Showing 1–50 of 51 results for author: Woltran, S

Combining Voting and Abstract Argumentation to Understand Online Discussions

Authors: Michael Bernreiter, Jan Maly, Oliviero Nardi, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Online discussion platforms are a vital part of the public discourse in a deliberative democracy. However, how to interpret the outcomes of the discussions on these platforms is often unclear. In this paper, we propose a novel and explainable method for selecting a set of most representative, consistent points of view by combining methods from computational social choice and abstract argumentation… ▽ More Online discussion platforms are a vital part of the public discourse in a deliberative democracy. However, how to interpret the outcomes of the discussions on these platforms is often unclear. In this paper, we propose a novel and explainable method for selecting a set of most representative, consistent points of view by combining methods from computational social choice and abstract argumentation. Specifically, we model online discussions as abstract argumentation frameworks combined with information regarding which arguments voters approve of. Based on ideas from approval-based multiwinner voting, we introduce several voting rules for selecting a set of preferred extensions that represents voters' points of view. We compare the proposed methods across several dimensions, theoretically and in numerical simulations, and give clear suggestions on which methods to use depending on the specific situation. △ Less

Submitted 8 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

Comments: 33 pages. Extended version of an accepted AAMAS-24 paper

A Unified View on Forgetting and Strong Equivalence Notions in Answer Set Programming

Authors: Zeynep G. Saribatur, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a prominent rule-based language for knowledge representation and reasoning with roots in logic programming and non-monotonic reasoning. The aim to capture the essence of removing (ir)relevant details in ASP programs led to the investigation of different notions, from strong persistence (SP) forgetting, to faithful abstractions, and, recently, strong simplifications,… ▽ More Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a prominent rule-based language for knowledge representation and reasoning with roots in logic programming and non-monotonic reasoning. The aim to capture the essence of removing (ir)relevant details in ASP programs led to the investigation of different notions, from strong persistence (SP) forgetting, to faithful abstractions, and, recently, strong simplifications, where the latter two can be seen as relaxed and strengthened notions of forgetting, respectively. Although it was observed that these notions are related, especially given that they have characterizations through the semantics for strong equivalence, it remained unclear whether they can be brought together. In this work, we bridge this gap by introducing a novel relativized equivalence notion, which is a relaxation of the recent simplification notion, that is able to capture all related notions from the literature. We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for relativized simplifiability, which shows that the challenging part is for when the context programs do not contain all the atoms to remove. We then introduce an operator that combines projection and a relaxation of (SP)-forgetting to obtain the relativized simplifications. We furthermore present complexity results that complete the overall picture. △ Less

Submitted 13 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: This is an extended version of a paper to be published at AAAI 2024

Solving Projected Model Counting by Utilizing Treewidth and its Limits

Authors: Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Patrick Thier, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: In this paper, we introduce a novel algorithm to solve projected model counting (PMC). PMC asks to count solutions of a Boolean formula with respect to a given set of projection variables, where multiple solutions that are identical when restricted to the projection variables count as only one solution. Inspired by the observation that the so-called "treewidth" is one of the most prominent structu… ▽ More In this paper, we introduce a novel algorithm to solve projected model counting (PMC). PMC asks to count solutions of a Boolean formula with respect to a given set of projection variables, where multiple solutions that are identical when restricted to the projection variables count as only one solution. Inspired by the observation that the so-called "treewidth" is one of the most prominent structural parameters, our algorithm utilizes small treewidth of the primal graph of the input instance. More precisely, it runs in time O(2^2k+4n2) where k is the treewidth and n is the input size of the instance. In other words, we obtain that the problem PMC is fixed-parameter tractable when parameterized by treewidth. Further, we take the exponential time hypothesis (ETH) into consideration and establish lower bounds of bounded treewidth algorithms for PMC, yielding asymptotically tight runtime bounds of our algorithm. While the algorithm above serves as a first theoretical upper bound and although it might be quite appealing for small values of k, unsurprisingly a naive implementation adhering to this runtime bound suffers already from instances of relatively small width. Therefore, we turn our attention to several measures in order to resolve this issue towards exploiting treewidth in practice: We present a technique called nested dynamic programming, where different levels of abstractions of the primal graph are used to (recursively) compute and refine tree decompositions of a given instance. Finally, we provide a nested dynamic programming algorithm and an implementation that relies on database technology for PMC and a prominent special case of PMC, namely model counting (#Sat). Experiments indicate that the advancements are promising, allowing us to solve instances of treewidth upper bounds beyond 200. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2023; v1 submitted 30 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1805.05445

Rediscovering Argumentation Principles Utilizing Collective Attacks

Authors: Wolfgang Dvořák, Matthias König, Markus Ulbricht, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) are a key formalism in AI research. Their semantics have been investigated in terms of principles, which define characteristic properties in order to deliver guidance for analysing established and develo** new semantics. Because of the simple structure of AFs, many desired properties hold almost trivially, at the same time hiding interesting concepts behind syntact… ▽ More Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) are a key formalism in AI research. Their semantics have been investigated in terms of principles, which define characteristic properties in order to deliver guidance for analysing established and develo** new semantics. Because of the simple structure of AFs, many desired properties hold almost trivially, at the same time hiding interesting concepts behind syntactic notions. We extend the principle-based approach to Argumentation Frameworks with Collective Attacks (SETAFs) and provide a comprehensive overview of common principles for their semantics. Our analysis shows that investigating principles based on decomposing the given SETAF (e.g. directionality or SCC-recursiveness) poses additional challenges in comparison to usual AFs. We introduce the notion of the reduct as well as the modularization principle for SETAFs which will prove beneficial for this kind of investigation. We then demonstrate how our findings can be utilized for incremental computation of extensions and give a novel parameterized tractability result for verifying preferred extensions. △ Less

Submitted 6 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

The Effect of Preferences in Abstract Argumentation Under a Claim-Centric View

Authors: Michael Bernreiter, Wolfgang Dvorak, Anna Rapberger, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: In this paper, we study the effect of preferences in abstract argumentation under a claim-centric perspective. Recent work has revealed that semantical and computational properties can change when reasoning is performed on claim-level rather than on the argument-level, while under certain natural restrictions (arguments with the same claims have the same outgoing attacks) these properties are cons… ▽ More In this paper, we study the effect of preferences in abstract argumentation under a claim-centric perspective. Recent work has revealed that semantical and computational properties can change when reasoning is performed on claim-level rather than on the argument-level, while under certain natural restrictions (arguments with the same claims have the same outgoing attacks) these properties are conserved. We now investigate these effects when, in addition, preferences have to be taken into account and consider four prominent reductions to handle preferences between arguments. As we shall see, these reductions give rise to different classes of claim-augmented argumentation frameworks, and behave differently in terms of semantic properties and computational complexity. This strengthens the view that the actual choice for handling preferences has to be taken with care. △ Less

Submitted 28 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Aspartix-V21

Authors: Wolfgang Dvořák, Matthias König, Johannes P. Wallner, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: In this solver description we present ASPARTIX-V, in its 2021 edition, which participates in the International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation (ICCMA) 2021. ASPARTIX-V is capable of solving all classical (static) reasoning tasks part of ICCMA'21 and extends the ASPARTIX system suite by incorporation of recent ASP language constructs (e.g. conditional literals), domain heuristi… ▽ More In this solver description we present ASPARTIX-V, in its 2021 edition, which participates in the International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation (ICCMA) 2021. ASPARTIX-V is capable of solving all classical (static) reasoning tasks part of ICCMA'21 and extends the ASPARTIX system suite by incorporation of recent ASP language constructs (e.g. conditional literals), domain heuristics within ASP, and multi-shot methods. In this light ASPARTIX-V deviates from the traditional focus of ASPARTIX on monolithic approaches (i.e., one-shot solving via a single ASP encoding) to further enhance performance. △ Less

Submitted 7 September, 2021; originally announced September 2021.

Comments: Part of ICCMA 2021 proceedings

Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs

Authors: Viktor Besin, Markus Hecher, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Extending the popular Answer Set Programming (ASP) paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, i.e., contained in all or some ans… ▽ More Extending the popular Answer Set Programming (ASP) paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, i.e., contained in all or some answer sets, respectively. ELPs thus deliver multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. Employing ELPs for reasoning problems so far has mainly been restricted to standard decision problems (complexity analysis) and enumeration (development of systems) of world views. In this paper, we take a next step and contribute to epistemic logic programming in two ways: First, we establish quantitative reasoning for ELPs, where the acceptance of a certain set of literals depends on the number (proportion) of world views that are compatible with the set. Second, we present a novel system that is capable of efficiently solving the underlying counting problems required to answer such quantitative reasoning problems. Our system exploits the graph-based measure treewidth and works by iteratively finding and refining (graph) abstractions of an ELP program. On top of these abstractions, we apply dynamic programming that is combined with utilizing existing search-based solvers like (e)clingo for hard combinatorial subproblems that appear during solving. It turns out that our approach is competitive with existing systems that were introduced recently. This work is under consideration for acceptance in TPLP. △ Less

Submitted 6 August, 2021; originally announced August 2021.

Comments: Paper presented at the 37th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2021), 16 pages

Choice Logics and Their Computational Properties

Authors: Michael Bernreiter, Jan Maly, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Qualitative Choice Logic (QCL) and Conjunctive Choice Logic (CCL) are formalisms for preference handling, with especially QCL being well established in the field of AI. So far, analyses of these logics need to be done on a case-by-case basis, albeit they share several common features. This calls for a more general choice logic framework, with QCL and CCL as well as some of their derivatives being… ▽ More Qualitative Choice Logic (QCL) and Conjunctive Choice Logic (CCL) are formalisms for preference handling, with especially QCL being well established in the field of AI. So far, analyses of these logics need to be done on a case-by-case basis, albeit they share several common features. This calls for a more general choice logic framework, with QCL and CCL as well as some of their derivatives being particular instantiations. We provide such a framework, which allows us, on the one hand, to easily define new choice logics and, on the other hand, to examine properties of different choice logics in a uniform setting. In particular, we investigate strong equivalence, a core concept in non-classical logics for understanding formula simplification, and computational complexity. Our analysis also yields new results for QCL and CCL. For example, we show that the main reasoning task regarding preferred models is $Θ^p_2$-complete for QCL and CCL, while being $Δ^p_2$-complete for a newly introduced choice logic. △ Less

Submitted 9 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Comments: This is an extended version of a paper of the same name to be published at IJCAI 2021

Expressiveness of SETAFs and Support-Free ADFs under 3-valued Semantics

Authors: Wolfgang Dvořák, Atefeh Keshavarzi Zafarghandi, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Generalizing the attack structure in argumentation frameworks (AFs) has been studied in different ways. Most prominently, the binary attack relation of Dung frameworks has been extended to the notion of collective attacks. The resulting formalism is often termed SETAFs. Another approach is provided via abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), where acceptance conditions specify the relation between… ▽ More Generalizing the attack structure in argumentation frameworks (AFs) has been studied in different ways. Most prominently, the binary attack relation of Dung frameworks has been extended to the notion of collective attacks. The resulting formalism is often termed SETAFs. Another approach is provided via abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), where acceptance conditions specify the relation between arguments; restricting these conditions naturally allows for so-called support-free ADFs. The aim of the paper is to shed light on the relation between these two different approaches. To this end, we investigate and compare the expressiveness of SETAFs and support-free ADFs under the lens of 3-valued semantics. Our results show that it is only the presence of unsatisfiable acceptance conditions in support-free ADFs that discriminate the two approaches. △ Less

Submitted 7 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Structural Decompositions of Epistemic Logic Programs

Authors: Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Epistemic logic programs (ELPs) are a popular generalization of standard Answer Set Programming (ASP) providing means for reasoning over answer sets within the language. This richer formalism comes at the price of higher computational complexity reaching up to the fourth level of the polynomial hierarchy. However, in contrast to standard ASP, dedicated investigations towards tractability have not… ▽ More Epistemic logic programs (ELPs) are a popular generalization of standard Answer Set Programming (ASP) providing means for reasoning over answer sets within the language. This richer formalism comes at the price of higher computational complexity reaching up to the fourth level of the polynomial hierarchy. However, in contrast to standard ASP, dedicated investigations towards tractability have not been undertaken yet. In this paper, we give first results in this direction and show that central ELP problems can be solved in linear time for ELPs exhibiting structural properties in terms of bounded treewidth. We also provide a full dynamic programming algorithm that adheres to these bounds. Finally, we show that applying treewidth to a novel dependency structure---given in terms of epistemic literals---allows to bound the number of ASP solver calls in typical ELP solving procedures. △ Less

Submitted 13 January, 2020; originally announced January 2020.

MSC Class: 68T27 ACM Class: I.2.8; G.2.2; G.2.3; F.4.1

Exploiting Database Management Systems and Treewidth for Counting

Authors: Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Patrick Thier, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Bounded treewidth is one of the most cited combinatorial invariants, which was applied in the literature for solving several counting problems efficiently. A canonical counting problem is #SAT, which asks to count the satisfying assignments of a Boolean formula. Recent work shows that benchmarking instances for #SAT often have reasonably small treewidth. This paper deals with counting problems for… ▽ More Bounded treewidth is one of the most cited combinatorial invariants, which was applied in the literature for solving several counting problems efficiently. A canonical counting problem is #SAT, which asks to count the satisfying assignments of a Boolean formula. Recent work shows that benchmarking instances for #SAT often have reasonably small treewidth. This paper deals with counting problems for instances of small treewidth. We introduce a general framework to solve counting questions based on state-of-the-art database management systems (DBMS). Our framework takes explicitly advantage of small treewidth by solving instances using dynamic programming (DP) on tree decompositions (TD). Therefore, we implement the concept of DP into a DBMS (PostgreSQL), since DP algorithms are already often given in terms of table manipulations in theory. This allows for elegant specifications of DP algorithms and the use of SQL to manipulate records and tables, which gives us a natural approach to bring DP algorithms into practice. To the best of our knowledge, we present the first approach to employ a DBMS for algorithms on TDs. A key advantage of our approach is that DBMS naturally allow to deal with huge tables with a limited amount of main memory (RAM), parallelization, as well as suspending computation. △ Less

Submitted 3 February, 2021; v1 submitted 13 January, 2020; originally announced January 2020.

Comments: Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

ACM Class: H.2.8; I.2.4; I.2.8; I.2.11; G.2.1; G.2.2; G.2.3

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 22 (2022) 128-157

selp: A Single-Shot Epistemic Logic Program Solver

Authors: Manuel Bichler, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Epistemic Logic Programs (ELPs) are an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with epistemic operators that allow for a form of meta-reasoning, that is, reasoning over multiple possible worlds. Existing ELP solving approaches generally rely on making multiple calls to an ASP solver in order to evaluate the ELP. However, in this paper, we show that there also exists a direct translation from ELP… ▽ More Epistemic Logic Programs (ELPs) are an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with epistemic operators that allow for a form of meta-reasoning, that is, reasoning over multiple possible worlds. Existing ELP solving approaches generally rely on making multiple calls to an ASP solver in order to evaluate the ELP. However, in this paper, we show that there also exists a direct translation from ELPs into non-ground ASP with bounded arity. The resulting ASP program can thus be solved in a single shot. We then implement this encoding method, using recently proposed techniques to handle large, non-ground ASP rules, into the prototype ELP solving system "selp", which we present in this paper. This solver exhibits competitive performance on a set of ELP benchmark instances. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). △ Less

Submitted 4 January, 2020; originally announced January 2020.

Comments: 19 pages, 2 figures, under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

ACM Class: F.4.1; I.2.4

Solving Advanced Argumentation Problems with Answer Set Programming

Authors: Gerhard Brewka, Martin Diller, Georg Heissenberger, Thomas Linsbichler, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Powerful formalisms for abstract argumentation have been proposed, among them abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) that allow for a succinct and flexible specification of the relationship between arguments, and the GRAPPA framework which allows argumentation scenarios to be represented as arbitrary edge-labelled graphs. The complexity of ADFs and GRAPPA is located beyond NP and ranges up to the… ▽ More Powerful formalisms for abstract argumentation have been proposed, among them abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) that allow for a succinct and flexible specification of the relationship between arguments, and the GRAPPA framework which allows argumentation scenarios to be represented as arbitrary edge-labelled graphs. The complexity of ADFs and GRAPPA is located beyond NP and ranges up to the third level of the polynomial hierarchy. The combined complexity of Answer Set Programming (ASP) exactly matches this complexity when programs are restricted to predicates of bounded arity. In this paper, we exploit this coincidence and present novel efficient translations from ADFs and GRAPPA to ASP. More specifically, we provide reductions for the five main ADF semantics of admissible, complete, preferred, grounded, and stable interpretations, and exemplify how these reductions need to be adapted for GRAPPA for the admissible, complete and preferred semantics. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). △ Less

Submitted 5 December, 2019; originally announced December 2019.

Comments: Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 20 (2020) 391-431

Design and Results of the Second International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation

Authors: Sarah A. Gaggl, Thomas Linsbichler, Marco Maratea, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Argumentation is a major topic in the study of Artificial Intelligence. Since the first edition in 2015, advancements in solving (abstract) argumentation frameworks are assessed in competition events, similar to other closely related problem solving technologies. In this paper, we report about the design and results of the Second International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation,… ▽ More Argumentation is a major topic in the study of Artificial Intelligence. Since the first edition in 2015, advancements in solving (abstract) argumentation frameworks are assessed in competition events, similar to other closely related problem solving technologies. In this paper, we report about the design and results of the Second International Competition on Computational Models of Argumentation, which has been jointly organized by TU Dresden (Germany), TU Wien (Austria), and the University of Genova (Italy), in affiliation with the 2017 International Workshop on Theory and Applications of Formal Argumentation. This second edition maintains some of the design choices made in the first event, e.g. the I/O formats, the basic reasoning problems, and the organization into tasks and tracks. At the same time, it introduces significant novelties, e.g. three additional prominent semantics, and an instance selection stage for classifying instances according to their empirical hardness. △ Less

Submitted 2 September, 2019; originally announced September 2019.

Comments: submitted to Artificial Intelligence

On Uniform Equivalence of Epistemic Logic Programs

Authors: Wolfgang Faber, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

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 ou… ▽ More 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. △ Less

Submitted 25 July, 2019; originally announced July 2019.

Comments: Accepted for publication and presentation at the 35th International Conference of Logic Programming, ICLP 2019, in Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 19 (2019) 826-840

Strong Equivalence for Epistemic Logic Programs Made Easy (Extended Version)

Authors: Wolfgang Faber, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: 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 equiva… ▽ More 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. △ Less

Submitted 12 November, 2018; originally announced November 2018.

Comments: Long version of paper published at AAAI'19, extended with full proofs

Weighted Abstract Dialectical Frameworks: Extended and Revised Report

Authors: Gerhard Brewka, Jörg Pührer, Hannes Strass, Johannes P. Wallner, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) generalize Dung's argumentation frameworks allowing various relationships among arguments to be expressed in a systematic way. We further generalize ADFs so as to accommodate arbitrary acceptance degrees for the arguments. This makes ADFs applicable in domains where both the initial status of arguments and their relationship are only insufficiently specified… ▽ More Abstract Dialectical Frameworks (ADFs) generalize Dung's argumentation frameworks allowing various relationships among arguments to be expressed in a systematic way. We further generalize ADFs so as to accommodate arbitrary acceptance degrees for the arguments. This makes ADFs applicable in domains where both the initial status of arguments and their relationship are only insufficiently specified by Boolean functions. We define all standard ADF semantics for the weighted case, including grounded, preferred and stable semantics. We illustrate our approach using acceptance degrees from the unit interval and show how other valuation structures can be integrated. In each case it is sufficient to specify how the generalized acceptance conditions are represented by formulas, and to specify the information ordering underlying the characteristic ADF operator. We also present complexity results for problems related to weighted ADFs. △ Less

Submitted 7 September, 2018; v1 submitted 20 June, 2018; originally announced June 2018.

Comments: This is an extended and corrected version of the paper Weighted Abstract Dialectical Frameworks published in the Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2018)

Report number: DBAI-TR-2018-110

Exploiting Treewidth for Projected Model Counting and its Limits

Authors: Johannes K. Fichte, Michael Morak, Markus Hecher, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: In this paper, we introduce a novel algorithm to solve projected model counting (PMC). PMC asks to count solutions of a Boolean formula with respect to a given set of projected variables, where multiple solutions that are identical when restricted to the projected variables count as only one solution. Our algorithm exploits small treewidth of the primal graph of the input instance. It runs in time… ▽ More In this paper, we introduce a novel algorithm to solve projected model counting (PMC). PMC asks to count solutions of a Boolean formula with respect to a given set of projected variables, where multiple solutions that are identical when restricted to the projected variables count as only one solution. Our algorithm exploits small treewidth of the primal graph of the input instance. It runs in time $O({2^{2^{k+4}} n^2})$ where k is the treewidth and n is the input size of the instance. In other words, we obtain that the problem PMC is fixed-parameter tractable when parameterized by treewidth. Further, we take the exponential time hypothesis (ETH) into consideration and establish lower bounds of bounded treewidth algorithms for PMC, yielding asymptotically tight runtime bounds of our algorithm. △ Less

Submitted 14 May, 2018; originally announced May 2018.

Do Hard SAT-Related Reasoning Tasks Become Easier in the Krom Fragment?

Authors: Nadia Creignou, Reinhard Pichler, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Many reasoning problems are based on the problem of satisfiability (SAT). While SAT itself becomes easy when restricting the structure of the formulas in a certain way, the situation is more opaque for more involved decision problems. We consider here the CardMinSat problem which asks, given a propositional formula $φ$ and an atom $x$, whether $x$ is true in some cardinality-minimal model of $φ$.… ▽ More Many reasoning problems are based on the problem of satisfiability (SAT). While SAT itself becomes easy when restricting the structure of the formulas in a certain way, the situation is more opaque for more involved decision problems. We consider here the CardMinSat problem which asks, given a propositional formula $φ$ and an atom $x$, whether $x$ is true in some cardinality-minimal model of $φ$. This problem is easy for the Horn fragment, but, as we will show in this paper, remains $Θ_2$-complete (and thus $\mathrm{NP}$-hard) for the Krom fragment (which is given by formulas in CNF where clauses have at most two literals). We will make use of this fact to study the complexity of reasoning tasks in belief revision and logic-based abduction and show that, while in some cases the restriction to Krom formulas leads to a decrease of complexity, in others it does not. We thus also consider the CardMinSat problem with respect to additional restrictions to Krom formulas towards a better understanding of the tractability frontier of such problems. △ Less

Submitted 29 October, 2018; v1 submitted 21 November, 2017; originally announced November 2017.

Journal ref: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 14, Issue 4 (October 31, 2018) lmcs:4091

When You Must Forget: beyond strong persistence when forgetting in answer set programming

Authors: Ricardo Gonçalves, Matthias Knorr, João Leite, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Among the myriad of desirable properties discussed in the context of forgetting in Answer Set Programming (ASP), 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 forget… ▽ More Among the myriad of desirable properties discussed in the context of forgetting in Answer Set Programming (ASP), 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 ASP, and present a detailed study on their computational complexity. △ Less

Submitted 17 July, 2017; originally announced July 2017.

Comments: Paper presented at the 33nd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2017), Melbourne, Australia, August 28 to September 1, 2017, 15 pages, LaTeX (arXiv:YYMM.NNNNN)

ACM Class: I.2.4

Defensive Alliances in Graphs of Bounded Treewidth

Authors: Bernhard Bliem, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: A set S of vertices of a graph is a defensive alliance if, for each element of S, the majority of its neighbors is in S. The problem of finding a defensive alliance of minimum size in a given graph is NP-hard and there are polynomial-time algorithms if certain parameters are bounded by a fixed constant. In particular, fixed-parameter tractability results have been obtained for some structural para… ▽ More A set S of vertices of a graph is a defensive alliance if, for each element of S, the majority of its neighbors is in S. The problem of finding a defensive alliance of minimum size in a given graph is NP-hard and there are polynomial-time algorithms if certain parameters are bounded by a fixed constant. In particular, fixed-parameter tractability results have been obtained for some structural parameters such as the vertex cover number. However, for the parameter treewidth, the question of whether the problem is FPT has remained open. This is unfortunate because treewidth is perhaps the most prominent graph parameter and has proven successful for many problems. In this work, we give a negative answer by showing that the problem is W[1]-hard when parameterized by treewidth, which rules out FPT algorithms under common assumptions. This is surprising since the problem is known to be FPT when parameterized by solution size and "subset problems" that satisfy this property usually tend to be FPT for bounded treewidth as well. We prove W[1]-hardness by using techniques from a recent hardness result for the problem of finding so-called secure sets in a graph. △ Less

Submitted 12 July, 2017; originally announced July 2017.

Comments: 18 pages, 9 figures. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1411.6549

MSC Class: 68Q25 ACM Class: F.2.2

DynASP2.5: Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions in Action

Authors: Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: A vibrant theoretical research area are efficient exact parameterized algorithms. Very recent solving competitions such as the PACE challenge show that there is also increasing practical interest in the parameterized algorithms community. An important research question is whether dedicated parameterized exact algorithms exhibit certain practical relevance and one can even beat well-established pro… ▽ More A vibrant theoretical research area are efficient exact parameterized algorithms. Very recent solving competitions such as the PACE challenge show that there is also increasing practical interest in the parameterized algorithms community. An important research question is whether dedicated parameterized exact algorithms exhibit certain practical relevance and one can even beat well-established problem solvers. We consider the logic-based declarative modeling language and problem solving framework Answer Set Programming (ASP). State-of-the-art ASP solvers rely considerably on Sat-based algorithms. An ASP solver (DynASP2), which is based on a classical dynamic programming on tree decompositions, has been published very recently. Unfortunately, DynASP2 can outperform modern ASP solvers on programs of small treewidth only if the question of interest is to count the number of solutions. In this paper, we describe underlying concepts of our new implementation (DynASP2.5) that shows competitive behavior to state-of-the-art ASP solvers even for finding just one solution when solving problems as the Steiner tree problem that have been modeled in ASP on graphs with low treewidth. Our implementation is based on a novel approach that we call multi-pass dynamic programming (M-DPSINC). △ Less

Submitted 28 June, 2017; originally announced June 2017.

Answer Set Solving with Bounded Treewidth Revisited

Authors: Johannes Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Parameterized algorithms are a way to solve hard problems more efficiently, given that a specific parameter of the input is small. In this paper, we apply this idea to the field of answer set programming (ASP). To this end, we propose two kinds of graph representations of programs to exploit their treewidth as a parameter. Treewidth roughly measures to which extent the internal structure of a prog… ▽ More Parameterized algorithms are a way to solve hard problems more efficiently, given that a specific parameter of the input is small. In this paper, we apply this idea to the field of answer set programming (ASP). To this end, we propose two kinds of graph representations of programs to exploit their treewidth as a parameter. Treewidth roughly measures to which extent the internal structure of a program resembles a tree. Our main contribution is the design of parameterized dynamic programming algorithms, which run in linear time if the treewidth and weights of the given program are bounded. Compared to previous work, our algorithms handle the full syntax of ASP. Finally, we report on an empirical evaluation that shows good runtime behaviour for benchmark instances of low treewidth, especially for counting answer sets. △ Less

Submitted 9 February, 2017; originally announced February 2017.

Comments: This paper extends and updates a paper that has been presented on the workshop TAASP'16 (arXiv:1612.07601). We provide a higher detail level, full proofs and more examples

Counting Answer Sets via Dynamic Programming

Authors: Johannes Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: While the solution counting problem for propositional satisfiability (#SAT) has received renewed attention in recent years, this research trend has not affected other AI solving paradigms like answer set programming (ASP). Although ASP solvers are designed to enumerate all solutions, and counting can therefore be easily done, the involved materialization of all solutions is a clear bottleneck for… ▽ More While the solution counting problem for propositional satisfiability (#SAT) has received renewed attention in recent years, this research trend has not affected other AI solving paradigms like answer set programming (ASP). Although ASP solvers are designed to enumerate all solutions, and counting can therefore be easily done, the involved materialization of all solutions is a clear bottleneck for the counting problem of ASP (#ASP). In this paper we propose dynamic programming-based #ASP algorithms that exploit the structure of the underlying (ground) ASP program. Experimental results for a prototype implementation show promise when compared to existing solvers. △ Less

Submitted 22 December, 2016; originally announced December 2016.

Comments: Informal proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Trends and Applications of Answer Set Programming (TAASP 2016), Klagenfurt, Austria, 26 September 2016

lpopt: A Rule Optimization Tool for Answer Set Programming

Authors: Manuel Bichler, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: State-of-the-art answer set programming (ASP) solvers rely on a program called a grounder to convert non-ground programs containing variables into variable-free, propositional programs. The size of this grounding depends heavily on the size of the non-ground rules, and thus, reducing the size of such rules is a promising approach to improve solving performance. To this end, in this paper we announ… ▽ More State-of-the-art answer set programming (ASP) solvers rely on a program called a grounder to convert non-ground programs containing variables into variable-free, propositional programs. The size of this grounding depends heavily on the size of the non-ground rules, and thus, reducing the size of such rules is a promising approach to improve solving performance. To this end, in this paper we announce lpopt, a tool that decomposes large logic programming rules into smaller rules that are easier to handle for current solvers. The tool is specifically tailored to handle the standard syntax of the ASP language (ASP-Core) and makes it easier for users to write efficient and intuitive ASP programs, which would otherwise often require significant hand-tuning by expert ASP engineers. It is based on an idea proposed by Morak and Woltran (2012) that we extend significantly in order to handle the full ASP syntax, including complex constructs like aggregates, weak constraints, and arithmetic expressions. We present the algorithm, the theoretical foundations on how to treat these constructs, as well as an experimental evaluation showing the viability of our approach. △ Less

Submitted 23 August, 2016; v1 submitted 19 August, 2016; originally announced August 2016.

Comments: Pre-proceedings paper presented at the 26th International Symposium on Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2016), Edinburgh, Scotland UK, 6-8 September 2016 (arXiv:1608.02534), 14 pages, LaTeX, 2 figures

Report number: LOPSTR/2016/40

The Power of Non-Ground Rules in Answer Set Programming

Authors: Manuel Bichler, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Answer set programming (ASP) is a well-established logic programming language that offers an intuitive, declarative syntax for problem solving. In its traditional application, a fixed ASP program for a given problem is designed and the actual instance of the problem is fed into the program as a set of facts. This approach typically results in programs with comparably short and simple rules. Howeve… ▽ More Answer set programming (ASP) is a well-established logic programming language that offers an intuitive, declarative syntax for problem solving. In its traditional application, a fixed ASP program for a given problem is designed and the actual instance of the problem is fed into the program as a set of facts. This approach typically results in programs with comparably short and simple rules. However, as is known from complexity analysis, such an approach limits the expressive power of ASP; in fact, an entire NP-check can be encoded into a single large rule body of bounded arity that performs both a guess and a check within the same rule. Here, we propose a novel paradigm for encoding hard problems in ASP by making explicit use of large rules which depend on the actual instance of the problem. We illustrate how this new encoding paradigm can be used, providing examples of problems from the first, second, and even third level of the polynomial hierarchy. As state-of-the-art solvers are tuned towards short rules, rule decomposition is a key technique in the practical realization of our approach. We also provide some preliminary benchmarks which indicate that giving up the convenient way of specifying a fixed program can lead to a significant speed-up. This paper is under consideration for acceptance into TPLP. △ Less

Submitted 5 August, 2016; originally announced August 2016.

Comments: Paper presented at the 32nd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2016), New York City, USA, 16-21 October 2016, 15 pages, LaTeX, 2 figures

Clique-Width and Directed Width Measures for Answer-Set Programming

Authors: Bernhard Bliem, Sebastian Ordyniak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Disjunctive Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a powerful declarative programming paradigm whose main decision problems are located on the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. Identifying tractable fragments and develo** efficient algorithms for such fragments are thus important objectives in order to complement the sophisticated ASP systems available to date. Hard problems can become tractabl… ▽ More Disjunctive Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a powerful declarative programming paradigm whose main decision problems are located on the second level of the polynomial hierarchy. Identifying tractable fragments and develo** efficient algorithms for such fragments are thus important objectives in order to complement the sophisticated ASP systems available to date. Hard problems can become tractable if some problem parameter is bounded by a fixed constant; such problems are then called fixed-parameter tractable (FPT). While several FPT results for ASP exist, parameters that relate to directed or signed graphs representing the program at hand have been neglected so far. In this paper, we first give some negative observations showing that directed width measures on the dependency graph of a program do not lead to FPT results. We then consider the graph parameter of signed clique-width and present a novel dynamic programming algorithm that is FPT w.r.t. this parameter. Clique-width is more general than the well-known treewidth, and, to the best of our knowledge, ours is the first FPT algorithm for bounded clique-width for reasoning problems beyond SAT. △ Less

Submitted 30 December, 2016; v1 submitted 30 June, 2016; originally announced June 2016.

Comments: A short version of this paper has been accepted to ECAI 2016 and TAASP 2016

Distributing Knowledge into Simple Bases

Authors: Adrian Haret, Jean-Guy Mailly, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Understanding the behavior of belief change operators for fragments of classical logic has received increasing interest over the last years. Results in this direction are mainly concerned with adapting representation theorems. However, fragment-driven belief change also leads to novel research questions. In this paper we propose the concept of belief distribution, which can be understood as the re… ▽ More Understanding the behavior of belief change operators for fragments of classical logic has received increasing interest over the last years. Results in this direction are mainly concerned with adapting representation theorems. However, fragment-driven belief change also leads to novel research questions. In this paper we propose the concept of belief distribution, which can be understood as the reverse task of merging. More specifically, we are interested in the following question: given an arbitrary knowledge base $K$ and some merging operator $Δ$, can we find a profile $E$ and a constraint $μ$, both from a given fragment of classical logic, such that $Δ_μ(E)$ yields a result equivalent to $K$? In other words, we are interested in seeing if $K$ can be distributed into knowledge bases of simpler structure, such that the task of merging allows for a reconstruction of the original knowledge. Our initial results show that merging based on drastic distance allows for an easy distribution of knowledge, while the power of distribution for operators based on Hamming distance relies heavily on the fragment of choice. △ Less

Submitted 31 March, 2016; originally announced March 2016.

Verifiability of Argumentation Semantics

Authors: Ringo Baumann, Thomas Linsbichler, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Dung's abstract argumentation theory is a widely used formalism to model conflicting information and to draw conclusions in such situations. Hereby, the knowledge is represented by so-called argumentation frameworks (AFs) and the reasoning is done via semantics extracting acceptable sets. All reasonable semantics are based on the notion of conflict-freeness which means that arguments are only join… ▽ More Dung's abstract argumentation theory is a widely used formalism to model conflicting information and to draw conclusions in such situations. Hereby, the knowledge is represented by so-called argumentation frameworks (AFs) and the reasoning is done via semantics extracting acceptable sets. All reasonable semantics are based on the notion of conflict-freeness which means that arguments are only jointly acceptable when they are not linked within the AF. In this paper, we study the question which information on top of conflict-free sets is needed to compute extensions of a semantics at hand. We introduce a hierarchy of so-called verification classes specifying the required amount of information. We show that well-known standard semantics are exactly verifiable through a certain such class. Our framework also gives a means to study semantics lying inbetween known semantics, thus contributing to a more abstract understanding of the different features argumentation semantics offer. △ Less

Submitted 31 March, 2016; originally announced March 2016.

Comments: Contribution to the 16h International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, 2016, Cape Town

MSC Class: 68T30

Improved Answer-Set Programming Encodings for Abstract Argumentation

Authors: Sarah A. Gaggl, Norbert Manthey, Alessandro Ronca, Johannes P. Wallner, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: The design of efficient solutions for abstract argumentation problems is a crucial step towards advanced argumentation systems. One of the most prominent approaches in the literature is to use Answer-Set Programming (ASP) for this endeavor. In this paper, we present new encodings for three prominent argumentation semantics using the concept of conditional literals in disjunctions as provided by th… ▽ More The design of efficient solutions for abstract argumentation problems is a crucial step towards advanced argumentation systems. One of the most prominent approaches in the literature is to use Answer-Set Programming (ASP) for this endeavor. In this paper, we present new encodings for three prominent argumentation semantics using the concept of conditional literals in disjunctions as provided by the ASP-system clingo. Our new encodings are not only more succinct than previous versions, but also outperform them on standard benchmarks. △ Less

Submitted 20 October, 2015; v1 submitted 23 July, 2015; originally announced July 2015.

Comments: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), Proceedings of ICLP 2015

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 15 (2015) 434-448

Dual-normal Logic Programs - the Forgotten Class

Authors: Johannes K. Fichte, Miroslaw Truszczynski, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Disjunctive Answer Set Programming is a powerful declarative programming paradigm with complexity beyond NP. Identifying classes of programs for which the consistency problem is in NP is of interest from the theoretical standpoint and can potentially lead to improvements in the design of answer set programming solvers. One of such classes consists of dual-normal programs, where the number of posit… ▽ More Disjunctive Answer Set Programming is a powerful declarative programming paradigm with complexity beyond NP. Identifying classes of programs for which the consistency problem is in NP is of interest from the theoretical standpoint and can potentially lead to improvements in the design of answer set programming solvers. One of such classes consists of dual-normal programs, where the number of positive body atoms in proper rules is at most one. Unlike other classes of programs, dual-normal programs have received little attention so far. In this paper we study this class. We relate dual-normal programs to propositional theories and to normal programs by presenting several inter-translations. With the translation from dual-normal to normal programs at hand, we introduce the novel class of body-cycle free programs, which are in many respects dual to head-cycle free programs. We establish the expressive power of dual-normal programs in terms of SE- and UE-models, and compare them to normal programs. We also discuss the complexity of deciding whether dual-normal programs are strongly and uniformly equivalent. △ Less

Submitted 20 July, 2015; originally announced July 2015.

Comments: This is the author's self-archived copy including detailed proofs. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP), Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2015)

Complexity of Secure Sets

Authors: Bernhard Bliem, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: A secure set $S$ in a graph is defined as a set of vertices such that for any $X\subseteq S$ the majority of vertices in the neighborhood of $X$ belongs to $S$. It is known that deciding whether a set $S$ is secure in a graph is co-NP-complete. However, it is still open how this result contributes to the actual complexity of deciding whether for a given graph $G$ and integer $k$, a non-empty secur… ▽ More A secure set $S$ in a graph is defined as a set of vertices such that for any $X\subseteq S$ the majority of vertices in the neighborhood of $X$ belongs to $S$. It is known that deciding whether a set $S$ is secure in a graph is co-NP-complete. However, it is still open how this result contributes to the actual complexity of deciding whether for a given graph $G$ and integer $k$, a non-empty secure set for $G$ of size at most $k$ exists. In this work, we pinpoint the complexity of this problem by showing that it is $Σ^P_2$-complete. Furthermore, the problem has so far not been subject to a parameterized complexity analysis that considers structural parameters. In the present work, we prove that the problem is $W[1]$-hard when parameterized by treewidth. This is surprising since the problem is known to be FPT when parameterized by solution size and "subset problems" that satisfy this property usually tend to be FPT for bounded treewidth as well. Finally, we give an upper bound by showing membership in XP, and we provide a positive result in the form of an FPT algorithm for checking whether a given set is secure on graphs of bounded treewidth. △ Less

Submitted 10 July, 2017; v1 submitted 24 November, 2014; originally announced November 2014.

Comments: 28 pages, 9 figures, short version accepted at WG 2015

MSC Class: 68Q25 ACM Class: F.2.2

Compact Argumentation Frameworks

Authors: Ringo Baumann, Wolfgang Dvorák, Thomas Linsbichler, Hannes Strass, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are one of the most studied formalisms in AI. In this work, we introduce a certain subclass of AFs which we call compact. Given an extension-based semantics, the corresponding compact AFs are characterized by the feature that each argument of the AF occurs in at least one extension. This not only guarantees a certain notion of fairness; compact AFs are thus… ▽ More Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are one of the most studied formalisms in AI. In this work, we introduce a certain subclass of AFs which we call compact. Given an extension-based semantics, the corresponding compact AFs are characterized by the feature that each argument of the AF occurs in at least one extension. This not only guarantees a certain notion of fairness; compact AFs are thus also minimal in the sense that no argument can be removed without changing the outcome. We address the following questions in the paper: (1) How are the classes of compact AFs related for different semantics? (2) Under which circumstances can AFs be transformed into equivalent compact ones? (3) Finally, we show that compact AFs are indeed a non-trivial subclass, since the verification problem remains coNP-hard for certain semantics. △ Less

Submitted 30 April, 2014; originally announced April 2014.

Comments: Contribution to the 15th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, 2014, Vienna

Belief merging within fragments of propositional logic

Authors: Nadia Creignou, Odile Papini, Stefan Rümmele, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Recently, belief change within the framework of fragments of propositional logic has gained increasing attention. Previous works focused on belief contraction and belief revision on the Horn fragment. However, the problem of belief merging within fragments of propositional logic has been neglected so far. This paper presents a general approach to define new merging operators derived from existing… ▽ More Recently, belief change within the framework of fragments of propositional logic has gained increasing attention. Previous works focused on belief contraction and belief revision on the Horn fragment. However, the problem of belief merging within fragments of propositional logic has been neglected so far. This paper presents a general approach to define new merging operators derived from existing ones such that the result of merging remains in the fragment under consideration. Our approach is not limited to the case of Horn fragment but applicable to any fragment of propositional logic characterized by a closure property on the sets of models of its formulae. We study the logical properties of the proposed operators in terms of satisfaction of merging postulates, considering in particular distance-based merging operators for Horn and Krom fragments. △ Less

Submitted 25 April, 2014; originally announced April 2014.

Comments: To appear in the Proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2014)

MSC Class: 03B42 ACM Class: I.2.3

On the Intertranslatability of Argumentation Semantics

Authors: Wolfgang Dvorak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Translations between different nonmonotonic formalisms always have been an important topic in the field, in particular to understand the knowledge-representation capabilities those formalisms offer. We provide such an investigation in terms of different semantics proposed for abstract argumentation frameworks, a nonmonotonic yet simple formalism which received increasing interest within the last… ▽ More Translations between different nonmonotonic formalisms always have been an important topic in the field, in particular to understand the knowledge-representation capabilities those formalisms offer. We provide such an investigation in terms of different semantics proposed for abstract argumentation frameworks, a nonmonotonic yet simple formalism which received increasing interest within the last decade. Although the properties of these different semantics are nowadays well understood, there are no explicit results about intertranslatability. We provide such translations wrt. different properties and also give a few novel complexity results which underlie some negative results. △ Less

Submitted 16 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 41, pages 445-475, 2011

Modularity Aspects of Disjunctive Stable Models

Authors: Tomi Janhunen, Emilia Oikarinen, Hans Tompits, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Practically all programming languages allow the programmer to split a program into several modules which brings along several advantages in software development. In this paper, we are interested in the area of answer-set programming where fully declarative and nonmonotonic languages are applied. In this context, obtaining a modular structure for programs is by no means straightforward since the ou… ▽ More Practically all programming languages allow the programmer to split a program into several modules which brings along several advantages in software development. In this paper, we are interested in the area of answer-set programming where fully declarative and nonmonotonic languages are applied. In this context, obtaining a modular structure for programs is by no means straightforward since the output of an entire program cannot in general be composed from the output of its components. To better understand the effects of disjunctive information on modularity we restrict the scope of analysis to the case of disjunctive logic programs (DLPs) subject to stable-model semantics. We define the notion of a DLP-function, where a well-defined input/output interface is provided, and establish a novel module theorem which indicates the compositionality of stable-model semantics for DLP-functions. The module theorem extends the well-known splitting-set theorem and enables the decomposition of DLP-functions given their strongly connected components based on positive dependencies induced by rules. In this setting, it is also possible to split shared disjunctive rules among components using a generalized shifting technique. The concept of modular equivalence is introduced for the mutual comparison of DLP-functions using a generalization of a translation-based verification method. △ Less

Submitted 15 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 35, pages 813-857, 2009

Utilizing ASP for Generating and Visualizing Argumentation Frameworks

Authors: Günther Charwat, Johannes Peter Wallner, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Within the area of computational models of argumentation, the instantiation-based approach is gaining more and more attention, not at least because meaningful input for Dung's abstract frameworks is provided in that way. In a nutshell, the aim of instantiation-based argumentation is to form, from a given knowledge base, a set of arguments and to identify the conflicts between them. The resulting n… ▽ More Within the area of computational models of argumentation, the instantiation-based approach is gaining more and more attention, not at least because meaningful input for Dung's abstract frameworks is provided in that way. In a nutshell, the aim of instantiation-based argumentation is to form, from a given knowledge base, a set of arguments and to identify the conflicts between them. The resulting network is then evaluated by means of extension-based semantics on an abstract level, i.e. on the resulting graph. While several systems are nowadays available for the latter step, the automation of the instantiation process itself has received less attention. In this work, we provide a novel approach to construct and visualize an argumentation framework from a given knowledge base. The system we propose relies on Answer-Set Programming and follows a two-step approach. A first program yields the logic-based arguments as its answer-sets; a second program is then used to specify the relations between arguments based on the answer-sets of the first program. As it turns out, this approach not only allows for a flexible and extensible tool for instantiation-based argumentation, but also provides a new method for answer-set visualization in general. △ Less

Submitted 7 January, 2013; originally announced January 2013.

Comments: Proceedings of Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms (ASPOCP 2012), 5th International Workshop, September 4, 2012, Budapest, Hungary

Complexity of super-coherence problems in ASP

Authors: Mario Alviano, Wolfgang Faber, Stefan Woltran

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 DMS, has been proposed for ASP. However, this technique has a caveat, because it is not correct (in t… ▽ More 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 DMS, 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 recent work, a large fragment of ASP programs, referred to as super-coherent programs, has been identified, for which DMS 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 Π^P_3-complete in the disjunctive case, while it is Π^P_2-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, even though this transformation is more of theoretical than practical interest. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). △ Less

Submitted 24 December, 2012; originally announced December 2012.

Comments: 22 pages, 1 figure, journal paper

MSC Class: 68Q17 ACM Class: I.2.3; F.2.2; F.4.1

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 14 (2014) 339-361

D-FLAT: Declarative Problem Solving Using Tree Decompositions and Answer-Set Programming

Authors: Bernhard Bliem, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: In this work, we propose Answer-Set Programming (ASP) as a tool for rapid prototy** of dynamic programming algorithms based on tree decompositions. In fact, many such algorithms have been designed, but only a few of them found their way into implementation. The main obstacle is the lack of easy-to-use systems which (i) take care of building a tree decomposition and (ii) provide an interface for… ▽ More In this work, we propose Answer-Set Programming (ASP) as a tool for rapid prototy** of dynamic programming algorithms based on tree decompositions. In fact, many such algorithms have been designed, but only a few of them found their way into implementation. The main obstacle is the lack of easy-to-use systems which (i) take care of building a tree decomposition and (ii) provide an interface for declarative specifications of dynamic programming algorithms. In this paper, we present D-FLAT, a novel tool that relieves the user of having to handle all the technical details concerned with parsing, tree decomposition, the handling of data structures, etc. Instead, it is only the dynamic programming algorithm itself which has to be specified in the ASP language. D-FLAT employs an ASP solver in order to compute the local solutions in the dynamic programming algorithm. In the paper, we give a few examples illustrating the use of D-FLAT and describe the main features of the system. Moreover, we report experiments which show that ASP-based D-FLAT encodings for some problems outperform monolithic ASP encodings on instances of small treewidth. △ Less

Submitted 6 October, 2012; originally announced October 2012.

Comments: 18 pages, 5 figures. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

Tractable Answer-Set Programming with Weight Constraints: Bounded Treewidth is not Enough

Authors: Reinhard Pichler, Stefan Rümmele, Stefan Szeider, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Cardinality constraints or, more generally, weight constraints are well recognized as an important extension of answer-set programming. Clearly, all common algorithmic tasks related to programs with cardinality or weight constraints - like checking the consistency of a program - are intractable. Many intractable problems in the area of knowledge representation and reasoning have been shown to beco… ▽ More Cardinality constraints or, more generally, weight constraints are well recognized as an important extension of answer-set programming. Clearly, all common algorithmic tasks related to programs with cardinality or weight constraints - like checking the consistency of a program - are intractable. Many intractable problems in the area of knowledge representation and reasoning have been shown to become linear time tractable if the treewidth of the programs or formulas under consideration is bounded by some constant. The goal of this paper is to apply the notion of treewidth to programs with cardinality or weight constraints and to identify tractable fragments. It will turn out that the straightforward application of treewidth to such class of programs does not suffice to obtain tractability. However, by imposing further restrictions, tractability can be achieved. △ Less

Submitted 29 May, 2012; v1 submitted 13 April, 2012; originally announced April 2012.

Comments: To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 14 (2014) 141-164

Strong Equivalence of Qualitative Optimization Problems

Authors: Wolfgang Faber, Mirosław Truszczyński, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: 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 proposition… ▽ More 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. △ Less

Submitted 4 December, 2011; originally announced December 2011.

Making Use of Advances in Answer-Set Programming for Abstract Argumentation Systems

Authors: Wolfgang Dvořák, Sarah Alice Gaggl, Johannes Wallner, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Dung's famous abstract argumentation frameworks represent the core formalism for many problems and applications in the field of argumentation which significantly evolved within the last decade. Recent work in the field has thus focused on implementations for these frameworks, whereby one of the main approaches is to use Answer-Set Programming (ASP). While some of the argumentation semantics can be… ▽ More Dung's famous abstract argumentation frameworks represent the core formalism for many problems and applications in the field of argumentation which significantly evolved within the last decade. Recent work in the field has thus focused on implementations for these frameworks, whereby one of the main approaches is to use Answer-Set Programming (ASP). While some of the argumentation semantics can be nicely expressed within the ASP language, others required rather cumbersome encoding techniques. Recent advances in ASP systems, in particular, the metasp optimization frontend for the ASP-package gringo/claspD provides direct commands to filter answer sets satisfying certain subset-minimality (or -maximality) constraints. This allows for much simpler encodings compared to the ones in standard ASP language. In this paper, we experimentally compare the original encodings (for the argumentation semantics based on preferred, semi-stable, and respectively, stage extensions) with new metasp encodings. Moreover, we provide novel encodings for the recently introduced resolution-based grounded semantics. Our experimental results indicate that the metasp approach works well in those cases where the complexity of the encoded problem is adequately mirrored within the metasp approach. △ Less

Submitted 24 August, 2011; originally announced August 2011.

Comments: Paper appears in the Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Applications of Declarative Programming and Knowledge Management (INAP 2011)

ACM Class: I.2.3; I.2.4

dynPARTIX - A Dynamic Programming Reasoner for Abstract Argumentation

Authors: Wolfgang Dvořák, Michael Morak, Clemens Nopp, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to announce the release of a novel system for abstract argumentation which is based on decomposition and dynamic programming. We provide first experimental evaluations to show the feasibility of this approach. The aim of this paper is to announce the release of a novel system for abstract argumentation which is based on decomposition and dynamic programming. We provide first experimental evaluations to show the feasibility of this approach. △ Less

Submitted 24 August, 2011; originally announced August 2011.

Comments: The paper appears in the Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Applications of Declarative Programming and Knowledge Management (INAP 2011)

ACM Class: I.2.3

A general approach to belief change in answer set programming

Authors: James Delgrande, Torsten Schaub, Hans Tompits, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: We address the problem of belief change in (nonmonotonic) logic programming under answer set semantics. Unlike previous approaches to belief change in logic programming, our formal techniques are analogous to those of distance-based belief revision in propositional logic. In develo** our results, we build upon the model theory of logic programs furnished by SE models. Since SE models provide a… ▽ More We address the problem of belief change in (nonmonotonic) logic programming under answer set semantics. Unlike previous approaches to belief change in logic programming, our formal techniques are analogous to those of distance-based belief revision in propositional logic. In develo** our results, we build upon the model theory of logic programs furnished by SE models. Since SE models provide a formal, monotonic characterisation of logic programs, we can adapt techniques from the area of belief revision to belief change in logic programs. We introduce methods for revising and merging logic programs, respectively. For the former, we study both subset-based revision as well as cardinality-based revision, and we show that they satisfy the majority of the AGM postulates for revision. For merging, we consider operators following arbitration merging and IC merging, respectively. We also present encodings for computing the revision as well as the merging of logic programs within the same logic programming framework, giving rise to a direct implementation of our approach in terms of off-the-shelf answer set solvers. These encodings reflect in turn the fact that our change operators do not increase the complexity of the base formalism. △ Less

Submitted 30 December, 2009; originally announced December 2009.

Comments: 44 pages

ACM Class: I.2.3; I.2.4; F.4.1

Relativized hyperequivalence of logic programs for modular programming

Authors: Miroslaw Truszczyński, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: A recent framework of relativized hyperequivalence of programs offers a unifying generalization of strong and uniform equivalence. It seems to be especially well suited for applications in program optimization and modular programming due to its flexibility that allows us to restrict, independently of each other, the head and body alphabets in context programs. We study relativized hyperequivalen… ▽ More A recent framework of relativized hyperequivalence of programs offers a unifying generalization of strong and uniform equivalence. It seems to be especially well suited for applications in program optimization and modular programming due to its flexibility that allows us to restrict, independently of each other, the head and body alphabets in context programs. We study relativized hyperequivalence for the three semantics of logic programs given by stable, supported and supported minimal models. For each semantics, we identify four types of contexts, depending on whether the head and body alphabets are given directly or as the complement of a given set. Hyperequivalence relative to contexts where the head and body alphabets are specified directly has been studied before. In this paper, we establish the complexity of deciding relativized hyperequivalence with respect to the three other types of context programs. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). △ Less

Submitted 23 July, 2009; originally announced July 2009.

Characterising equilibrium logic and nested logic programs: Reductions and complexity

Authors: David Pearce, Hans Tompits, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Equilibrium logic is an approach to nonmonotonic reasoning that extends the stable-model and answer-set semantics for logic programs. In particular, it includes the general case of nested logic programs, where arbitrary Boolean combinations are permitted in heads and bodies of rules, as special kinds of theories. In this paper, we present polynomial reductions of the main reasoning tasks associa… ▽ More Equilibrium logic is an approach to nonmonotonic reasoning that extends the stable-model and answer-set semantics for logic programs. In particular, it includes the general case of nested logic programs, where arbitrary Boolean combinations are permitted in heads and bodies of rules, as special kinds of theories. In this paper, we present polynomial reductions of the main reasoning tasks associated with equilibrium logic and nested logic programs into quantified propositional logic, an extension of classical propositional logic where quantifications over atomic formulas are permitted. We provide reductions not only for decision problems, but also for the central semantical concepts of equilibrium logic and nested logic programs. In particular, our encodings map a given decision problem into some formula such that the latter is valid precisely in case the former holds. The basic tasks we deal with here are the consistency problem, brave reasoning, and skeptical reasoning. Additionally, we also provide encodings for testing equivalence of theories or programs under different notions of equivalence, viz. ordinary, strong, and uniform equivalence. For all considered reasoning tasks, we analyse their computational complexity and give strict complexity bounds. △ Less

Submitted 13 June, 2009; v1 submitted 11 June, 2009; originally announced June 2009.

ACM Class: F.4.1

Journal ref: Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (2009), 9 : 565-616

A Common View on Strong, Uniform, and Other Notions of Equivalence in Answer-Set Programming

Authors: Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Logic programming under the answer-set semantics nowadays deals with numerous different notions of program equivalence. This is due to the fact that equivalence for substitution (known as strong equivalence) and ordinary equivalence are different concepts. The former holds, given programs P and Q, iff P can be faithfully replaced by Q within any context R, while the latter holds iff P and Q prov… ▽ More Logic programming under the answer-set semantics nowadays deals with numerous different notions of program equivalence. This is due to the fact that equivalence for substitution (known as strong equivalence) and ordinary equivalence are different concepts. The former holds, given programs P and Q, iff P can be faithfully replaced by Q within any context R, while the latter holds iff P and Q provide the same output, that is, they have the same answer sets. Notions in between strong and ordinary equivalence have been introduced as theoretical tools to compare incomplete programs and are defined by either restricting the syntactic structure of the considered context programs R or by bounding the set A of atoms allowed to occur in R (relativized equivalence).For the latter approach, different A yield properly different equivalence notions, in general. For the former approach, however, it turned out that any ``reasonable'' syntactic restriction to R coincides with either ordinary, strong, or uniform equivalence. In this paper, we propose a parameterization for equivalence notions which takes care of both such kinds of restrictions simultaneously by bounding, on the one hand, the atoms which are allowed to occur in the rule heads of the context and, on the other hand, the atoms which are allowed to occur in the rule bodies of the context. We introduce a general semantical characterization which includes known ones as SE-models (for strong equivalence) or UE-models (for uniform equivalence) as special cases. Moreover,we provide complexity bounds for the problem in question and sketch a possible implementation method. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP). △ Less

Submitted 6 December, 2007; originally announced December 2007.

Semantical Characterizations and Complexity of Equivalences in Answer Set Programming

Authors: Thomas Eiter, Michael Fink, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: In recent research on non-monotonic logic programming, repeatedly strong equivalence of logic programs P and Q has been considered, which holds if the programs P union R and Q union R have the same answer sets for any other program R. This property strengthens equivalence of P and Q with respect to answer sets (which is the particular case for R is the empty set), and has its applications in pro… ▽ More In recent research on non-monotonic logic programming, repeatedly strong equivalence of logic programs P and Q has been considered, which holds if the programs P union R and Q union R have the same answer sets for any other program R. This property strengthens equivalence of P and Q with respect to answer sets (which is the particular case for R is the empty set), and has its applications in program optimization, verification, and modular logic programming. In this paper, we consider more liberal notions of strong equivalence, in which the actual form of R may be syntactically restricted. On the one hand, we consider uniform equivalence, where R is a set of facts rather than a set of rules. This notion, which is well known in the area of deductive databases, is particularly useful for assessing whether programs P and Q are equivalent as components of a logic program which is modularly structured. On the other hand, we consider relativized notions of equivalence, where R ranges over rules over a fixed alphabet, and thus generalize our results to relativized notions of strong and uniform equivalence. For all these notions, we consider disjunctive logic programs in the propositional (ground) case, as well as some restricted classes, provide semantical characterizations and analyze the computational complexity. Our results, which naturally extend to answer set semantics for programs with strong negation, complement the results on strong equivalence of logic programs and pave the way for optimizations in answer set solvers as a tool for input-based problem solving. △ Less

Submitted 18 February, 2005; originally announced February 2005.

Comments: 58 pages, 6 tables. The contents were partially published in: Proceedings 19th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2003), pp. 224-238, LNCS 2916, Springer, 2003; and Proceedings 9th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2004), pp. 161-173, LNCS 3229, Springer, 2004

Report number: 1843-05-01 ACM Class: I.2.3; F.4.1; I.2.4

Paraconsistent Reasoning via Quantified Boolean Formulas,I: Axiomatising Signed Systems

Authors: Philippe Besnard, Torsten Schaub, Hans Tompits, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Signed systems were introduced as a general, syntax-independent framework for paraconsistent reasoning, that is, non-trivialised reasoning from inconsistent information. In this paper, we show how the family of corresponding paraconsistent consequence relations can be axiomatised by means of quantified Boolean formulas. This approach has several benefits. First, it furnishes an axiomatic specifi… ▽ More Signed systems were introduced as a general, syntax-independent framework for paraconsistent reasoning, that is, non-trivialised reasoning from inconsistent information. In this paper, we show how the family of corresponding paraconsistent consequence relations can be axiomatised by means of quantified Boolean formulas. This approach has several benefits. First, it furnishes an axiomatic specification of paraconsistent reasoning within the framework of signed systems. Second, this axiomatisation allows us to identify upper bounds for the complexity of the different signed consequence relations. We strengthen these upper bounds by providing strict complexity results for the considered reasoning tasks. Finally, we obtain an implementation of different forms of paraconsistent reasoning by appeal to the existing system QUIP. △ Less

Submitted 25 July, 2002; originally announced July 2002.

Comments: 15 pages. Originally published in proc. PCL 2002, a FLoC workshop; eds. Hendrik Decker, Dina Goldin, Jorgen Villadsen, Toshiharu Waragai (http://floc02.diku.dk/PCL/)

ACM Class: F.4.1; F.1.3; I.2.3; I.2.4

A Polynomial Translation of Logic Programs with Nested Expressions into Disjunctive Logic Programs: Preliminary Report

Authors: David Pearce, Vladimir Sarsakov, Torsten Schaub, Hans Tompits, Stefan Woltran

Abstract: Nested logic programs have recently been introduced in order to allow for arbitrarily nested formulas in the heads and the bodies of logic program rules under the answer sets semantics. Nested expressions can be formed using conjunction, disjunction, as well as the negation as failure operator in an unrestricted fashion. This provides a very flexible and compact framework for knowledge represent… ▽ More Nested logic programs have recently been introduced in order to allow for arbitrarily nested formulas in the heads and the bodies of logic program rules under the answer sets semantics. Nested expressions can be formed using conjunction, disjunction, as well as the negation as failure operator in an unrestricted fashion. This provides a very flexible and compact framework for knowledge representation and reasoning. Previous results show that nested logic programs can be transformed into standard (unnested) disjunctive logic programs in an elementary way, applying the negation as failure operator to body literals only. This is of great practical relevance since it allows us to evaluate nested logic programs by means of off-the-shelf disjunctive logic programming systems, like DLV. However, it turns out that this straightforward transformation results in an exponential blow-up in the worst-case, despite the fact that complexity results indicate that there is a polynomial translation among both formalisms. In this paper, we take up this challenge and provide a polynomial translation of logic programs with nested expressions into disjunctive logic programs. Moreover, we show that this translation is modular and (strongly) faithful. We have implemented both the straightforward as well as our advanced transformation; the resulting compiler serves as a front-end to DLV and is publicly available on the Web. △ Less

Submitted 19 July, 2002; originally announced July 2002.

Comments: 10 pages; published in Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning

ACM Class: I.2.4