skip to main content
research-article
Free Access

Answer set programming at a glance

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 December 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The motivation and key concepts behind answer set programming---a promising approach to declarative problem solving.

References

  1. Baral, C. Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Baral, C., Gelfond, M. and Rushton, J.N. Probabilistic reasoning with answer sets. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 9, 1 (2009), 57--144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Baselice, S., Bonatti, P.A. and Criscuolo, G. On finitely recursive programs. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 9, 2 (2009), 213--238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Boenn, G., Brain, M., Vos, M.D. and Fitch, J. Automatic music composition using answer set programming. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 11, 2--3 (2011), 397--427. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Brain, M. and Vos, M.D. Debugging logic programs under the answer set semantics. In Proc. 3rd International Workshop on Answer Set Programming, CEUR Workshop Proceedings 142, 2005. M. De Vos and A. Provetti, Eds.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Brewka, G., Niemelä, I. and Truszczyński, M. Answer set optimization. In Proc. 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. G. Gottlob and T.Walsh, Eds. Morgan Kaufmann, 2003, 867--872. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Brummayer, R. and Järvisalo, M. Testing and debugging techniques for answer set solver development. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 10, 4--6 (2010) 741--758. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Calimeri, F., Cozza, S., Ianni, G. and Leone, N. Computable functions in ASP: Theory and implementation. In Proc. 24th International Conference on Logic Programming, LNCS 5366. M. Garcia de La Banda and E. Pontelli, Eds. Springer, 2008, 407--424. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dantsin, E., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G. and Voronkov, A. Complexity and expressive power of logic programming. ACM Computing Surveys 33, 3 (2001), 374--425. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Dao-Tran, M., Eiter, T., Fink, M. and Krennwallner, T. Modular nonmonotonic logic programming revisited. In Proc. 25th International Conference on Logic Programming, LNCS 5649. P. M. Hill and D.S. Warren, Eds. Springer, 2009, 145--159. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Eiter, T. and Gottlob, G. On the computational cost of disjunctive logic programming: Propositional case. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 15, 3/4 (1995), 289--323.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., and Krennwallner, T. Answer set programming: A primer. Reasoning Web, LNCS 5689. S. Tessaris, E. Franconi, T. Eiter, C. Gutierrez, S. Handschuh, M.-C. Rousset, and R. A. Schmidt, Eds. Springer, 2009, 40--110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R. and Tompits, H. A uniform integration of higher-order reasoning and external evaluations in answer-set programming. In Proc. 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. L. P. Kaelbling and A. Saffiotti, Eds. 2005, 90--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Eiter, T. and Simkus, M. FDNC: Decidable nonmonotonic disjunctive logic programs with function symbols. ACM Trans. Computational Logic 11, 2 (2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Erdem, E. Applications of answer set programming in phylogenetic systematics. Logic Programming, Knowledge Representation, and Nonmonotonic-Reasoning: Essays Dedicated to Michael Gelfond on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, LNCS 6565. M. Balduccini and T. C. Son, Eds. Springer, 2011, 415--431. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Faber, W., Pfeifer, G., Leone, N., Dell'Armi, T. and Ielpa, G. Design and implementation of aggregate functions in the DLV system. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8, 5--6 (2008), 545--580. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Ferraris, P., Lee, J. and Lifschitz, V. Stable models and circumscription. Artificial Intelligence 175, 1 (2011), 236--263. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Friedrich, G., Fugini, M., Mussi, E., Pernici, B. and Tagni, G. Exception handling for repair in service-based processes. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 36, 2 (2010) 198--215. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Gebser, M., Guziolowski, C., Ivanchev, M., Schaub, T., Siegel, A., Thiele, S. and Veber, P. Repair and prediction (under inconsistency) in large biological networks with answer set programming. In Proc. 12th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. F. Lin, U. Sattler, and M. Truszczynski, Eds., 2010, 497--507.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Gelfond, M. and Lifschitz, V. The stable model semantics for logic programming. Logic Programming: The 5th International Conference and Symposium. R.A. Kowalski and K. Bowen, Eds. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1988, 1070--1080,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Gelfond M. and Lifschitz, V. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9 (1991), 365--385.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Greco, S., Molinaro, C., Trubitsyna, I. and Zumpano, E. NP datalog: A logic language for expressing search and optimization problems. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 10, 2 (2010), 125--166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Janhunen, T., Oikarinen, E., Tompits, H. and Woltran, S. Modularity aspects of disjunctive stable models. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 35 (2009), 813--857. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Kautz, H.A. and Selman, B. Planning as satisfiability. In Proc. 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. B. Neumann, Ed. 1992, 359--363. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Leone, N., Rullo, P. and Scarcello, F. Disjunctive stable models: Unfounded sets, fixpoint semantics and computation. Information and Computation 135, 2 (June 1997), 69--112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Lifschitz, V. Answer set programming and plan generation. Artificial Intelligence 138 (2002), 39--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D. and Valverde, A. Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Trans. Computational Logic 2, 4 (2001), 526--541. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Lin, F. and Zhao, Y. ASSAT: Computing answer sets of a logic program by SAT solvers. In Proc'18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and 14th Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2002, 112--117. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Marek, V.W. and Truszczyński, M. Autoepistemic logic. J. ACM 38, 3 (1991) 588--619. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Marek, V.W. and Truszczyński, M. Stable models and an alternative logic programming paradigm. The Logic Programming Paradigm---A 25-Year Perspective. K. Apt, K.V. V.W. Marek, M.W. Truszczyński and D.S. Warren, Eds. Springer, 1999, 375--398.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Marek, V.W. and Truszczyński, M. Nonmonotonic Logics - Context-Dependent Reasoning. Springer, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Niemelä, I. Logic programming with stable model semantics as constraint programming paradigm. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25, 3--4 (1999), 241--273. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Niemelä, I. Stable models and difference logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 53, 1 (2008), 313--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Nogueira, M., Balduccini, M., Gelfond, M., Watson, R. and Barry, M. A Prolog decision support system for the space shuttle. In Proc. 1st International Workshop on Answer Set Programming. A. Provetti and T. C. Son, Eds, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Pearce, D. Equilibrium logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 47, 1--2 (2006), 3--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Pearce, D. and Valverde, A. Towards a first order equilibrium logic for nonmonotonic reasoning. In Proc. 9th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, LNCS 3229. Springer, 2004, 147--160.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Polleres, A. From SPARQL to rules (and back). In Proc. 16th International Conference on World Wide Web. C.L. Williamson, M.E. Zurko, P.F. Patel-Schneider, and P.J. Shenoy, Eds. ACM, 2007, 787--796. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Ricca, F., Grasso, G., Alviano, M., Manna, M. Lio, V. Liritano, S. and Leone, N. Team-building with answer set programming in the Gioia-Tauro seaport. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 2011; doi:10.1017/S147106841100007X. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Soininen, T. and Niemelä, I. Developing a declarative rule language for applications in product configuration. In Proc. 1st International Workshop on Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages, LNCS 1551. G. Gupta, Ed. Springer, 1999, 305--319. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Woltran, S. A common view on strong, uniform, and other notions of equivalence in answer-set programming. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8, 2 (2008), 217--234. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Answer set programming at a glance

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image Communications of the ACM
            Communications of the ACM  Volume 54, Issue 12
            December 2011
            121 pages
            ISSN:0001-0782
            EISSN:1557-7317
            DOI:10.1145/2043174
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2011 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 1 December 2011

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Popular
            • Refereed

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format