Abstract
Answer Set Programming faces an increasing popularity for problem solving in various domains. While its modeling language allows us to express many complex problems in an easy way, its solving technology enables their effective resolution. In what follows, we detail some of the key factors of its success. Answer Set Programming [ASP; Brewka et al. Commun ACM 54(12):92–103, (2011)] is seeing a rapid proliferation in academia and industry due to its easy and flexible way to model and solve knowledge-intense combinatorial (optimization) problems. To this end, ASP offers a high-level modeling language paired with high-performance solving technology. As a result, ASP systems provide out-off-the-box, general-purpose search engines that allow for enumerating (optimal) solutions. They are represented as answer sets, each being a set of atoms representing a solution. The declarative approach of ASP allows a user to concentrate on a problem’s specification rather than the computational means to solve it. This makes ASP a prime candidate for rapid prototyping and an attractive tool for teaching key AI techniques since complex problems can be expressed in a succinct and elaboration tolerant way. This is eased by the tuning of ASP’s modeling language to knowledge representation and reasoning (KRR). The resulting impact is nicely reflected by a growing range of successful applications of ASP [Erdem et al. AI Mag 37(3):53–68, 2016; Falkner et al. Industrial applications of answer set programming. K++nstliche Intelligenz (2018)].
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Abiteboul S, Hull R, Vianu V (1995) Foundations of databases. Addison-Wesley, Boston
Alviano M, Dodaro C, Leone N, Ricca F (2015) Advances in WASP. In: Calimeri E, Ianni G, Truszczyński (eds) Proceedings of the thirteenth international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’15). Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, vol 9345. Springer, Berlin, pp 40–54 (2015)
Alviano M, Faber W (2018) Aggregates in answer set programming. K++nstliche Intelligenz
Baral C (2003) Knowledge representation, reasoning and declarative problem solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Barrett C, Sebastiani R, Seshia S, Tinelli C (2018) Satisfiability modulo theories. In: Biere et al. (ed) Chap. 26, pp 825–885
Bidoit N, Froidevaux C (1987) Minimalism subsumes default logic and circumscription in stratified logic programming. In: Proceedings of the second annual symposium on logic in computer science (LICS’87), IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, DC, pp 89–97
Biere A, Heule M, van Maaren H, Walsh T (eds) (2009) Handbook of satisfiability. Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol 185. IOS Press, Amsterdam
Brewka G, Delgrande J, Romero J, Schaub T (2015) Asprin: customizing answer set preferences without a headache. In: Bonet B, Koenig S (eds) Proceedings of the twenty-ninth national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’15), AAAI Press, Palo Alto, pp 1467–1474. http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI15/paper/view/9535
Brewka G, Eiter T, Truszczyński M (2011) Answer set programming at a glance. Commun ACM 54(12):92–103
Cabalar P, Pearce D, Valverde A (2018) Answer set programming from a logical point of view. K++nstliche Intelligenz
Calimeri F, Faber W, Gebser M, Ianni G, Kaminski R, Krennwallner T, Leone N, Ricca F, Schaub T (2012) ASP-Core-2: input language format. https://www.mat.unical.it/aspcomp2013/ASPStandardization
Ceri S, Gottlob G, Tanca L (1990) Logic programming and databases. Springer, Berlin
Clark K (1978) Negation as failure. In: Gallaire H, Minker J (eds) Logic and data bases. Plenum Press, Berlin, pp 293–322
Clocksin W (1981) Programming in Prolog. Springer, Berlin
Davis M, Logemann G, Loveland D (1962) A machine program for theorem-proving. Commun ACM 5:394–397
Davis M, Putnam H (1960) A computing procedure for quantification theory. J ACM 7:201–215
Dechter R (2003) Constraint processing. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Burlington
Eiter T, Ianni G, Krennwallner T (2009) Answer set programming: a primer. In: Tessaris S, Franconi E, Eiter T, Gutierrez C, Handschuh S, Rousset M, Schmidt R (eds) Fifth international reasoning web summer school (RW’09). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5689. Springer, Berlin, pp 40–110. http://www.kr.tuwien.ac.at/staff/tkren/pub/2009/rw2009-asp.pdf
Erdem E, Gelfond M, Leone N (2016) Applications of ASP. AI Mag 37(3):53–68
Falkner A, Friedrich G, Schekotihin K, Taupe R, Teppan E (2018) Industrial applications of answer set programming. K++nstliche Intelligenz (to appear)
Febbraro O, Reale K, Ricca F (2011) ASPIDE: integrated development environment for answer set programming. In: Delgrande J, Faber W (eds) Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’11). Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, vol 6645. Springer, Berlin, pp 317–330
Gebser M, Kaminski R, Kaufmann B, Schaub T (2012) Answer set solving in practice. Synthesis lectures on artificial intelligence and machine learning. Morgan and Claypool Publishers, San Rafael
Gebser M, Kaufmann B, Schaub T (2012) Conflict-driven answer set solving: from theory to practice. Artif Intell 187–188:52–89
Gebser M, Schaub T (2016) Modeling and language extensions. AI Mag 37(3):33–44
Gelfond M, Kahl Y (2014) Knowledge representation, reasoning, and the design of intelligent agents: the answer-set programming approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Gelfond M, Lifschitz V (1988) The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Kowalski R, Bowen K (eds) Proceedings of the fifth international conference and symposium of logic programming (ICLP’88), MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1070–1080
Heyting A (1986) Die formalen Regeln der intuitionistischen Logik. In: Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, pp 42–56. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1930). Reprint in Logik-Texte: Kommentierte Auswahl zur Geschichte der Modernen Logik, Akademie-Verlag
Kaminski R, Schaub T, Wanko P (2017) A tutorial on hybrid answer set solving with clingo. In: Ianni G, Lembo D, Bertossi L, Faber W, Glimm B, Gottlob G, Staab S (eds) Proceedings of the thirteenth international summer school of the reasoning web. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 10370. Springer, Berlin, pp 167–203
Kaufmann B, Leone N, Perri S, Schaub T (2016) Grounding and solving in answer set programming. AI Mag 37(3):25–32
Kowalski R (1974) Predicate logic as programming language. In: Proceedings IFIP Congress, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, pp 569–574
Leone N, Pfeifer G, Faber W, Eiter T, Gottlob G, Perri S, Scarcello F (2006) The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Trans Comput Logic 7(3):499–562
Lifschitz V, Razborov A (2006) Why are there so many loop formulas? ACM Trans Comput Logic 7(2):261–268
Lin F, Zhao Y (2002) ASSAT: computing answer sets of a logic program by SAT solvers. In: Proceedings of the national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI), AAAI/MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 112–118
Marques-Silva J, Sakallah K (1999) GRASP: a search algorithm for propositional satisfiability. IEEE Trans Comput 48(5):506–521
McCarthy J (1986) Applications of circumscription to formalizing common-sense knowledge. Artif Intell 28:89–116
McCarthy J (1998) Elaboration tolerance. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/elaboration.html
Niemelä I (1999) Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Ann Math Artif Intell 25(3–4):241–273
Oetsch J, Pührer J, Tompits H (2010) Catching the ouroboros: on debugging non-ground answer-set programs. Theory Pract Logic Program 10(4–6):513–529
Pearce D (2006) Equilibrium logic. Ann Math Artif Intell 47(1–2):3–41
Pearce D, Tompits H, Woltran S (2001) Encodings for equilibrium logic and logic programs with nested expressions. In: Brazdil P, Jorge A (eds) Proceedings of the tenth Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence (EPIA’01). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2258. Springer, Berlin, pp 306–320
Reiter R (1980) A logic for default reasoning. Artif Intell 13(1–2):81–132
Schrijver A (1999) Theory of linear and integer programming. Discrete mathematics and optimization. Wiley, Hoboken
Simons P, Niemelä I, Soininen T (2002) Extending and implementing the stable model semantics. Artif Intell 138(1–2):181–234
Zhang L, Madigan C, Moskewicz M, Malik S (2001) Efficient conflict driven learning in a Boolean satisfiability solver. In: Ernst R (ed) Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE/ACM international conference on Computer-aided design. IEEE, San Jose, pp 279–285
Acknowledgements
Torsten Schaub has been supported by the German Science Foundation (DFG): Projects SCHA 550/9 and 11. Stefan Woltran has been supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): Project Y698.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schaub, T., Woltran, S. Answer set programming unleashed!. Künstl Intell 32, 105–108 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-018-0550-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-018-0550-z