Abstract In this paper, we compare four different semantics for disjunction in Answer Set Programming that, unlike stable models, do not adhere to the principle of model minimality. Two of these approaches, Cabalar and Muñiz’ Justified Models and Doherty and Szalas’ Strongly Supported Models , directly provide an alternative non-minimal semantics for disjunction. The other two, Aguado et al’s Forks and Shen and Eiter’s Determining Inference (DI) semantics, actually introduce a new disjunction connective, but are compared here as if they constituted new semantics for the standard disjunction operator. We are able to prove that three of these approaches (Forks, Justified Models and a reasonable relaxation of the DI-semantics) actually coincide, constituting a common single approach under different definitions. Moreover, this common semantics always provides a superset of the stable models of a programme (in fact, modulo any context) and is strictly stronger than the fourth approach (Strongly Supported Models), that actually treats disjunctions as in classical logic.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) constitutes nowadays one of the most successful paradigms for practical Knowledge Representation and declarative problem solving. The formal analysis of ASP programs is essential for a rigorous treatment of specifications, the correct construction of solvers and the extension with other representational features. In this paper, we present a syntactic transformation, called the unfolding operator, that allows forgetting an atom in a logic program (under ASP semantics). The main advantage of unfolding is that, unlike other syntactic operators, it is always applicable and guarantees strong persistence, that is, the result preserves the same stable models with respect to any context where the forgotten atom does not occur. The price for its completeness is that the result is an expression that may contain the fork operator. Yet, we illustrate how, in some cases, the application of fork properties may allow us to reduce the fork to a logic program.

Abstract In this survey, we present an overview on (Modal) Temporal Logic Programming in view of its application to Knowledge Representation and Declarative Problem Solving. The syntax of this extension of logic programs is the result of combining usual rules with temporal modal operators, as in Linear-time Temporal Logic (LTL). In the paper, we focus on the main recent results of the non-monotonic formalism called Temporal Equilibrium Logic (TEL) that is defined for the full syntax of LTL but involves a model selection criterion based on Equilibrium Logic, a well known logical characterization of Answer Set Programming (ASP). As a result, we obtain a proper extension of the stable models semantics for the general case of temporal formulas in the syntax of LTL. We recall the basic definitions for TEL and its monotonic basis, the temporal logic of Here-and-There (THT), and study the differences between finite and infinite trace length. We also provide further useful results, such as the translation into other formalisms like Quantified Equilibrium Logic and Second-order LTL, and some techniques for computing temporal stable models based on automata constructions. In the remainder of the paper, we focus on practical aspects, defining a syntactic fragment called (modal) temporal logic programs closer to ASP, and explaining how this has been exploited in the construction of the solver telingo, a temporal extension of the well-known ASP solver clingo that uses its incremental solving capabilities.

In this research note we present additional results for an earlier published paper [1]. There, we studied the problem of projective strong equivalence (PSE) of logic programs, that is, checking whether two logic programs (or propositional formulas) have the same behaviour (under the stable model semantics) regardless of a common context and ignoring the effect of local auxiliary atoms. PSE is related to another problem called strongly persistent forgetting that consists in keeping a program's behaviour after removing its auxiliary atoms, something that is known to be not always possible in Answer Set Programming. In [1], we introduced a new connective ‘|’ called fork and proved that, in this extended language, it is always possible to forget auxiliary atoms, but at the price of obtaining a result containing forks. We also proved that forks can be translated back to logic programs introducing new hidden auxiliary atoms, but this translation was exponential in the worst case. In this note we provide a new polynomial translation of arbitrary forks into regular programs that allows us to prove that brave and cautious reasoning with forks has the same complexity as that of ordinary (disjunctive) logic programs and paves the way for an efficient implementation of forks. To this aim, we rely on a pair of new PSE invariance properties.

This work tackles the problem of checking strong equivalence of logic programs that may contain local auxiliary atoms, to be removed from their stable models and to be forbidden in any external context. We call this property projective strong equivalence (PSE). It has been recently proved that not any logic program containing auxiliary atoms can be reformulated, under PSE, as another logic program or formula without them -- this is known as strongly persistent forgetting. In this paper, we introduce a conservative extension of Equilibrium Logic and its monotonic basis, the logic of Here-and-There, in which we deal with a new connective we call fork. We provide a semantic characterisation of PSE for forks and use it to show that, in this extension, it is always possible to forget auxiliary atoms under strong persistence. We further define when the obtained fork is representable as a regular formula.

Abstract A common feature in Answer Set Programming is the use of a second negation, stronger than default negation and sometimes called explicit, strong or classical negation. This explicit negation is normally used in front of atoms, rather than allowing its use as a regular operator. In this paper we consider the arbitrary combination of explicit negation with nested expressions, as those defined by Lifschitz, Tang and Turner. We extend the concept of reduct for this new syntax and then prove that it can be captured by an extension of Equilibrium Logic with this second negation. We study some properties of this variant and compare to the already known combination of Equilibrium Logic with Nelson’s strong negation.

Abstract In this note, we consider the problem of introducing variables in temporal logic programs under the formalism of Temporal Equilibrium Logic, an extension of Answer Set Programming for dealing with linear-time modal operators. To this aim, we provide a definition of a first-order version of Temporal Equilibrium Logic that shares the syntax of first-order Linear-time Temporal Logic but has different semantics, selecting some Linear-time Temporal Logic models we call temporal stable models. Then, we consider a subclass of theories (called splittable temporal logic programs) that are close to usual logic programs but allowing a restricted use of temporal operators. In this setting, we provide a syntactic definition of safe variables that suffices to show the property of domain independence – that is, addition of arbitrary elements in the universe does not vary the set of temporal stable models. Finally, we present a method for computing the derivable facts by constructing a non-temporal logic program with variables that is fed to a standard Answer Set Programming grounder. The information provided by the grounder is then used to generate a subset of ground temporal rules which is equivalent to (and generally smaller than) the full program instantiation.

Abstract In this paper we provide an alternative semantics for Equilibrium Logic and its monotonic basis, the logic of Here-and-There (also known as Gödel'sG3logic) that relies on the idea ofdenotationof a formula, that is, a function that collects the set of models of that formula. Using the three-valued logicG3as a starting point and an ordering relation (for which equilibrium/stable models are minimal elements) we provide several elementary operations for sets of interpretations. By analysing structural properties of the denotation of formulas, we show some expressiveness results forG3such as, for instance, that conjunction is not expressible in terms of the other connectives. Moreover, the denotational semantics allows us to capture the set of equilibrium models of a formula with a simple and compact set expression. We also use this semantics to provide several formal definitions for entailment relations that are usual in the literature, and further introduce a new one calledstrong entailment. We say that α strongly entails β when the equilibrium models of α ∧ γ are also equilibrium models of β ∧ γ for any context γ. We also provide a characterisation of strong entailment in terms of the denotational semantics, and give an example of a sufficient condition that can be applied in some cases.

Abstract This paper studies the relation between two recent extensions of propositional Equilibrium Logic, a well-known logical characterisation of Answer Set Programming. In particular, we show how Temporal Equilibrium Logic, which introduces modal operators as those typically handled in Linear-Time Temporal Logic (LTL), can be encoded into Infinitary Equilibrium Logic, a recent formalisation that allows the use of infinite conjunctions and disjunctions. We prove the correctness of this encoding and, as an application, we further use it to show that the semantics of the temporal logic programming formalism called TEMPLOG is subsumed by Temporal Equilibrium Logic.

In this note, we indicate how the basic machinery of Walsh transforms can be generalized from the binary case ([3, 4]) to multary alphabets. Our main results show how Walsh coefficients are related to partition coefficients and how they may be used to calculate schema averages.