Extend Answer Set Research Articles

CEGAR-Based Approach for Solving Combinatorial Optimization Modulo Quantified Linear Arithmetics Problems

Bioinformatics has always been a prolific domain for generating complex satisfiability and optimization problems. For instance, the synthesis of multi-scale models of biological networks has recently been associated with the resolution of optimization problems mixing Boolean logic and universally quantified linear constraints (OPT+qLP), which can be benchmarked on real-world models. In this paper, we introduce a Counter-Example-Guided Abstraction Refinement (CEGAR) to solve such problems efficiently. Our CEGAR exploits monotone properties inherent to linear optimization in order to generalize counter-examples of Boolean relaxations. We implemented our approach by extending Answer Set Programming (ASP) solver Clingo with a quantified linear constraints propagator. Our prototype enables exploiting independence of sub-formulas to further exploit the generalization of counter-examples. We evaluate the impact of refinement and partitioning on two sets of OPT+qLP problems inspired by system biology. Additionally, we conducted a comparison with the state-of-the-art ASP solver Clingo[lpx] that handles non-quantified linear constraints, showing the advantage of our CEGAR approach for solving large problems.

Epistemic Logic Programs: A Study of Some Properties

Abstract Epistemic logic programs (ELPs), extend answer set programming (ASP) with epistemic operators. The semantics of such programs is provided in terms of world views, which are sets of belief sets, that is, syntactically, sets of sets of atoms. Different semantic approaches propose different characterizations of world views. Recent work has introduced semantic properties that should be met by any semantics for ELPs, like the Epistemic Splitting Property, that, if satisfied, allows to modularly compute world views in a bottom-up fashion, analogously to “traditional” ASP. We analyze the possibility of changing the perspective, shifting from a bottom-up to a top-down approach to splitting. We propose a basic top-down approach, which we prove to be equivalent to the bottom-up one. We then propose an extended approach, where our new definition: (i) is provably applicable to many of the existing semantics; (ii) operates similarly to “traditional” ASP; (iii) provably coincides under any semantics with the bottom-up notion of splitting at least on the class of Epistemically Stratified Programs (which are, intuitively, those where the use of epistemic operators is stratified); (iv) better adheres to common ASP programming methodology.

An Efficient Solver for ASP(Q)

AbstractAnswer Set Programming with Quantifiers ASP(Q) extends Answer Set Programming (ASP) to allow for declarative and modular modeling of problems from the entire polynomial hierarchy. The first implementation of ASP(Q), called QASP, was based on a translation to Quantified Boolean Formulae (QBF) with the aim of exploiting the well-developed and mature QBF-solving technology. However, the implementation of the QBF encoding employed in qasp is very general and might produce formulas that are hard to evaluate for existing QBF solvers because of the large number of symbols and subclauses. In this paper, we present a new implementation that builds on the ideas of QASP and features both a more efficient encoding procedure and new optimized encodings of ASP(Q) programs in QBF. The new encodings produce smaller formulas (in terms of the number of quantifiers, variables, and clauses) and result in a more efficient evaluation process. An algorithm selection strategy automatically combines several QBF-solving back-ends to further increase performance. An experimental analysis, conducted on known benchmarks, shows that the new system outperforms QASP.

Comparing the Reasoning Capabilities of Equilibrium Theories and Answer Set Programs

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well established logical approach in artificial intelligence that is widely used for knowledge representation and problem solving. Equilibrium logic extends answer set semantics to more general classes of programs and theories. When intertheory relations are studied in ASP, or in the more general form of equilibrium logic, they are usually understood in the form of comparisons of the answer sets or equilibrium models of theories or programs. This is the case for strong and uniform equivalence and their relativised and projective versions. However, there are many potential areas of application of ASP for which query answering is relevant and a comparison of programs in terms of what can be inferred from them may be important. We formulate and study some natural equivalence and entailment concepts for programs and theories that are couched in terms of inference and query answering. We show that, for the most part, these new intertheory relations coincide with their model-theoretic counterparts. We also extend some previous results on projective entailment for theories and for the new connective called fork.

Extending Answer Set Programs with Neural Networks

The integration of low-level perception with high-level reasoning is one of the oldest problems in Artificial Intelligence. Recently, several proposals were made to implement the reasoning process in complex neural network architectures. While these works aim at extending neural networks with the capability of reasoning, a natural question that we consider is: can we extend answer set programs with neural networks to allow complex and high-level reasoning on neural network outputs? As a preliminary result, we propose NeurASP -- a simple extension of answer set programs by embracing neural networks where neural network outputs are treated as probability distributions over atomic facts in answer set programs. We show that NeurASP can not only improve the perception accuracy of a pre-trained neural network, but also help to train a neural network better by giving restrictions through logic rules. However, training with NeurASP would take much more time than pure neural network training due to the internal use of a symbolic reasoning engine. For future work, we plan to investigate the potential ways to solve the scalability issue of NeurASP. One potential way is to embed logic programs directly in neural networks. On this route, we plan to first design a SAT solver using neural networks, then extend such a solver to allow logic programs.

About Epistemic Negation and World Views in Epistemic Logic Programs

AbstractIn this paper we consider Epistemic Logic Programs, which extend Answer Set Programming (ASP) with “ epistemic operators” and “ epistemic negation”, and a recent approach to the semantics of such programs in terms ofWorld Views. We propose some observations on the existence and number of world views. We show how to exploit an extended ASP semantics in order to: (i) provide a characterization of world views, different from existing ones; (ii) query world views and query the whole set of world views.

On Uniform Equivalence of Epistemic Logic Programs

AbstractEpistemic Logic Programs (ELPs) extend Answer Set Programming (ASP) with epistemic negation and have received renewed interest in recent years. This led to the development of new research and efficient solving systems for ELPs. In practice, ELPs are often written in a modular way, where each module interacts with other modules by accepting sets of facts as input, and passing on sets of facts as output. An interesting question then presents itself: under which conditions can such a module be replaced by another one without changing the outcome, for any set of input facts? This problem is known as uniform equivalence, and has been studied extensively for ASP. For ELPs, however, such an investigation is, as of yet, missing. In this paper, we therefore propose a characterization of uniform equivalence that can be directly applied to the language of state-of-the-art ELP solvers. We also investigate the computational complexity of deciding uniform equivalence for two ELPs, and show that it is on the third level of the polynomial hierarchy.

LARS: A Logic-based framework for Analytic Reasoning over Streams

The increasing availability of streaming data has accelerated advances in information processing tools that no longer store data for static querying but push information to consumers as soon as it becomes available. Stream processing aims at providing languages and tools for data that changes at a high rate. To cope with the volume of data, query languages often extend existing approaches for static data by means of window operators that return snapshots of recent data. However, the semantics of these languages are often given only informally or operationally, which makes their analysis and comparison difficult. A formal means to express the declarative semantics of such systems seems to be missing. This lack of theory is of particular relevance for the emerging research in stream reasoning which shifts the focus from throughput to higher expressiveness. To fill this gap, we present LARS, a Logic-based framework for Analytic Reasoning over Streams. At its core, LARS formulas extend propositional logic with generic window operators and additional controls to handle temporal information. On top of this, LARS programs extend Answer Set Programming (ASP) with rich stream reasoning capabilities; the latter can be exploited to target AI applications in a streaming context, such as diagnosis, configuration or planning. Specifically, we study in this article the computational complexity of LARS formulas and programs, their relationship to Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) and the well-known Continuous Query Language (CQL). Furthermore, we discuss the modeling capabilities of LARS in notes on the SPARQL extensions C-SPARQL and CQELS, and on the interval-based approach of the complex event processing language ETALIS. We finally briefly touch available implementations, in particular, the recent prototype engines Laser and Ticker that aim for high throughput and high expressiveness, respectively. Notably, both engines specify their semantics in LARS, indicating the desired flexibility of the framework and its potential as stream reasoning language itself, which is further explored in other works.

LPMLN, Weak Constraints, and P-log

LPMLN is a recently introduced formalism that extends answer set programs by adopting the log-linear weight scheme of Markov Logic. This paper investigates the relationships between LPMLN and two other extensions of answer set programs: weak constraints to express a quantitative preference among answer sets, and P-log to incorporate probabilistic uncertainty. We present a translation of LPMLN into programs with weak constraints and a translation of P-log into LPMLN, which complement the existing translations in the opposite directions. The first translation allows us to compute the most probable stable models (i.e., MAP estimates) of LPMLN programs using standard ASP solvers. This result can be extended to other formalisms, such as Markov Logic, ProbLog, and Pearl's Causal Models, that are shown to be translatable into LPMLN. The second translation tells us how probabilistic nonmonotonicity (the ability of the reasoner to change his probabilistic model as a result of new information) of P-log can be represented in LPMLN, which yields a way to compute P-log using standard ASP solvers and MLN solvers.

Characterizing and extending answer set semantics using possibility theory

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.

An ASP-based approach to dealing with agent perception failure

The paper presents a new modality extending Answer Set Programming in order to refine its capability of representing knowledge in case of possible perception failure. The aim of the proposal is mai...

Open answer set programming for the semantic web

We extend answer set programming (ASP) with, possibly infinite, open domains. Since this leads to undecidable reasoning, we restrict the syntax of programs, while carefully guarding knowledge representation mechanisms such as negation as failure and inequalities. Reasoning with the resulting extended forest logic programs (EFoLPs) can be reduced to finite answer set programming, for which reasoners are available. We argue that extended forest logic programming is a useful tool for uniformly representing and reasoning with both ontological and rule-based knowledge, as they can capture a large fragment of the OWL DL ontology language equipped with DL-safe rules. Furthermore, EFoLPs enable nonmonotonic reasoning, a desirable feature in locally closed subareas of the Semantic Web.

Preferred answer sets for ordered logic programs

We extend answer set semantics to deal with inconsistent programs (containing classical negation), by finding a “best” answer set. Within the context of inconsistent programs, it is natural to have a partial order on rules, representing a preference for satisfying certain rules, possibly at the cost of violating less important ones. We show that such a rule order induces a natural order on extended answer sets, the minimal elements of which we call preferred answer sets. We characterize the expressiveness of the resulting semantics and show that it can simulate negation as failure, disjunction and some other formalisms such as logic programs with ordered disjunction. The approach is shown to be useful in several application areas, e.g. repairing database, where minimal repairs correspond to preferred answer sets.