BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Pedro Cabalar

Pedro Cabalar contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceLogic in Computer ScienceProgramming Languages

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
12works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

12 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

Comparing Non-minimal Semantics for Disjunction in Answer Set Programming

In this paper, we compare four different semantics for disjunction in Answer Set Programming that, unlike stable models, do not adhere to the principle of model minimality. Two of these approaches, Cabalar and Muñiz' \emph{Justified Models} and Doherty and Szalas' \emph{Strongly Supported Models}, directly provide an alternative non-minimal semantics for disjunction. The other two, Aguado et al's \emph{Forks} and Shen and Eiter's \emph{Determining Inference} (DI) semantics, actually introduce a new disjunction connective, but are compared here as if they constituted new semantics for the standard disjunction operator. We are able to prove that three of these approaches (Forks, Justified Models and a reasonable relaxation of the DI semantics) actually coincide, constituting a common single approach under different definitions. Moreover, this common semantics always provides a superset of the stable models of a program (in fact, modulo any context) and is strictly stronger than the fourth approach (Strongly Supported Models), that actually treats disjunctions as in classical logic.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2025arXiv

Towards Constraint Temporal Answer Set Programming

Reasoning about dynamic systems with a fine-grained temporal and numeric resolution presents significant challenges for logic-based approaches like Answer Set Programming (ASP). To address this, we introduce and elaborate upon a novel temporal and constraint-based extension of the logic of Here-and-There and its nonmonotonic equilibrium extension, representing, to the best of our knowledge, the first approach to nonmonotonic temporal reasoning with constraints specifically tailored for ASP. This expressive system is achieved by a synergistic combination of two foundational ASP extensions: the linear-time logic of Here-and-There, providing robust nonmonotonic temporal reasoning capabilities, and the logic of Here-and-There with constraints, enabling the direct integration and manipulation of numeric constraints, among others. This work establishes the foundational logical framework for tackling complex dynamic systems with high resolution within the ASP paradigm.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

A System for Explainable Answer Set Programming

We present xclingo, a tool for generating explanations from ASP programs annotated with text and labels. These annotations allow tracing the application of rules or the atoms derived by them. The input of xclingo is a markup language written as ASP comment lines, so the programs annotated in this way can still be accepted by a standard ASP solver. xclingo translates the annotations into additional predicates and rules and uses the ASP solver clingo to obtain the extension of those auxiliary predicates. This information is used afterwards to construct derivation trees containing textual explanations. The language allows selecting which atoms to explain and, in its turn, which atoms or rules to include in those explanations. We illustrate the basic features through a diagnosis problem from the literature.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

A Uniform Treatment of Aggregates and Constraints in Hybrid ASP

Characterizing hybrid ASP solving in a generic way is difficult since one needs to abstract from specific theories. Inspired by lazy SMT solving, this is usually addressed by treating theory atoms as opaque. Unlike this, we propose a slightly more transparent approach that includes an abstract notion of a term. Rather than imposing a syntax on terms, we keep them abstract by stipulating only some basic properties. With this, we further develop a semantic framework for hybrid ASP solving and provide aggregate functions for theory variables that adhere to different semantic principles, show that they generalize existing aggregate semantics in ASP and how we can rely on off-the-shelf hybrid solvers for implementation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

An ASP semantics for Constraints involving Conditional Aggregates

We elaborate upon the formal foundations of hybrid Answer Set Programming (ASP) and extend its underlying logical framework with aggregate functions over constraint values and variables. This is achieved by introducing the construct of conditional expressions, which allow for considering two alternatives while evaluating constraints. Which alternative is considered is interpretation-dependent and chosen according to an associated condition. We put some emphasis on logic programs with linear constraints and show how common ASP aggregates can be regarded as particular cases of so-called conditional linear constraints. Finally, we introduce a polynomial-size, modular and faithful translation from our framework into regular (condition-free) Constraint ASP, outlining an implementation of conditional aggregates on top of existing hybrid ASP solvers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

eclingo: A solver for Epistemic Logic Programs

We describe eclingo, a solver for epistemic logic programs under Gelfond 1991 semantics built upon the Answer Set Programming system clingo. The input language of eclingo uses the syntax extension capabilities of clingo to define subjective literals that, as usual in epistemic logic programs, allow for checking the truth of a regular literal in all or in some of the answer sets of a program. The eclingo solving process follows a guess and check strategy. It first generates potential truth values for subjective literals and, in a second step, it checks the obtained result with respect to the cautious and brave consequences of the program. This process is implemented using the multi-shot functionalities of clingo. We have also implemented some optimisations, aiming at reducing the search space and, therefore, increasing eclingo's efficiency in some scenarios. Finally, we compare the efficiency of eclingo with two state-of-the-art solvers for epistemic logic programs on a pair of benchmark scenarios and show that eclingo generally outperforms their obtained results. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Implementing Dynamic Answer Set Programming

We introduce an implementation of an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with language constructs from dynamic (and temporal) logic that provides an expressive computational framework for modeling dynamic applications. Starting from logical foundations, provided by dynamic and temporal equilibrium logics over finite linear traces, we develop a translation of dynamic formulas into temporal logic programs. This provides us with a normal form result establishing the strong equivalence of formulas in different logics. Our translation relies on the introduction of auxiliary atoms to guarantee polynomial space complexity and to provide an embedding that is doomed to be impossible over the same language. Finally, the reduction of dynamic formulas to temporal logic programs allows us to extend ASP with both approaches in a uniform way and to implement both extensions via temporal ASP solvers such as telingo

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Modular Answer Set Programming as a Formal Specification Language

In this paper, we study the problem of formal verification for Answer Set Programming (ASP), namely, obtaining a formal proof showing that the answer sets of a given (non-ground) logic program P correctly correspond to the solutions to the problem encoded by P, regardless of the problem instance. To this aim, we use a formal specification language based on ASP modules, so that each module can be proved to capture some informal aspect of the problem in an isolated way. This specification language relies on a novel definition of (possibly nested, first order) program modules that may incorporate local hidden atoms at different levels. Then, verifying the logic program P amounts to prove some kind of equivalence between P and its modular specification. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Towards Metric Temporal Answer Set Programming

We elaborate upon the theoretical foundations of a metric temporal extension of Answer Set Programming. In analogy to previous extensions of ASP with constructs from Linear Temporal and Dynamic Logic, we accomplish this in the setting of the logic of Here-and-There and its non-monotonic extension, called Equilibrium Logic. More precisely, we develop our logic on the same semantic underpinnings as its predecessors and thus use a simple time domain of bounded time steps. This allows us to compare all variants in a uniform framework and ultimately combine them in a common implementation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Revisiting Explicit Negation in Answer Set Programming

A common feature in Answer Set Programming is the use of a second negation, stronger than default negation and sometimes called explicit, strong or classical negation. This explicit negation is normally used in front of atoms, rather than allowing its use as a regular operator. In this paper we consider the arbitrary combination of explicit negation with nested expressions, as those defined by Lifschitz, Tang and Turner. We extend the concept of reduct for this new syntax and then prove that it can be captured by an extension of Equilibrium Logic with this second negation. We study some properties of this variant and compare to the already known combination of Equilibrium Logic with Nelson's strong negation. Under consideration for acceptance in TPLP.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

A Denotational Semantics for Equilibrium Logic

In this paper we provide an alternative semantics for Equilibrium Logic and its monotonic basis, the logic of Here-and-There (also known as Gödel's G3 logic) that relies on the idea of "denotation" of a formula, that is, a function that collects the set of models of that formula. Using the three-valued logic G3 as a starting point and an ordering relation (for which equilibrium/stable models are minimal elements) we provide several elementary operations for sets of interpretations. By analysing structural properties of the denotation of formulas, we show some expressiveness results for G3 such as, for instance, that conjunction is not expressible in terms of the other connectives. Moreover, the denotational semantics allows us to capture the set of equilibrium models of a formula with a simple and compact set expression. We also use this semantics to provide several formal definitions for entailment relations that are usual in the literature, and further introduce a new one called "strong entailment". We say that $α$ strongly entails $β$ when the equilibrium models of $α\wedge γ$ are also equilibrium models of $β\wedge γ$ for any context $γ$. We also provide a characterisation of strong entailment in terms of the denotational semantics, and give an example of a sufficient condition that can be applied in some cases.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Functional Answer Set Programming

In this paper we propose an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP), and in particular, of its most general logical counterpart, Quantified Equilibrium Logic (QEL), to deal with partial functions. Although the treatment of equality in QEL can be established in different ways, we first analyse the choice of decidable equality with complete functions and Herbrand models, recently proposed in the literature. We argue that this choice yields some counterintuitive effects from a logic programming and knowledge representation point of view. We then propose a variant called QELF where the set of functions is partitioned into partial and Herbrand functions (we also call constructors). In the rest of the paper, we show a direct connection to Scott's Logic of Existence and present a practical application, proposing an extension of normal logic programs to deal with partial functions and equality, so that they can be translated into function-free normal programs, being possible in this way to compute their answer sets with any standard ASP solver.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access