This special issue of Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) contains the regular papers accepted for presentation at the 33rd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2017), held in Melbourne, Australia from the 28th of August to the 1st of September, 2017. ICLP 2017 was colocated with the 23rd International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2017) and the 20th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2017). Since the first conference held in Marseille in 1982, ICLP has been the premier international event for presenting research in logic programming.

This paper introduces GLINTS, a graphical tool for exploring variant narrowing computations in Maude. The most recent version of Maude, version 2.7.1, provides quite sophisticated unification features, including order-sorted equational unification for convergent theories modulo axioms such as associativity, commutativity, and identity. This novel equational unification relies on built-in generation of the set of variants of a term t, i.e., the canonical form of tσ for a computed substitution σ. Variant generation relies on a novel narrowing strategy called folding variant narrowing that opens up new applications in formal reasoning, theorem proving, testing, protocol analysis, and model checking, especially when the theory satisfies the finite variant property, i.e., there is a finite number of most general variants for every term in the theory. However, variant narrowing computations can be extremely involved and are simply presented in text format by Maude, often being too heavy to be debugged or even understood. The GLINTS system provides support for (i) determining whether a given theory satisfies the finite variant property, (ii) thoroughly exploring variant narrowing computations, (iii) automatic checking of node embedding and closedness modulo axioms, and (iv) querying and inspecting selected parts of the variant trees.

Many practical problems are characterized by a preference relation over admissible solutions, where preferred solutions are minimal in some sense. For example, a preferred diagnosis usually comprises a minimal set of reasons that is sufficient to cause the observed anomaly. Alternatively, a minimal correction subset comprises a minimal set of reasons whose deletion is sufficient to eliminate the observed anomaly. Circumscription formalizes such preference relations by associating propositional theories with minimal models. The resulting enumeration problem is addressed here by means of a new algorithm taking advantage of unsatisfiable core analysis. Empirical evidence of the efficiency of the algorithm is given by comparing the performance of the resulting solver, circumscriptino, with hclasp, camus_mcs, lbx and mcsls on the enumeration of minimal models for problems originating from practical applications.

Ontology-based query answering asks whether a Boolean conjunctive query is satisfied by all models of a logical theory consisting of a relational database paired with an ontology. The introduction of existential rules (i.e., Datalog rules extended with existential quantifiers in rule heads) as a means to specify the ontology gave birth to Datalog+/-, a framework that has received increasing attention in the last decade, with focus also on decidability and finite controllability to support effective reasoning. Five basic decidable fragments have been singled out: linear, weakly acyclic, guarded, sticky, and shy. Moreover, for all these fragments, except shy, the important property of finite controllability has been proved, ensuring that a query is satisfied by all models of the theory iff it is satisfied by all its finite models. In this paper, we complete the picture by demonstrating that finite controllability of ontology-based query answering holds also for shy ontologies, and it therefore applies to all basic decidable Datalog+/- classes. To make the demonstration, we devise a general technique to facilitate the process of (dis)proving finite controllability of an arbitrary ontological fragment.

In complex reasoning tasks, as expressible by Answer Set Programming (ASP), problems often permit for multiple solutions. In dynamic environments, where knowledge is continuously changing, the question arises how a given model can be incrementally adjusted relative to new and outdated information. This paper introduces Ticker, a prototypical engine for well-defined logical reasoning over streaming data. Ticker builds on a practical fragment of the recent rule-based language LARS, which extends ASP for streams by providing flexible expiration control and temporal modalities. We discuss Ticker's reasoning strategies: first, the repeated one-shot solving mode calls Clingo on an ASP encoding. We show how this translation can be incrementally updated when new data is streaming in or time passes by. Based on this, we build on Doyle's classic justification-based truth-maintenance system to update models of non-stratified programs. Finally, we empirically compare the obtained evaluation mechanisms.

Management of chronic diseases, such as heart failure, is a major public health problem. A standard approach to managing chronic diseases by medical community is to have a committee of experts develop guidelines that all physicians should follow. Due to their complexity, these guidelines are difficult to implement and are adopted slowly by the medical community at large. We have developed a physician advisory system that codes the entire set of clinical practice guidelines for managing heart failure using answer set programming. In this paper, we show how abductive reasoning can be deployed to find missing symptoms and conditions that the patient must exhibit in order for a treatment prescribed by a physician to work effectively. Thus, if a physician does not make an appropriate recommendation or makes a non-adherent recommendation, our system will advise the physician about symptoms and conditions that must be in effect for that recommendation to apply. It is under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

Answer set programming (ASP) is a well-established declarative paradigm. One of the successes of ASP is the availability of efficient systems. State-of-the-art systems are based on the ground+solve approach. In some applications, this approach is infeasible because the grounding of one or a few constraints is expensive. In this paper, we systematically compare alternative strategies to avoid the instantiation of problematic constraints, which are based on custom extensions of the solver. Results on real and synthetic benchmarks highlight some strengths and weaknesses of the different strategies.

One promising trend in digital system integration consists of boosting on-chip communication performance by means of silicon photonics, thus materializing the so-called Optical Networks-on-Chip. Among them, wavelength routing can be used to route a signal to destination by univocally associating a routing path to the wavelength of the optical carrier. Such wavelengths should be chosen so to minimize interferences among optical channels and to avoid routing faults. As a result, physical parameter selection of such networks requires the solution of complex constrained optimization problems. In previous work, published in the proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, we proposed and solved the problem of computing the maximum parallelism obtainable in the communication between any two endpoints while avoiding misrouting of optical signals. The underlying technology, only quickly mentioned in that paper, is Answer Set Programming. In this work, we detail the Answer Set Programming approach we used to solve such problem.

Another important design issue is to select the wavelengths of optical carriers such that they are spread across the available spectrum, in order to reduce the likelihood that, due to imperfections in the manufacturing process, unintended routing faults arise. We show how to address such problem in Constraint Logic Programming on Finite Domains.

Defeasible logics provide several linguistic features to support the expression of defeasible knowledge. There is also a wide variety of such logics, expressing different intuitions about defeasible reasoning. However, the logics can only combine in trivial ways. This limits their usefulness in contexts where different intuitions are at play in different aspects of a problem. In particular, in some legal settings, different actors have different burdens of proof, which might be expressed as reasoning in different defeasible logics. In this paper, we introduce annotated defeasible logic as a flexible formalism permitting multiple forms of defeasibility, and establish some properties of the formalism.

Among the myriad of desirable properties discussed in the context of forgetting in Answer Set Programming, strong persistence naturally captures its essence. Recently, it has been shown that it is not always possible to forget a set of atoms from a program while obeying this property, and a precise criterion regarding what can be forgotten has been presented, accompanied by a class of forgetting operators that return the correct result when forgetting is possible. However, it is an open question what to do when we have to forget a set of atoms, but cannot without violating this property. In this paper, we address this issue and investigate three natural alternatives to forget when forgetting without violating strong persistence is not possible, which turn out to correspond to the different possible relaxations of the characterization of strong persistence. Additionally, we discuss their preferable usage, shed light on the relation between forgetting and notions of relativized equivalence established earlier in the context of Answer Set Programming, and present a detailed study on their computational complexity.

We argue that turning a logic program into a set of completed definitions can be sometimes thought of as the “reverse engineering” process of generating a set of conditions that could serve as a specification for it. Accordingly, it may be useful to define completion for a large class of Answer Set Programming (ASP) programs and to automate the process of generating and simplifying completion formulas. Examining the output produced by this kind of software may help programmers to see more clearly what their program does, and to what degree its behavior conforms with their expectations. As a step toward this goal, we propose here a definition of program completion for a large class of programs in the input language of the ASP grounder gringo, and study its properties.

The recent series 5 of the Answer Set Programming (ASP) system clingo provides generic means to enhance basic ASP with theory reasoning capabilities. We instantiate this framework with different forms of linear constraints and elaborate upon its formal properties. Given this, we discuss the respective implementations, and present techniques for using these constraints in a reactive context. More precisely, we introduce extensions to clingo with difference and linear constraints over integers and reals, respectively, and realize them in complementary ways. Finally, we empirically evaluate the resulting clingo derivatives clingo[dl] and clingo[lp] on common language fragments and contrast them to related ASP systems.

Hybrid MKNF knowledge bases have been considered one of the dominant approaches to combining open world ontology languages with closed world rule-based languages. Currently, the only known inference methods are based on the approach of guess-and-verify, while most modern SAT/ASP solvers are built under the DPLL architecture. The central impediment here is that it is not clear what constitutes a constraint propagator, a key component employed in any DPLL-based solver. In this paper, we address this problem by formulating the notion of unfounded sets for non-disjunctive hybrid MKNF knowledge bases, based on which we propose and study two new well-founded operators. We show that by employing a well-founded operator as a constraint propagator, a sound and complete DPLL search engine can be readily defined. We compare our approach with the operator based on the alternating fixpoint construction by Knorr et al. (2011. Artificial Intelligence 175, 9, 1528–1554) and show that, when applied to arbitrary partial partitions, the new well-founded operators not only propagate more truth values but also circumvent the non-converging behavior of the latter. In addition, we study the possibility of simplifying a given hybrid MKNF knowledge base by employing a well-founded operator and show that, out of the two operators proposed in this paper, the weaker one can be applied for this purpose and the stronger one cannot. These observations are useful in implementing a grounder for hybrid MKNF knowledge bases, which can be applied before the computation of MKNF models.

Logic Programming is a Turing complete language. As a consequence, designing algorithms that decide termination and non-termination of programs or decide inductive/coinductive soundness of formulae is a challenging task. For example, the existing state-of-the-art algorithms can only semi-decide coinductive soundness of queries in logic programming for regular formulae. Another, less famous, but equally fundamental and important undecidable property is productivity. If a derivation is infinite and coinductively sound, we may ask whether the computed answer it determines actually computes an infinite formula. If it does, the infinite computation is productive. This intuition was first expressed under the name of computations at infinity in the 80s. In modern days of the Internet and stream processing, its importance lies in connection to infinite data structure processing. Recently, an algorithm was presented that semi-decides a weaker property – of productivity of logic programs. A logic program is productive if it can give rise to productive derivations. In this paper, we strengthen these recent results. We propose a method that semi-decides productivity of individual derivations for regular formulae. Thus, we at last give an algorithmic counterpart to the notion of productivity of derivations in logic programming. This is the first algorithmic solution to the problem since it was raised more than 30 years ago. We also present an implementation of this algorithm.

Both hybrid automata and action languages are formalisms for describing the evolution of dynamic systems. This paper establishes a formal relationship between them. We show how to succinctly represent hybrid automata in an action language which in turn is defined as a high-level notation for answer set programming modulo theories—an extension of answer set programs to the first-order level similar to the way satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) extends propositional satisfiability (SAT). We first show how to represent linear hybrid automata with convex invariants by an action language modulo theories. A further translation into SMT allows for computing them using SMT solvers that support arithmetic over reals. Next, we extend the representation to the general class of non-linear hybrid automata allowing even non-convex invariants. We represent them by an action language modulo ordinary differential equations, which can be compiled into satisfiability modulo ordinary differential equations. We present a prototype system cplus2aspmt based on these translations, which allows for a succinct representation of hybrid transition systems that can be computed effectively by the state-of-the-art SMT solver dReal.

LPMLN is a recent addition to probabilistic logic programming languages. Its main idea is to overcome the rigid nature of the stable model semantics by assigning a weight to each rule in a way similar to Markov Logic is defined. We present two implementations of LPMLN, lpmln2asp and lpmln2mln. System lpmln2asp translates LPMLN programs into the input language of answer set solver clingo, and using weak constraints and stable model enumeration, it can compute most probable stable models as well as exact conditional and marginal probabilities. System lpmln2mln translates LPMLN programs into the input language of Markov Logic solvers, such as alchemy, tuffy, and rockit, and allows for performing approximate probabilistic inference on LPMLN programs. We also demonstrate the usefulness of the LPMLN systems for computing other languages, such as ProbLog and Pearl's Causal Models, that are shown to be translatable into LPMLN.

This paper describes an approach to the methodology of answer set programming that can facilitate the design of encodings that are easy to understand and provably correct. Under this approach, after appending a rule or a small group of rules to the emerging program, we include a comment that states what has been “achieved” so far. This strategy allows us to set out our understanding of the design of the program by describing the roles of small parts of the program in a mathematically precise way.

M. Bezem defined an extensional semantics for positive higher-order logic programs. Recently, it was demonstrated by Rondogiannis and Symeonidou that Bezem's technique can be extended to higher-order logic programs with negation, retaining its extensional properties, provided that it is interpreted under a logic with an infinite number of truth values. Rondogiannis and Symeonidou also demonstrated that Bezem's technique, when extended under the stable model semantics, does not in general lead to extensional stable models. In this paper, we consider the problem of extending Bezem's technique under the well-founded semantics. We demonstrate that the well-founded extension fails to retain extensionality in the general case. On the positive side, we demonstrate that for stratified higher-order logic programs, extensionality is indeed achieved. We analyze the reasons of the failure of extensionality in the general case, arguing that a three-valued setting cannot distinguish between certain predicates that appear to have a different behaviour inside a program context, but which happen to be identical as three-valued relations.

Constraint handling rules provide descriptions for constraint solvers. However, they fall short when those constraints specify some binding structure, like higher-rank types in a constraint-based type inference algorithm. In this paper, the term syntax of constraints is replaced by λ-tree syntax, in which binding is explicit, and a new ∇ generic quantifier is introduced, which is used to create new fresh constants.

In inductive learning of a broad concept, an algorithm should be able to distinguish concept examples from exceptions and noisy data. An approach through recursively finding patterns in exceptions turns out to correspond to the problem of learning default theories. Default logic is what humans employ in common-sense reasoning. Therefore, learned default theories are better understood by humans. In this paper, we present new algorithms to learn default theories in the form of non-monotonic logic programs. Experiments reported in this paper show that our algorithms are a significant improvement over traditional approaches based on inductive logic programming. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.