In recent years, answer set programming (ASP) has been extended to deal with multivalued predicates. The resulting formalismsallow for the modeling of continuous problems as elegantly as ASP allows for the modeling of discrete problems, by combining thestable model semantics underlying ASP with fuzzy logics. However, contrary to the case of classical ASP where manyefficient solvers have been constructed, to date there is no efficient fuzzy ASP solver. A well-knowntechnique for classical ASP consists of translating an ASP program P to a propositional theory whose models exactlycorrespond to the answer sets of P. In this paper, we show how this idea can be extended to fuzzy ASP, paving the wayto implement efficient fuzzy ASP solvers that can take advantage of existing fuzzy logic reasoners.

Logic programming has developed as a rich field, built over a logical substratum whose main constituent is a nonclassical form of negation, sometimes coexisting with classical negation. The field has seen the advent of a number of alternative semantics, with Kripke–Kleene semantics, the well-founded semantics, the stable model semantics, and the answer-set semantics standing out as the most successful. We show that all aforementioned semantics are particular cases of a generic semantics, in a framework where classical negation is the unique form of negation and where the literals in the bodies of the rules can be ‘marked’ to indicate that they can be the targets of hypotheses. A particular semantics then amounts to choosing a particular marking scheme and choosing a particular set of hypotheses. When a literal belongs to the chosen set of hypotheses, all marked occurrences of that literal in the body of a rule are assumed to be true, whereas the occurrences of that literal that have not been marked in the body of the rule are to be derived in order to contribute to the firing of the rule. Hence the notion of hypothetical reasoning that is presented in this framework is not based on making global assumptions, but more subtly on making local, contextual assumptions, taking effect as indicated by the chosen marking scheme on the basis of the chosen set of hypotheses. Our approach offers a unified view on the various semantics proposed in logic programming, classical in that only classical negation is used, and links the semantics of logic programs to mechanisms that endow rule-based systems with the power to harness hypothetical reasoning.

Coding standards and good practices are fundamental to a disciplined approach to software projects irrespective of programing languages being employed. Prolog programing can benefit from such an approach, perhaps more than programing in other languages. Despite this, no widely accepted standards and practices seem to have emerged till now. The present paper is a first step toward filling this void: It provides immediate guidelines for code layout, naming conventions, documentation, proper use of Prolog features, program development, debugging, and testing. Presented with each guideline is its rationale and, where sensible options exist, illustrations of the relative pros and cons for each alternative. A coding standard should always be selected on a per-project basis, based on a host of issues pertinent to any given programing project; for this reason the paper goes beyond the mere provision of normative guidelines by discussing key factors and important criteria that should be taken into account when deciding on a full-fledged coding standard for the project.

The paper presents a simple and concise proof of correctness of the magic transformation. We believe that it may provide a useful example of formal reasoning about logic programs. The correctness property concerns the declarative semantics. The proof, however, refers to the operational semantics (LD-resolution) of the source programs. Its conciseness is due to applying a suitable proof method.