Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Benjamin Kaufmann
dblp:60/3303
· DBLP profile ↗
22ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 16Theory of computation · 12Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 5Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 5
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Logic in computer science · 62% Algorithms and data structures · 27% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 8% | |
| Artificial intelligence
4 papers |
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › logic programming
answer set programming |
0.5 | 4 | 2013 | Advanced Conflict-Driven Disjunctive Answer Set Solving · IJCAI 2013 Conflict-driven answer set solving: From theory to practice · Artif. Intell. 2012 Conflict-Driven Disjunctive Answer Set Solving · KR 2008 |
Logic in computer science › logic programming
answer set programming |
0.4 | 2 | 2016 | ASP for Anytime Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions · IJCAI 2016 Domain-Specific Heuristics in Answer Set Programming · AAAI 2013 |
Algorithms and data structures › dynamic programming
treewidth-based dynamic programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | ASP for Anytime Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions · IJCAI 2016 |
Logic in computer science › nonmonotonic reasoning
answer set solving |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Domain-Specific Heuristics in Answer Set Programming · AAAI 2013 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
logic programming |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Conflict-driven answer set solving: From theory to practice · Artif. Intell. 2012 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph theory › graph parameters › graph width parameters
treewidth |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | ASP for Anytime Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions · IJCAI 2016 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › satisfiability
SAT solving |
0.0 | 1 | 2008 | Conflict-Driven Disjunctive Answer Set Solving · KR 2008 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
answer set programming · 0.2declarative heuristic specification · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Multi-shot ASP solving with clingoabstractAbstract We introduce a new flexible paradigm of grounding and solving in Answer Set Programming (ASP), which we refer to as multi-shot ASP solving, and present its implementation in the ASP system clingo . Multi-shot ASP solving features grounding and solving processes that deal with continuously changing logic programs. In doing so, they remain operative and accommodate changes in a seamless way. For instance, such processes allow for advanced forms of search, as in optimization or theory solving, or interaction with an environment, as in robotics or query answering. Common to them is that the problem specification evolves during the reasoning process, either because data or constraints are added, deleted, or replaced. This evolutionary aspect adds another dimension to ASP since it brings about state changing operations. We address this issue by providing an operational semantics that characterizes grounding and solving processes in multi-shot ASP solving. This characterization provides a semantic account of grounder and solver states along with the operations manipulating them. The operative nature of multi-shot solving avoids redundancies in relaunching grounder and solver programs and benefits from the solver's learning capacities. clingo accomplishes this by complementing ASP's declarative input language with control capacities. On the declarative side, a new directive allows for structuring logic programs into named and parameterizable subprograms. The grounding and integration of these subprograms into the solving process is completely modular and fully controllable from the procedural side. To this end, clingo offers a new application programming interface that is conveniently accessible via scripting languages. By strictly separating logic and control, clingo also abolishes the need for dedicated systems for incremental and reactive reasoning, like iclingo and oclingo , respectively, and its flexibility goes well beyond the advanced yet still rigid solving processes of the latter. Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
Theory Pract. Log. Program. | 3 |
| 2017 | Clingcon: The next generationabstractAbstract We present the third generation of the constraint answer set system clingcon , combining Answer Set Programming (ASP) with finite domain constraint processing (CP). While its predecessors rely on a black-box approach to hybrid solving by integrating the CP solver gecode , the new clingcon system pursues a lazy approach using dedicated constraint propagators to extend propagation in the underlying ASP solver clasp . No extension is needed for parsing and grounding clingcon 's hybrid modeling language since both can be accommodated by the new generic theory handling capabilities of the ASP grounder gringo . As a whole, clingcon 3 is thus an extension of the ASP system clingo 5, which itself relies on the grounder gringo and the solver clasp . The new approach of clingcon offers a seamless integration of CP propagation into ASP solving that benefits from the whole spectrum of clasp 's reasoning modes, including, for instance, multi-shot solving and advanced optimization techniques. This is accomplished by a lazy approach that unfolds the representation of constraints and adds it to that of the logic program only when needed. Although the unfolding is usually dictated by the constraint propagators during solving, it can already be partially (or even totally) done during preprocessing. Moreover, clingcon 's constraint preprocessing and propagation incorporate several well-established CP techniques that greatly improve its performance. We demonstrate this via an extensive empirical evaluation contrasting, first, the various techniques in the context of CSP solving and, second, the new clingcon system with other hybrid ASP systems. Mutsunori Banbara, Benjamin Kaufmann, Max Ostrowski, Torsten Schaub |
Theory Pract. Log. Program. | 2 |
| 2016 | ASP for Anytime Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions
Bernhard Bliem, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub, Stefan Woltran |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2016 | Answer Set Programming Modulo AcyclicityabstractAcyclicity constraints are prevalent in knowledge representation and applications where acyclic data structures such as DAGs and trees play a role. Recently, such constraints have been considered in the satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) framework, and in this paper we carry out an analogous exte nsion to the answer set programming (ASP) paradigm. The resulting formalism, ASP modulo acyclicity, offers a rich set of primitives to express constraints related to recursive structures. In the technical results of the paper, we relate the new generalization with standard ASP by showing (i) how acyclicity extensions translate into normal rules, (ii) how weight constraint programs can be instrumented by acyclicity extensions to capture stability in analogy to unfounded set checking, and (iii) how the gap between supported and stable models is effectively closed in the presence of such an extension. Moreover, we present an efficient implementation of acyclicity constraints by incorporating a respective propagator into the state-of-the-art ASP solver CLASP. The implementation provides a unique combination of traditional unfounded set checking with acyclicity propagation. In the experimental part, we evaluate the interplay of these orthogonal checks by equipping logic programs with supplementary acyclicity constraints. The performance results show that native support for acyclicity constraints is a worthwhile addition, furnishing a complementary modeling construct in ASP itself as well as effective means for translation-based ASP solving. Jori Bomanson, Martin Gebser, Tomi Janhunen, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
Fundam. Informaticae | 4 |
| 2015 | Answer Set Programming Modulo Acyclicity
Jori Bomanson, Martin Gebser, Tomi Janhunen, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
LPNMR | 4 |
| 2015 | Progress in clasp Series 3
Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Javier Romero 0003, Torsten Schaub |
LPNMR | 3 |
| 2013 | Domain-Specific Heuristics in Answer Set ProgrammingabstractWe introduce a general declarative framework for incorporating domain-specific heuristics into ASP solving. We accomplish this by extending the first-order modeling language of ASP by a distinguished heuristic predicate. The resulting heuristic information is processed as an equitable part of the logic program and subsequently exploited by the solver when it comes to non-deterministically assigning a truth value to an atom. We implemented our approach as a dedicated heuristic in the ASP solver clasp and show its great prospect by an empirical evaluation. Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, Javier Romero 0003, Ramón Otero, Torsten Schaub, Philipp Wanko |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2013 | Advanced Conflict-Driven Disjunctive Answer Set Solving
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2012 | Conflict-driven answer set solving: From theory to practice
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
Artif. Intell. | 2 |
| 2012 | Multi-threaded ASP solving with claspabstractAbstract We present the new multi-threaded version of the state-of-the-art answer set solverclasp. We detail its component and communication architecture and illustrate how they support the principal functionalities ofclasp. Also, we provide some insights into the data representation used for different constraint types handled byclasp. All this is accompanied by an extensive experimental analysis of the major features related to multi-threading inclasp. Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
Theory Pract. Log. Program. | 2 |
| 2011 | Cluster-Based ASP Solving with claspar
Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub, Bettina Schnor |
LPNMR | 3 |
| 2011 | A Portfolio Solver for Answer Set Programming: Preliminary Report
Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub, Marius Lindauer, Stefan Ziller |
LPNMR | 3 |
| 2009 | Solution Enumeration for Projected Boolean Search Problems
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
CPAIOR | 2 |
| 2009 | On the Implementation of Weight Constraint Rules in Conflict-Driven ASP Solvers
Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
ICLP | 3 |
| 2009 | A Simple Distributed Conflict-Driven Answer Set Solver
Enrico Ellguth, Martin Gebser, Markus Gusowski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Roland Kaminski, Stefan Liske, Torsten Schaub, Lars Schneidenbach, Bettina Schnor |
LPNMR | 4 |
| 2009 | The Conflict-Driven Answer Set Solver clasp: Progress Report
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, Torsten Schaub |
LPNMR | 2 |
| 2008 | Advanced Preprocessing for Answer Set SolvingabstractPuerto de Cajas serves as a vital high-altitude passage in Ecuador, connecting the coastal region to the city of Cuenca. The stability of this rocky massif is carefully managed through the assessment of blocks and discontinuities, ensuring safe travel. This study presents a novel approach, employing rapid and cost-effective methods to evaluate an unexplored area within the protected expanse of Cajas. Using terrestrial photogrammetry and strategically positioned geomechanical stations along the slopes, we generated a detailed point cloud capturing elusive terrain features. We have used terrestrial photogrammetry for digitalization of the slope. Validation of the collected data was achieved by comparing directional data from Cloud Compare software with manual readings using a digital compass integrated in a phone at control points. The analysis encompasses three slopes, employing the SMR, Q-slope, and kinematic methodologies. Results from the SMR system closely align with kinematic analysis, indicating satisfactory slope quality. Nonetheless, continued vigilance in stability control remains imperative for ensuring road safety and preserving the site's integrity. Moreover, this research lays the groundwork for the creation of a publicly accessible 3D repository, enhancing visualization capabilities through Google Virtual Reality. This initiative not only aids in replicating the findings but also facilitates access to an augmented reality environment, thereby fostering collaborative research endeavors. Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, André Neumann, Torsten Schaub |
ECAI | 2 |
| 2008 | Engineering an Incremental ASP Solver
Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Benjamin Kaufmann, Max Ostrowski, Torsten Schaub, Sven Thiele |
ICLP | 3 |
| 2008 | Conflict-Driven Disjunctive Answer Set Solving
Christian Drescher, Martin Gebser, Torsten Grote, Benjamin Kaufmann, Arne König, Max Ostrowski, Torsten Schaub |
KR | 4 |
| 2007 | Conflict-Driven Answer Set Solving
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, André Neumann, Torsten Schaub |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2007 | Conflict-Driven Answer Set Enumeration
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, André Neumann, Torsten Schaub |
LPNMR | 2 |
| 2007 | clasp : A Conflict-Driven Answer Set Solver
Martin Gebser, Benjamin Kaufmann, André Neumann, Torsten Schaub |
LPNMR | 2 |