Skip to main content

Automatic Program Rewriting in Non-Ground Answer Set Programs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages (PADL 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11372))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Answer set programming is a popular constraint programming paradigm that has seen wide use across various industry applications. However, logic programs under answer set semantics often require careful design and nontrivial expertise from a programmer to obtain satisfactory solving times. In order to reduce this burden on a software engineer we propose an automated rewriting technique for non-ground logic programs that we implement in a system projector. We conduct rigorous experimental analysis, which shows that applying system projector to a logic program can improve its performance, even after significant human-performed optimizations.

We are grateful to Michael Dingess, Brian Hodges, Daniel Houston, Roland Kaminski, Liu Liu, Miroslaw Truszczynski, Stefan Woltran for the fruitful discussions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.kr.tuwien.ac.at/research/systems/eq/simpl/index.html.

  2. 2.

    http://dbai.tuwien.ac.at/research/project/lpopt/.

  3. 3.

    https://github.com/mabseher/htd.

  4. 4.

    https://www.unomaha.edu/college-of-information-science-and-technology/natural-language-processing-and-knowledge-representation-lab/software/projector.php.

  5. 5.

    http://groups.inf.ed.ac.uk/ccg/ccgbank.html.

  6. 6.

    The term guards was suggested by Miroslaw Truszczynski.

References

  1. Balduccini, M., Gelfond, M., Nogueira, M.: Answer set based design of knowledge systems. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 47(1–2), 183–219 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Bichler, M.: Optimizing non-ground answer set programs via rule decomposition. Bachelor thesis. TU Wien (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bichler, M., Morak, M., Woltran, S.: lpopt: a rule optimization tool for answer set programming. In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brewka, G., Eiter, T., Truszczynski, M.: Answer set programming at a glance. Commun. ACM 54(12), 92–103 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Buddenhagen, M., Lierler, Y.: Performance tuning in answer set programming. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Calimeri, F., Cozza, S., Ianni, G., Leone, N.: Computable functions in ASP: theory and implementation. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP), pp. 407–424 (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Calimeri, F., Fusca, D., Perri, S., Zangari, J.: I-DLV: the new intelligent grounder of DLV. Intelligenza Artificiale 11(1), 5–20 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Calimeri, F., Fuscà, D., Perri, S., Zangari, J.: Optimizing answer set computation via heuristic-based decomposition. In: Calimeri, F., Hamlen, K., Leone, N. (eds.) PADL 2018. LNCS, vol. 10702, pp. 135–151. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73305-0_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Calimeri, F., Gebser, M., Maratea, M., Ricca, F.: Design and results of the fifth answer set programming competition. Artif. Intell. 231, 151–181 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2015.09.008. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0004370215001447

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Tompits, H., Traxler, P., Woltran, S.: Replacements in non-ground answer-set programming. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR) (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Eiter, T., Traxler, P., Woltran, S.: An implementation for recognizing rule replacements in non-ground answer-set programs. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 477–480. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11853886_41

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Faber, W., Leone, N., Mateis, C., Pfeifer, G.: Using database optimization techniques for nonmonotonic reasoning, pp. 135–139 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gebser, M., Kaminski, R., Kaufmann, B., Ostrowski, M., Schaub, T., Thiele, S.: A user’s guide to gringo, clasp, clingo, and iclingo (2010). http://potassco.sourceforge.net

  14. Gebser, M., Kaminski, R., Kaufmann, B., Schaub, T.: Challenges in answer set solving. In: Balduccini, M., Son, T.C. (eds.) Logic Programming, Knowledge Representation, and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6565, pp. 74–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20832-4_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., Neumann, A., Schaub, T.: Advanced preprocessing for answer set solving. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on ECAI 2008: 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 15–19. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1567281.1567290

  16. Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., Schaub, T.: Conflict-driven answer set solving: from theory to practice. Artif. Intell. 187, 52–89 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Gebser, M., Schaub, T., Thiele, S.: GrinGo: a new grounder for answer set programming. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4483, pp. 266–271. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72200-7_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Lierler, Y.: SAT-based Answer Set Programming. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lierler, Y., Maratea, M., Ricca, F.: Systems, engineering environments, and competitions. AI Mag. 37(3), 45–52 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lierler, Y., Schüller, P.: Parsing combinatory categorial grammar via planning in answer set programming. In: Erdem, E., Lee, J., Lierler, Y., Pearce, D. (eds.) Correct Reasoning. LNCS, vol. 7265, pp. 436–453. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30743-0_30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Ricca, F., et al.: Team-building with answer set programming in the Gioia-Tauro seaport. Theory Pract. Logic Program. 12(3), 361–381 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Hippen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Hippen, N., Lierler, Y. (2019). Automatic Program Rewriting in Non-Ground Answer Set Programs. In: Alferes, J., Johansson, M. (eds) Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages. PADL 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11372. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05998-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05998-9_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05997-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05998-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics