  
Answer Set

AbstractAnswer set programming—the most popular problem solving paradigm based on logic programs—has been recently extended to support uninterpreted function symbols (Syrjänen 2001, Bonatti 2004; Simkus and Eiter 2007; Gebseret al. 2007; Baseliceet al. 2009; Calimeriet al. 2008). All of these approaches have some limitation. In this paper we propose a class of programs called FP2 that enjoys a different trade-off between expressiveness and complexity. FP2 is inspired by the extension of finitary normal programs with local variables introduced in (Bonatti 2004, Section 5). FP2 programs enjoy the following unique combination of properties: (i) the ability of expressing predicates with infinite extensions; (ii) full support for predicates with arbitrary arity; (iii) decidability of FP2 membership checking; (iv) decidability of skeptical and credulous stable model reasoning for call-safe queries. Odd cycles are supported by composing FP2 programs with argument restricted programs.

scholarly journals Paracoherent Answer Set Semantics meets Argumentation Frameworks

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
GIOVANNI AMENDOLA ◽  
FRANCESCO RICCA
Keyword(s):  
Logic Programming ◽  
Logic Program ◽  
Great Success ◽  
Argumentation Framework ◽  
Computational Costs ◽  
Abstract Argumentation ◽  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Answer Sets ◽  
Answer Set

AbstractIn the last years, abstract argumentation has met with great success in AI, since it has served to capture several non-monotonic logics for AI. Relations between argumentation framework (AF) semantics and logic programming ones are investigating more and more. In particular, great attention has been given to the well-known stable extensions of an AF, that are closely related to the answer sets of a logic program. However, if a framework admits a small incoherent part, no stable extension can be provided. To overcome this shortcoming, two semantics generalizing stable extensions have been studied, namely semi-stable and stage. In this paper, we show that another perspective is possible on incoherent AFs, called paracoherent extensions, as they have a counterpart in paracoherent answer set semantics. We compare this perspective with semi-stable and stage semantics, by showing that computational costs remain unchanged, and moreover an interesting symmetric behaviour is maintained.

scholarly journals ASP (): Answer Set Programming with Algebraic Constraints

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 895-910
Author(s):  
THOMAS EITER ◽  
RAFAEL KIESEL
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Answer Set Programming ◽  
Qualitative Information ◽  
Algebraic Computation ◽  
Generic Framework ◽  
Algebraic Constraints ◽  
Effective Problem ◽  
Answer Set

AbstractWeighted Logic is a powerful tool for the specification of calculations over semirings that depend on qualitative information. Using a novel combination of Weighted Logic and Here-and-There (HT) Logic, in which this dependence is based on intuitionistic grounds, we introduce Answer Set Programming with Algebraic Constraints (ASP($\mathcal A \mathcal C$)), where rules may contain constraints that compare semiring values to weighted formula evaluations. Such constraints provide streamlined access to a manifold of constructs available in ASP, like aggregates, choice constraints, and arithmetic operators. They extend some of them and provide a generic framework for defining programs with algebraic computation, which can be fruitfully used e.g. for provenance semantics of datalog programs. While undecidable in general, expressive fragments of ASP($\mathcal A \mathcal C$) can be exploited for effective problem solving in a rich framework.

scholarly journals Characterizing and extending answer set semantics using possibility theory

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
KIM BAUTERS ◽  
STEVEN SCHOCKAERT ◽  
MARTINE DE COCK ◽  
DIRK VERMEIR
Keyword(s):  
Possibility Theory ◽  
Combinatorial Problems ◽  
The Body ◽  
Uncertain Information ◽  
Possibilistic Logic ◽  
Possibility Distributions ◽  
Answer Set Semantics ◽  
Answer Sets ◽  
Answer Set

AbstractAnswer Set Programming (ASP) is a popular framework for modelling combinatorial problems. However, ASP cannot be used easily for reasoning about uncertain information. Possibilistic ASP (PASP) is an extension of ASP that combines possibilistic logic and ASP. In PASP a weight is associated with each rule, whereas this weight is interpreted as the certainty with which the conclusion can be established when the body is known to hold. As such, it allows us to model and reason about uncertain information in an intuitive way. In this paper we present new semantics for PASP in which rules are interpreted as constraints on possibility distributions. Special models of these constraints are then identified as possibilistic answer sets. In addition, since ASP is a special case of PASP in which all the rules are entirely certain, we obtain a new characterization of ASP in terms of constraints on possibility distributions. This allows us to uncover a new form of disjunction, called weak disjunction, that has not been previously considered in the literature. In addition to introducing and motivating the semantics of weak disjunction, we also pinpoint its computational complexity. In particular, while the complexity of most reasoning tasks coincides with standard disjunctive ASP, we find that brave reasoning for programs with weak disjunctions is easier.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document