• Home
  • Search
  • Complexity of super-coherence problems in ASP
  • Open Access IconOpen Access
  • Cite Icon3
  • https://doi.org/10.1017/s147106841300001xCopy DOI Icon

Complexity of super-coherence problems in ASP

Show More
  • Abstract
  • Literature Map
  • References
  • Citations
  • Similar Papers
Abstract

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 Dynamic Magic Set, 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 a recent work, a large fragment of ASP programs, referred to assuper-coherent programs, has been identified, for which Dynamic Magic Set 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 Π3P-complete in the disjunctive case, while it is Π2P-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, although this transformation is more of theoretical than practical interest.

Similar Papers
  • Single Book
  • Citations20

Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning

  • Jan 01, 2009
  • Esra Erdem +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations10

ApproxASP – a Scalable Approximate Answer Set Counter

  • Jun 28, 2022
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
  • Mohimenul Kabir +5
  • Conference Article
  • Citations1

LLASP: Fine-tuning Large Language Models for Answer Set Programming

  • Nov 01, 2024
  • Erica Coppolillo +4
  • Conference Article
  • Citations9

Blending Grounding and Compilation for Efficient ASP Solving

  • Nov 01, 2024
  • Carmine Dodaro +2
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations28

Planning in Answer Set Programming Using Ordered Task Decomposition

  • Jan 01, 2003
  • Jürgen Dix +2
  • Dissertation

Answer set programming : SAT based solver and phase transition

  • Jan 01, 2003
  • Yuting Zhao
  • Research Article
  • Citations1

An Answer Set Programming System with Cycle Breaking Heuristic

  • Mar 25, 2010
  • Journal of Software
  • Yu-Ping Shen +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations15

Multi-engine ASP solving with policy adaptation

  • Dec 11, 2013
  • Journal of Logic and Computation
  • M Maratea +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations16

Reducing fuzzy answer set programming to model finding in fuzzy logics

  • Jun 21, 2011
  • Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
  • Jeroen Janssen +3
  • Research Article
  • Citations62

Computing preferred answer sets by meta-interpretation in Answer Set Programming

  • Jul 01, 2003
  • Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
  • Thomas Eiter +3
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations20

Kara: A System for Visualising and Visual Editing of Interpretations for Answer-Set Programs

  • Jan 01, 2013
  • Christian Kloimüllner +3
  • Research Article
  • Citations25

Nurse (Re)scheduling via answer set programming1

  • Jan 29, 2019
  • Intelligenza Artificiale
  • Mario Alviano +2
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations19

Plasp: A Prototype for PDDL-Based Planning in ASP

  • Jan 01, 2011
  • Martin Gebser +3
  • Conference Article

Answer Set Programming: A Declarative Approach to Solving Challenging Search Problems

  • May 01, 2011
  • Ilkka Niemelä
  • Research Article
  • Citations46

Answering the “why” in answer set programming – A survey of explanation approaches

  • Jan 15, 2019
  • Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
  • Jorge Fandinno +1
Cactus Communications logo

Copyright 2026 Cactus Communications. All rights reserved.