With the recent interest in the reversibility of action effects, i.e., whether the effects of the action can be undone by applying other actions, the question arose how hard it is to reverse an action in a non-deterministic domain. With the use of phi-reversibility, the paper investigates the computational complexity of weak and strong non-deterministic action reversibility in fully observable non-deterministic domains, showing PSPACE-completeness for all weak variants in question and EXP-hardness and EXP, or NEXP memberships for strong variants.

Abstract We present ASP Chef Mustache, an extension of ASP Chef that enhances template-based rendering of answer set programming (ASP) solutions using a logic-less templating system inspired by Mustache. Our approach integrates data visualization frameworks such as Tabulator, Chart.js, and vis.js, enabling interactive representations of ASP interpretations as tables, charts, and graphs. Mustache queries in templates support advanced constructs for formatting, sorting, and multi-stage expansion, facilitating the generation of rich, structured outputs. We demonstrate the power of this framework through a series of use cases, including data analysis for the Italian VQR, visualization of blocking sets in graphs, and scheduling problems. The result is a versatile tool for bridging declarative problem solving and modern web-based visual analytics.

Classical planning looks for a sequence of actions that transform the initial state of the environment into a goal state. Studying whether the effects of an action can be undone by a sequence of other actions, that is, action reversibility, is beneficial, for example, in determining whether an action is safe to apply. This paper deals with action reversibility of non-deterministic actions, i.e., actions whose application might result in different outcomes. Inspired by the established notions of weak and strong plans in non-deterministic (or FOND) planning, we define the notions of weak and strong reversibility for non-deterministic actions. We then focus on the universality and uniformity of action reversibility, that is, whether we can always undo all possible effects of the action by the same means (i.e., policy), or whether some of the effects can never be undone. We show how these classes of problems can be solved via classical or FOND planning and evaluate our approaches on FOND benchmark domains.

Abstract Metamodeling is a general approach to expressing knowledge about classes and properties in an ontology. It is a desirable modeling feature in multiple applications that simplifies the extension and reuse of ontologies. Nevertheless, allowing metamodeling without restrictions is problematic for several reasons, mainly due to undecidability issues. Practical languages, therefore, forbid classes to occur as instances of other classes or treat such occurrences as semantically different objects. Specifically, meta-querying in SPARQL under the Direct Semantic Entailment Regime uses the latter approach, thereby effectively not supporting meta-queries. However, several extensions enabling different metamodeling features have been proposed over the last decade. This paper deals with the Metamodeling Semantics (MS) over OWL 2 QL and the Metamodeling Semantic Entailment Regime (MSER), as proposed in Lenzerini et al. (2015, Description Logics) and Lenzerini et al. (2020, Information Systems 88, 101294), Cima et al. (2017, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Web Intelligence, Mining and Semantics, 1–6). A reduction from OWL 2 QL to Datalog for meta-querying was proposed in Cima et al. (2017, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Web Intelligence, Mining and Semantics, 1–6). In this paper, we experiment with various logic programming tools that support Datalog querying to determine their suitability as back-ends to MSER query answering. These tools stem from different logic programming paradigms (Prolog, pure Datalog, Answer Set Programming, Hybrid Knowledge Bases). Our work shows that the Datalog approach to MSER querying is practical also for sizeable ontologies with limited resources (time and memory). This paper significantly extends Qureshi and Faber (2021, International Joint Conference on Rules and Reasoning, Springer, 218–233.) by a more detailed experimental analysis and more background.

In this paper we introduce a simple way to evaluate epistemic logic programs by means of answer set programming with quantifiers, a recently proposed extension of answer set programming. The method can easily be adapted for most of the many semantics that were proposed for epistemic logic programs. We evaluate the proposed transformation on existing benchmarks using a recently proposed solver for answer set programming with quantifiers, which relies on QBF solvers.

Abstract Answer set programming (ASP) emerged in the late 1990s as a paradigm for knowledge representation and reasoning. The attractiveness of ASP builds on an expressive high-level modeling language along with the availability of powerful off-the-shelf solving systems. While the utility of incorporating aggregate expressions in the modeling language has been realized almost simultaneously with the inception of the first ASP solving systems, a general semantics of aggregates and its efficient implementation have been long-standing challenges. Aggregates have been proposed and widely used in database systems, and also in the deductive database language Datalog, which is one of the main precursors of ASP. The use of aggregates was, however, still restricted in Datalog (by either disallowing recursion or only allowing monotone aggregates), while several ways to integrate unrestricted aggregates evolved in the context of ASP. In this survey, we pick up at this point of development by presenting and comparing the main aggregate semantics that have been proposed for propositional ASP programs. We highlight crucial properties such as computational complexity and expressive power, and outline the capabilities and limitations of different approaches by illustrative examples.

Abstract Answer 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.

The problem of action reversibility studies whether effects of a given action can be reversed (or undone) by a sequence of (other) actions. For example, actions whose effects can be reversed cannot lead to dead-ends. In the usual settings, the problem of action reversibility is PSPACE-complete, that is, as hard as deciding plan existence. In this paper, we focus on subclasses of the action reversibility problem, universal and uniform action reversibility, where the former considers all states in which the action in question is applicable, while the latter requires a single reverting action sequence, independent of the considered states. Specifically, we study the relations between projection abstractions and the subclasses of the action reversibility problem and we show that universal uniform reversibility of a given action can be decided on projection consisting of only the variables present in the schema of the action in question.

Abstract In the context of planning and reasoning about actions and change, we call an action reversible when its effects can be reverted by applying other actions, returning to the original state. Renewed interest in this area has led to several results in the context of the PDDL language, widely used for describing planning tasks. In this paper, we propose several solutions to the computational problem of deciding the reversibility of an action. In particular, we leverage an existing translation from PDDL to Answer Set Programming (ASP), and then use several different encodings to tackle the problem of action reversibility for the STRIPS fragment of PDDL. For these, we use ASP, as well as Epistemic Logic Programming (ELP), an extension of ASP with epistemic operators, and compare and contrast their strengths and weaknesses.

Checking whether action effects can be undone is an important question for determining, for instance, whether a planning task has dead-ends. In this paper, we investigate the reversibility of actions, that is, when the effects of an action can be reverted by applying other actions, in order to return to the original state. We propose a broad notion of reversibility that generalizes previously defined versions and investigate interesting properties and relevant restrictions. In particular, we propose the concept of uniform reversibility that guarantees that an action can be reverted independently of the state in which the action was applied, using a so-called reverse plan. In addition, we perform an in-depth investigation of the computational complexity of deciding action reversibility. We show that reversibility checking with polynomial-length reverse plans is harder than polynomial-length planning and that, in case of unrestricted plan length, the PSPACE-hardness of planning is inherited. In order to deal with the high complexity of solving these tasks, we then propose several incomplete algorithms that may be used to compute reverse plans for a relevant subset of states.

Abstract Standardization of solver input languages has been a main driver for the growth of several areas within knowledge representation and reasoning, fostering the exploitation in actual applications. In this document, we present the ASP-CORE-2 standard input language for Answer Set Programming, which has been adopted in ASP Competition events since 2013.

Epistemic Logic Programs (ELPs), that is, Answer Set Programming (ASP) extended with epistemic operators, have received renewed interest in recent years, which led to a flurry of new research, as well as efficient solvers. An important question is under which conditions a sub-program can be replaced by another one without changing the meaning, in any context. This problem is known as strong equivalence, and is well-studied for ASP. For ELPs, this question has been approached by embedding them into epistemic extensions of equilibrium logics. In this paper, we consider a simpler, more direct characterization that is directly applicable to the language used in state-of-the-art ELP solvers. This also allows us to give tight complexity bounds, showing that strong equivalence for ELPs remains coNP-complete, as for ASP. We further use our results to provide syntactic characterizations for tautological rules and rule subsumption for ELPs.

Abstract Epistemic 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.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-established formalism for nonmonotonic reasoning.While incoherence, the non-existence of answer sets for some programs, is an important feature of ASP, it has frequently been criticised and indeed has some disadvantages, especially for query answering.Paracoherent semantics have been suggested as a remedy, which extend the classical notion of answer sets to draw meaningful conclusions also from incoherent programs. In this paper we present an alternative characterization of the two major paracoherent semantics in terms of (extended) externally supported models. This definition uses a transformation of ASP programs that is more parsimonious than the classic epistemic transformation used in recent implementations.A performance comparison carried out on benchmarks from ASP competitions shows that the usage of the new transformation brings about performance improvements that are independent of the underlying algorithms.

This paper briefly describes the solver ASPrMin, which enumerates preferred extensions and scored first in the Extension Enumeration problem—the only one implemented—of the Preferred Semantics Track of the Second International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation, ICCMA17.

In sports, athletes need detailed and individualised training plans for maintaining and improving their skills in order to achieve their best performance in competitions. This presents a considerable workload for coaches, who besides setting objectives have to formulate extremely detailed training plans. Automated Planning, which has already been successfully deployed in many real-world applications such as space exploration, robotics, and manufacturing processes, embodies a useful mechanism that can be exploited for generating training plans for athletes. In this paper, we propose the use of Automated Planning techniques for generating individual training plans, which consist of exercises the athlete has to perform during training, given the athlete's current performance, period of time, and target performance that should be achieved. Our experimental analysis, which considers general training of kickboxers, shows that apart of considerable less planning time, training plans automatically generated by the proposed approach are more detailed and individualised than plans prepared manually by an expert coach.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-established formalism for nonmonotonic reasoning. An ASP program can have no answer set due to cyclic default negation. In this case, it is not possible to draw any conclusion, even if this is not intended. Recently, several paracoherent semantics have been proposed that address this issue,and several potential applications for these semantics have been identified. However, paracoherent semantics have essentially been inapplicable in practice, due to the lack of efficient algorithms and implementations. In this paper, this lack is addressed, and several different algorithms to compute semi-stable and semi-equilibrium models are proposed and implemented into an answer set solving framework. An empirical performance comparison among the new algorithms on benchmarks from ASP competitions is given as well.

Boolean functions in Answer Set Programming have proven a useful modelling tool. They are usually specified by means of aggregates or external atoms. A crucial step in computing answer sets for logic programs containing Boolean functions is verifying whether partial interpretations satisfy a Boolean function for all possible values of its undefined atoms. In this paper, we develop a new methodology for showing when such checks can be done in deterministic polynomial time. This provides a unifying view on all currently known polynomial-time decidability results, and furthermore identifies promising new classes that go well beyond the state of the art. Our main technique consists of using an ordering on the atoms to significantly reduce the necessary number of model checks. For many standard aggregates, we show how this ordering can be automatically obtained.

Optimization—minimization or maximization—in the lattice of subsets is a frequent operation in Artificial Intelligence tasks. Examples are subset-minimal model-based diagnosis, nonmonotonic reasoning by means of circumscription, or preferred extensions in abstract argumentation. Finding the optimum among many admissible solutions is often harder than finding admissible solutions with respect to both computational complexity and methodology. This paper addresses the former issue by means of an effective method for finding subset-optimal solutions. It is based on the relationship between cardinality-optimal and subset-optimal solutions, and the fact that many logic-based declarative programming systems provide constructs for finding cardinality-optimal solutions, for example maximum satisfiability (MaxSAT) or weak constraints in Answer Set Programming (ASP). Clearly each cardinality-optimal solution is also a subset-optimal one, and if the language also allows for the addition of particular restricting constructs (both MaxSAT and ASP do) then all subset-optimal solutions can be found by an iterative computation of cardinality-optimal solutions. As a showcase, the computation of preferred extensions of abstract argumentation frameworks using the proposed method is studied.

NP-SPEC is a language for specifying problems in NP in a declarative way. Despite the fact that the semantics of the language was given by referring to Datalog with circumscription, which is very close to answer set programming (ASP), so far the only existing implementations are by means of Prolog and via Boolean satisfiability solvers. In this paper, we present translations from NP-SPEC to ASP, and provide an experimental evaluation of existing implementations and the proposed translations into ASP using various ASP solvers. The results show that translating into ASP clearly has an edge over the existing translation into SAT, which involves an intrinsic grounding process. We also argue that it might be useful to incorporate certain language constructs of NP-SPEC into mainstream ASP.

Abstract Aggregation functions are widely used in answer set programming for representing and reasoning on knowledge involving sets of objects collectively. Current implementations simplify the structure of programs in order to optimize the overall performance. In particular, aggregates are rewritten into simpler forms known as monotone aggregates. Since the evaluation of normal programs with monotone aggregates is in general on a lower complexity level than the evaluation of normal programs with arbitrary aggregates, any faithful translation function must introduce disjunction in rule heads in some cases. However, no function of this kind is known. The paper closes this gap by introducing a polynomial, faithful, and modular translation for rewriting common aggregation functions into the simpler form accepted by current solvers. A prototype system allows for experimenting with arbitrary recursive aggregates, which are also supported in the recent version 4.5 of the groundergringo, using the methods presented in this paper.

Abstract Adapting techniques from database theory in order to optimize Answer Set Programming (ASP) systems, and in particular the grounding components of ASP systems, is an important topic in ASP. In recent years, the Magic Set method has received some interest in this setting, and a variant of it, called Dynamic Magic Set, has been proposed for ASP. However, this technique has a caveat, because it is not correct (in the sense of being query-equivalent) for all ASP programs. In a recent work, a large fragment of ASP programs, referred to assuper-coherent programs, has been identified, for which Dynamic Magic Set is correct. The fragment contains all programs which possess at least one answer set, no matter which set of facts is added to them. Two open question remained: How complex is it to determine whether a given program is super-coherent? Does the restriction to super-coherent programs limit the problems that can be solved? Especially the first question turned out to be quite difficult to answer precisely. In this paper, we formally prove that deciding whether a propositional program is super-coherent is Π3P-complete in the disjunctive case, while it is Π2P-complete for normal programs. The hardness proofs are the difficult part in this endeavor: We proceed by characterizing the reductions by the models and reduct models which the ASP programs should have, and then provide instantiations that meet the given specifications. Concerning the second question, we show that all relevant ASP reasoning tasks can be transformed into tasks over super-coherent programs, although this transformation is more of theoretical than practical interest.

Abstract Data originating from the Web, sensor readings and social media result in increasingly huge datasets. The so called Big Data comes with new scientific and technological challenges while creating new opportunities, hence the increasing interest in academia and industry. Traditionally, logic programming has focused on complex knowledge structures/programs, so the question arises whether and how it can work in the face of Big Data. In this paper, we examine how the well-founded semantics can process huge amounts of data through mass parallelization. More specifically, we propose and evaluate a parallel approach using the MapReduce framework. Our experimental results indicate that our approach is scalable and that well-founded semantics can be applied to billions of facts. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that addresses large scale nonmonotonic reasoning without the restriction of stratification for predicates of arbitrary arity.

We introduce abstract preference frameworks to study general properties common across a variety of preference formalisms. In particular, we study strong equivalence in preference formalisms and their separability. We identify abstract postulates on preference frameworks, satisfied by most of the currently studied preference formalisms, that lead to characterizations of both properties of interest.

We introduce the framework of qualitative optimization problems (or, simply, optimization problems) to represent preference theories. The formalism uses separate modules to describe the space of outcomes to be compared (the generator) and the preferences on outcomes (the selector). We consider two types of optimization problems. They differ in the way the generator, which we model by a propositional theory, is interpreted: by the standard propositional logic semantics, and by the equilibrium-model (answer-set) semantics. Under the latter interpretation of generators, optimization problems directly generalize answer-set optimization programs proposed previously. We study strong equivalence of optimization problems, which guarantees their interchangeability within any larger context. We characterize several versions of strong equivalence obtained by restricting the class of optimization problems that can be used as extensions and establish the complexity of associated reasoning tasks. Understanding strong equivalence is essential for modular representation of optimization problems and rewriting techniques to simplify them without changing their inherent properties.

This special issue of TPLP commemorates the 25th edition of the annual conference organized by GULP (Gruppo Ricercatori e Utenti Logic Programming), the Italian group of researchers and users of logic programming. The first event in this series was held at Genoa in 1986, one year after the foundation of the user group, continuing annually ever since. In 1994, the conference joined forces with the Spanish conference PRODE (on Declarative Programming), and in 1996 with the Portuguese APPIA (on Artificial Intelligence). This collaboration continued until 2003. Starting from 2004, the event became known as CILC (Convegno Italiano di Logica Computazionale, Italian Conference on Computational Logic), thereby broadening its topics to general computational logic, while becoming a national Italian event again. Being one of the oldest and largest national events of its kind, over the years the conference has been an important networking opportunity and catalyst for persons with different backgrounds, coming from theory and practice, and from research and industry, for exchanging their visions, achievements, and challenges in logic programming. For a more detailed historical account on GULP and its annual conferences, we refer to Rossi (2010).

Abstract Datalogis one of the best-known rule-based languages, and extensions of it are used in a wide context of applications. An importantDatalogextension is DisjunctiveDatalog, which significantly increases the expressivity of the basic language. DisjunctiveDatalogis useful in a wide range of applications, ranging from Databases (e.g., Data Integration) to Artificial Intelligence (e.g., diagnosis and planning under incomplete knowledge). However, in recent years an important shortcoming ofDatalog-based languages became evident, e.g. in the context of data-integration (consistent query-answering, ontology-based data access) and Semantic Web applications: The language does not permit any generation of and reasoning with unnamed individuals in an obvious way. In general, it is weak in supporting many cases of existential quantification. To overcome this problem,Datalog∃has recently been proposed, which extends traditionalDatalogby existential quantification in rule heads. In this work, we propose a natural extension of DisjunctiveDatalogandDatalog∃, calledDatalog∃,˅, which allows both disjunctions and existential quantification in rule heads and is therefore an attractive language for knowledge representation and reasoning, especially in domains where ontology-based reasoning is needed. We formally define syntax and semantics of the languageDatalog∃,˅, and provide a notion of instantiation, which we prove to be adequate forDatalog∃,˅. A main issue ofDatalog∃and hence also ofDatalog∃,˅is that decidability is no longer guaranteed for typical reasoning tasks. In order to address this issue, we identify many decidable fragments of the language, which extend, in a natural way, analog classes defined in the non-disjunctive case. Moreover, we carry out an in-depth complexity analysis, deriving interesting results which range from Logarithmic Space to Exponential Time.

The introduction of aggregates has been one of the most relevant language extensions to Answer Set Programming (ASP). Aggregates are very expressive, they allow to represent many problems in a more succinct and elegant way compared to aggregate-free programs. A significant amount of research work has been devoted to aggregates in the ASP community in the last years, and relevant research results on ASP with aggregates have been published, on both theoretical and practical sides. The high expressiveness of aggregates (eliminating aggregates often causes a quadratic blow-up in program size) requires suitable evaluation methods and optimization techniques for an efficient implementation. Nevertheless, in spite of the above-mentioned research developments, aggregates are treated in a quite straightforward way in most ASP systems. In this paper, we explore the exploitation of look-back techniques for an efficient implementation of aggregates. We define a reason calculus for backjumping in ASP programs with aggregates. Furthermore, we describe how these reasons can be used in order to guide look-back heuristics for programs with aggregates. We have implemented both the new reason calculus and the proposed heuristics in the DLV system, and have carried out an experimental analysis on publicly available benchmarks which shows significant performance benefits.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) has been deployed in many applications, thanks to the availability of efficient solvers. Most programs encountered in practice have an important property: Their predicate arities are bounded by a constant, and in this case it is known that the relevant computations can be done using polynomial space. However, all competitive ASP systems rely on grounding, due to which they may use exponential space for these programs. We present three evaluation methods that respect the polynomial space bound and a generic framework architecture for realization. Experimental results for a prototype implementation indicate that the methods are effective. They show not only benign space consumption, but interestingly also good runtime compared to some state of the art ASP solvers.

Abstract Querying over disjunctive ASP with functions is a highly undecidable task in general. In this paper we focus on disjunctive logic programs with stratified negation and functions under the stable model semantics (ASPfs). We show that query answering in this setting is decidable, if the query is finitely recursive (ASPfsfr). Our proof yields also an effective method for query evaluation. It is done by extending the magic set technique to ASPfsfr. We show that the magic-set rewritten program is query equivalent to the original one (under both brave and cautious reasoning). Moreover, we prove that the rewritten program is also finitely ground, implying that it is decidable. Importantly, finitely ground programs are evaluable using existing ASP solvers, making the class of ASPfsfr queries usable in practice.

Disjunctive logic programming under the answer set semantics (DLP, ASP) has been acknowledged as a versatile formalism for knowledge representation and reasoning during the last decades. Lifschitz, Tang, and Turner have introduced an extended language of DLP, called Nested Logic Programming (NLP), in 1999 [12]. It often allows for more concise representations by permitting a richer syntax in rule heads and bodies. However, that language is propositional and thus does not allow for variables, one of the strengths of DLP. In this paper, we introduce a language similar to NLP, called Normal Form Nested (NFN) programs, which does allow for variables, and present the syntax and semantics. However, with the introduction of variables an important issue arises: domain independence, the question of whether the semantics of a program is independent of the considered domain (given that it is sufficiently rich). Domain independence, originally studied for logic-based database query languages, is desirable because it guarantees that the semantics remains equal if unrelated information is added and also ensures finiteness of intended models even if infinite domains are considered. With the presence of variables, NFN programs in general are not domain independent. We study this issue in depth and define the class of safe NFN programs, which are guaranteed to be domain independent. Moreover, we show that for those NFN programs, which are also NLPs, our semantics coincides with the one of [12], while keeping the standard meaning of answer sets on DLP programs with variables. We also show that our semantics coincides with Herbrand stable models as defined in [6] of formulas corresponding to NFN programs. Finally, we provide an algorithm which transforms NFN programs into DLP programs in a correct and efficient way. We have implemented this algorithm, which provides an effective implementation of the NFN language, using existing DLP systems as a back-end.

Abstract Disjunctive logic programming (DLP) is a very expressive formalism. It allows for expressing every property of finite structures that is decidable in the complexity class ΣP2(=NPNP). Despite this high expressiveness, there are some simple properties, often arising in real-world applications, which cannot be encoded in a simple and natural manner. Especially properties that require the use of arithmetic operators (like sum, times, or count) on a set or multiset of elements, which satisfy some conditions, cannot be naturally expressed in classic DLP. To overcome this deficiency, we extend DLP by aggregate functions in a conservative way. In particular, we avoid the introduction of constructs with disputed semantics, by requiring aggregates to be stratified. We formally define the semantics of the extended language (called ), and illustrate how it can be profitably used for representing knowledge. Furthermore, we analyze the computational complexity of , showing that the addition of aggregates does not bring a higher cost in that respect. Finally, we provide an implementation of in DLV—a state-of-the-art DLP system—and report on experiments which confirm the usefulness of the proposed extension also for the efficiency of computation.

Disjunctive Logic Programming (DLP) is an advanced formalism for knowledge representation and reasoning, which is very expressive in a precise mathematical sense: it allows one to express every property of finite structures that is decidable in the complexity class Σ P 2 (NP NP ). Thus, under widely believed assumptions, DLP is strictly more expressive than normal ( disjunction-free ) logic programming, whose expressiveness is limited to properties decidable in NP. Importantly, apart from enlarging the class of applications which can be encoded in the language, disjunction often allows for representing problems of lower complexity in a simpler and more natural fashion.This article presents the DLV system, which is widely considered the state-of-the-art implementation of disjunctive logic programming, and addresses several aspects. As for problem solving, we provide a formal definition of its kernel language, function-free disjunctive logic programs (also known as disjunctive datalog ), extended by weak constraints, which are a powerful tool to express optimization problems. We then illustrate the usage of DLV as a tool for knowledge representation and reasoning, describing a new declarative programming methodology which allows one to encode complex problems (up to Δ P 3 -complete problems) in a declarative fashion. On the foundational side, we provide a detailed analysis of the computational complexity of the language of DLV, and by deriving new complexity results we chart a complete picture of the complexity of this language and important fragments thereof.Furthermore, we illustrate the general architecture of the DLV system, which has been influenced by these results. As for applications, we overview application front-ends which have been developed on top of DLV to solve specific knowledge representation tasks, and we briefly describe the main international projects investigating the potential of the system for industrial exploitation. Finally, we report about thorough experimentation and benchmarking, which has been carried out to assess the efficiency of the system. The experimental results confirm the solidity of DLV and highlight its potential for emerging application areas like knowledge management and information integration.

The task of an information integration system is to combine data residing at different sources, providing the user with a unified view of them, called global schema. Users formulate queries over the global schema, and the system suitably queries the sources, providing an answer to the user, who is not obliged to have any information about the sources. Recent developments in IT such as the expansion of the Internet and the World Wide Web, have made available to users a huge number of information sources, generally autonomous, heterogeneous and widely distributed: as a consequence, information integration has emerged as a crucial issue in many application domains, e.g., distributed databases, cooperative information systems, data warehousing, or on-demand computing. Recent estimates view information integration to be a $10 Billion market by 2006 [14].

We propose a new declarative planning language, called K, which is based on principles and methods of logic programming. In this language, transitions between states of knowledge can be described, rather than transitions between completely described states of the world, which makes the language well suited for planning under incomplete knowledge. Furthermore, our formalism enables the use of default principles in the planning process by supporting negation as failure. Nonetheless, K also supports the representation of transitions between states of the world (i.e., states of complete knowledge) as a special case, which shows that the language is very flexible. As we demonstrate on particular examples, the use of knowledge states may allow for a natural and compact problem representation. We then provide a thorough analysis of the computational complexity of K, and consider different planning problems, including standard planning and secure planning (also known as conformant planning ) problems. We show that these problems have different complexities under various restrictions, ranging from NP to NEXPTIME in the propositional case. Our results form the theoretical basis for the DLV k system, which implements the language K on top of the DLV logic programming system.

Recently, planning based on answer set programming has been proposed as an approach towards realizing declarative planning systems. In this paper, we present the language Kc, which extends the declarative planning language K by action costs. Kc provides the notion of admissible and optimal plans, which are plans whose overall action costs are within a given limit resp. minimum over all plans (i.e., cheapest plans). As we demonstrate, this novel language allows for expressing some nontrivial planning tasks in a declarative way. Furthermore, it can be utilized for representing planning problems under other optimality criteria, such as computing ``shortest'' plans (with the least number of steps), and refinement combinations of cheapest and fastest plans. We study complexity aspects of the language Kc and provide a transformation to logic programs, such that planning problems are solved via answer set programming. Furthermore, we report experimental results on selected problems. Our experience is encouraging that answer set planning may be a valuable approach to expressive planning systems in which intricate planning problems can be naturally specified and solved.

Most recently, Answer Set Programming (ASP) has been attracting interest as a new paradigm for problem solving. An important aspect, for which several approaches have been presented, is the handling of preferences between rules. In this paper, we consider the problem of implementing preference handling approaches by means of meta-interpreters in Answer Set Programming. In particular, we consider the preferred answer set approaches by Brewka and Eiter, by Delgrande, Schaub and Tompits, and by Wang, Zhou and Lin. We present suitable meta-interpreters for these semantics using DLV, which is an efficient engine for ASP. Moreover, we also present a meta-interpreter for the weakly preferred answer set approach by Brewka and Eiter, which uses the weak constraint feature of DLV as a tool for expressing and solving an underlying optimization problem. We also consider advanced meta-interpreters, which make use of graph-based characterizations and often allow for more efficient computations. Our approach shows the suitability of ASP in general and of DLV in particular for fast prototyping. This can be fruitfully exploited for experimenting with new languages and knowledge-representation formalisms.

The paper proposes a new knowledge representation language, called DLP<, which extends disjunctive logic programming (with strong negation) by inheritance. The addition of inheritance enhances the knowledge modeling features of the language providing a natural representation of default reasoning with exceptions. A declarative model-theoretic semantics of DLP< is provided, which is shown to generalize the Answer Set Semantics of disjunctive logic programs. The knowledge modeling features of the language are illustrated by encoding classical nonmonotonic problems in DLP<. The complexity of DLP< is analyzed, proving that inheritance does not cause any computational overhead, as reasoning in DLP< has exactly the same complexity as reasoning in disjunctive logic programming. This is confirmed by the existence of an efficient translation from DLP< to plain disjunctive logic programming. Using this translation, an advanced KR system supporting the DLP< language has been implemented on top of the DLV system and has subsequently been integrated into DLV.