• Arish J, Carro M (2015) Towards a generic interface to integrate CLP and tabled execution (extended abstract). In: Vos MD, Eiter T, Lierler Y, Toni F (eds) Proceedings of the technical communications of the 31st international conference on logic programming (ICLP 2015), Cork, Ireland, 31 August– 4 Sept 2015. CEUR workshop proceedings, vol 1433.http://CEUR-WS.org

• Baral C (2003) Knowledge representation, reasoning and declarative problem solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  Book MATH  Google Scholar 

• Bauters K, Schockaert S, Cock MD, Vermeir D (2014) Semantics for possibilistic answer set programs: uncertain rules versus rules with uncertain conclusions. Int J Approx Reason 55(2):739–761

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Bauters K, Schockaert S, Cock MD, Vermeir D (2015) Characterizing and extending answer set semantics using possibility theory. Theory Pract Log Program 15(1):79–116

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Benferhat S, Ben-Naim J, Papini O, Würbel É (2010) An answer set programming encoding of prioritized removed sets revision: application to GIS. Appl Intell 32(1):60–87

  Article MATH  Google Scholar 

• Benhamou F, Bouvier P, Colmerauer A, Garreta H, Gilleta B, Massat J-L, Narboni G-A, N’Dong S, Pasero R, Pique J-F, Touravane Caneghem MV, Vtillard E, Zhou J (1996) Le manuel de Prolog IV, Prologia

  Google Scholar 

• Bistarelli S, Montanari U, Rossi F (2001) Semiring-based constraint logic programming: syntax and semantics. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 23(1):1–29

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Blondeel M, Schockaert S, Vermeir D, Cock MD (2013) In: Yager R, Abbasov A, Reformat M, Shahbazova S (eds) Soft computing: state of the art theory and novel applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 209–222

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Blondeel M, Schockaert S, Vermeir D, Cock MD (2014) Complexity of fuzzy answer set programming under łukasiewicz semantics. Int J Approx Reason 55(9):1971–2003

  Article MATH  Google Scholar 

• Brewka G (2004) Complex preferences for answer set optimization. In: Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning: proceedings of the ninth international conference (KR2004), Whistler, Canada, 2–5 June 2004, pp 213–223

  Google Scholar 

• Brewka G, Delgrande JP, Romero J, Schaub T (2015) asprin: customizing answer set preferences without a headache. In: Proceedings of the twenty-ninth AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, 25–30 January 2015, Austin, Texas, USA, pp 1467–1474

  Google Scholar 

• Brewka G, Niemelä I, Syrjänen T (2004) Logic programs with ordered disjunction. Comput Intell 20(2):333–357

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Cabalar P, Ferraris P (2007) Propositional theories are strongly equivalent to logic programs. Theory Pract Log Program 7(6):745–759

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Calimeri F, Cozza S, Ianni G, Leone N (2008) Computable functions in ASP: theory and implementation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming (ICLP’08). Springer, Berlin, pp 407–424

  Google Scholar 

• Calimeri F, Gebser M, Maratea M, Ricca F (2016) Design and results of the fifth answer set programming competition. Artif Intell 231:151–181

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Calimeri F, Ianni G, Truszczynski M (eds) (2015) Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning - 13th international conference, LPNMR 2015, Lexington, KY, USA, 27–30 September 2015. Proceedings. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 9345. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Carlsson M, Ottosson G, Carlson B (1997) An open-ended finite domain constraint solver. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on programming language implementation and logic programming (PLILP’97), pp 191–206

  Google Scholar 

• Clark KL (1977) Negation as failure. In: Gallaire H, Minker J (eds) Logic and data bases. Plenum, New York, pp 293–322

  Google Scholar 

• Colmerauer A (1983) Prolog in ten figures. In: International joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI’83), pp 487–499

  Google Scholar 

• Colmerauer A (1990) An introduction to prolog III. Commun ACM 33(7):69–90

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Colmerauer A, Kanoui A, Roussel P, Pasero R (1973) Un systme de communication homme-machine en franais. Artificielle, Universit d’Aix-Marseille, Technical report, Groupe de Recherche en Intelligence

  Google Scholar 

• Colmerauer A, Roussel P (1996) The birth of prolog. In: Et Gibson RG, Berjin TJ (eds) History of programming languages. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley, New York, pp 37–52

  Google Scholar 

• Confalonieri R, Nieves JC, Osorio M, Vázquez-Salceda J (2010) Possibilistic semantics for logic programs with ordered disjunction. International symposium on foundations of information and knowledge systems (FoIKS’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 133–152

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Costantini S, Formisano A, Petturiti D (2010) Extending and implementing RASP. Fundam Inf 105(1–2):1–33

  MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• de Kergommeaux JC, Codognet P (1994) Parallel logic programming systems. ACM Comput Surv 26(3):295–336

  Article  Google Scholar 

• de la Banda MG, Pontelli E (eds) (2008). Logic programming, 24th international conference, ICLP 2008, Udine, Italy, 9–13 December 2008, Proceedings. LNCS, vol 5366. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Delgrande JP, Schaub T, Tompits H, Wang K (2004) A classification and survey of preference handling approaches in nonmonotonic reasoning. Comput Intell 20(2):308–334

  Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

• Deransart P, Ed-Dbali A, Cervoni L (1996) Prolog - the standard: reference manual. Springer, Berlin

  Book MATH  Google Scholar 

• Diaz D (2001) Design and implementation of the GNU Prolog system. J Funct Log Program 2001(6)

  Google Scholar 

• Dincbas M, Van Hentenryck P, Simonis H, Aggoun A, Herold A (1988) The CHIP system: constraint handling in Prolog. In: Lusk E, Overbeek R (eds) 9th international conference on automated deduction. Springer, Argonne

  Google Scholar 

• Drescher C, Walsh T (2010) A translational approach to constraint answer set solving. TPLP 10(4–6):465–480

  MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Dubois D, Prade H, Schockaert S (2015) Extending answer set programming using generalized possibilistic logic. In: Proceedings of the joint ontology workshops 2015 episode 1: the argentine winter of ontology co-located with the 24th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI 2015), Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–27 July 2015

  Google Scholar 

• Egly U, Gaggl SA, Woltran S (2010) Answer-set programming encodings for argumentation frameworks. Argum Comput 1(2):147–177

  Article MATH  Google Scholar 

• 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-C, Schmidt RA (eds) 5th international reasoning web summer school (RW 2009), Brixen/Bressanone, Italy, 30 August–4 September 2009. LNCS, vol 5689. Springer, Berlin pp 40–110

  Google Scholar 

• Erdem E, Erdem O, Türe F (2009) HAPLO-ASP: haplotype inference using answer set programming. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 573–578

  Google Scholar 

• Ferraris P, Lee J, Lifschitz V (2007) A new perspective on stable models. In: International joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI’07), pp 372–379

  Google Scholar 

• Ferraris P, Lee J (2010) Stable models and circumscription. Artif Intell 175:236–263

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Fruhwirth T (1998) Theory and practice of constraint handling rules. J Log Program 37(1–3):95–138

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Frühwirth T (2009) Constraint handling rules, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

  Google Scholar 

• Frühwirth TW (1994) Constraint handling rules. Constraint programming, pp 90–107

  Google Scholar 

• Garcia L, Ngoma S, Nicolas P (2009) Dealing automatically with exceptions by introducing specificity in ASP. In: Proceedings of the European conference on symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning with uncertainty (ECSQARU’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 614–625

  Google Scholar 

• Gebser M, Kaminski R, Knig A, Schaub T (2011a) Advances in gringo series 3. In: Delgrande JP Faber W (eds) Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning - 11th international conference, LPNMR 2011. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 6645. Springer, Berlin, pp 345–351

  Google Scholar 

• Gebser M, Schaub T, Thiele S, Veber P (2011b) Detecting inconsistencies in large biological networks with answer set programming. Theory Pract Log Program 11(2):1–38

  MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Gebser M, Kaufmann B, Schaub T (2009) The conflict-driven answer set solver clasp: progress report. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 509–514

  Google Scholar 

• Gebser M, Konig A, Schaub TTS, Veber P (2010) The BioASP library: ASP solutions for systems biology. In: Proceedings of the international conference on tools with artificial intelligence (ICTAI’10). IEEE Computer Society, Washington

  Google Scholar 

• Gebser M, Maratea M, Ricca F (2017). The design of the seventh answer set programming competition. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’17). Springer, Berlin, pp 3–9

  Google Scholar 

• Gebser M, Schaub T, Thiele S (2007) Gringo: a new grounder for answer set programming. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’07). Springer, Berlin, pp 266–271

  Google Scholar 

• Gelfond M, Leone N (2002) Logic programming and knowledge representation - the A-Prolog perspective. Artif Intell 138(1–2):3–38

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Gelfond M, Lifschitz V (1988) The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Kowalski RA, Bowen K (eds) Proceedings of the conference and symposium on logic programming. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp 1070–1080

  Google Scholar 

• Gelfond M, Lifschitz V (1991) Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Gener Comput 9(3sps4):365–386

  Google Scholar 

• Gelfond M, Przymusinska H, Przymusinski TC (1986) The extended closed world assumpution and its relationship to parallel circumscription. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on principles of database systems (PODS’86). ACM, New York, pp 133–139

  Google Scholar 

• Giannesini F, Kanoui H, Pasero R, Caneghem MV (1985) Prolog (Prface de A. Colmerauer), InterEditions

  Google Scholar 

• Giunchiglia E, Lierler Y, Maratea M (2006) Answer set programming based on propositional satisfiability. J Autom Reason 36(4):345–377

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Grasso G, Iiritano S, Leone N, Ricca F (2009) Some DLV applications for knowledge management. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 591–597

  Google Scholar 

• Hentenryck PV, Saraswat VA, Deville Y (1998) Design, implementation, and evaluation of the constraint language cc(FD). J Log Program 37(1–3):139–164

  Article MATH  Google Scholar 

• Hill PM, Lloyd JW (1994) The Gödel programming language. MIT Press, Cambridge

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Hué J, Papini O, Würbel É (2010) Implementing prioritized merging with ASP. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information processing and management of uncertainty in knowledge-based systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 138–147

  Google Scholar 

• Ielpa SM, Iiritano S, Leone N, Ricca F (2009) An ASP-based system for e-tourism. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 368–381

  Google Scholar 

• Jaffar J, Lassez J-L (1987) Constraint logic programming. In: Proceedings of the symposium on principles of programming languages (POPL’87). ACM, New York, pp 111–119

  Google Scholar 

• Jaffar J, Michaylov S, Stuckey PJ, Yap RHC (1992) The CLP(R) language and system. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 14(3):339–395

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Janssen J, Schockaert S, Vermeir D, Cock MD (2012) Answer set programming for continuous domains - a fuzzy logic approach. Atlantis computational intelligence systems, vol 5. Atlantis Press, Paris

  Google Scholar 

• Kayser D, Nouioua F (2009) From the textual description of an accident to its causes. Artif Intell 173(12–13):1154–1193

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kowalski R (1974) Predicate logic as a programming language. Inf Process 74:569–574

  MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Lefèvre C, Béatrix C, Stéphan I, Garcia L (2017) ASPeRix, a first order forward chaining approach for answer set computing. Theory Prat Log Program 1–45

  Google Scholar 

• Lefèvre C, Nicolas P (2009a) A first order forward chaining approach for answer set computing. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 196–208

  Google Scholar 

• Lefèvre C, Nicolas P (2009b) The first version of a new ASP solver : ASPeRiX. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’09). Springer, Berlin, pp 522–527

  Google Scholar 

• Leone N, Faber W (2008) The DLV project: a tour from theory and research to applications and market. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming (ICLP’08). Springer, Berlin, pp 53–68

  Google Scholar 

• 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 Log 7(3):499–562

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Lifschitz V (1989) Between circumscription and autoepistemic logic. In: International conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’89), pp 235–244

  Google Scholar 

• Lifschitz V (2002) Answer set programming and plan generation. Artif Intell 138(1–2):39–54

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Lifschitz V (2008a) Twelve definitions of a stable model. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming (ICLP’08). Springer, Berlin, pp 37–51

  Google Scholar 

• Lifschitz V (2008b) What is answer set programming? In: Proceedings of the international conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’08), pp 1594–1597

  Google Scholar 

• Lin F, Zhao Y (2004) ASSAT: computing answer sets of a logic program by SAT solvers. Artif Intell 157(1–2):115–137

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Lloyd J (1987) Foundations of logic programming. Springer, New York Inc

  Book MATH  Google Scholar 

• Loveland D (1968) A linear format for resolution. In: Proceedings of the symposium on automatic demonstration. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Luckham D (1968) Refinements theorems in resolution theory. In: Proceedings of the symposium on automatic demonstration. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Mancosu P (1998) From Brouwer to Hilbert: the debate on the foundations of mathematics in the 1920s. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• McCarthy J (1980) Circumscription - a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artif Intell 13(1–2):27–39

  Article MATH  Google Scholar 

• McCarthy J (1986) Applications of circumscription to formalizing common-sense knowledge. Artif Intell 28(1):89–116

  Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

• Moore RC (1985) Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic logic. Artif Intell 25(1):75–94

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Mushthofa M, Schockaert S, Cock MD (2014) A finite-valued solver for disjunctive fuzzy answer set programs. In: ECAI 2014 - 21st European conference on artificial intelligence, 18–22 August 2014, Prague, Czech republic - including prestigious applications of intelligent systems (PAIS 2014), pp 645–650

  Google Scholar 

• Nadathur G, Miller D (1998) Higher-order logic programming. In: Gabbay CHD, Robinson A (eds) Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming, vol 5. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 499–590

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Nicolas P, Garcia L, Stphan I, Lefvre C (2006) Possibilistic uncertainty handling for answer set programming. Ann Math Artif Intell 47(1–2):139–181

  Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

• Niemelä I (1999) Logic programs with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Ann Math Artif Intell 25(3–4):241–273

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Niemelä I, Simons P, Soininen T (1999) Stable model semantics of weight constraint rules. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’ 99). Springer, Berlin, pp 317–331

  Google Scholar 

• Nieuwenborgh DV, Cock MD, Vermeir D (2007) An introduction to fuzzy answer set programming. Ann Math Artif Intell 50(3–4):363–388

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Older WJ, Vellino A (1990) Extending prolog with constraint arithmetic on real intervals. In: Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering

  Google Scholar 

• Palu AD, Dovier A, Pontelli E, Rossi G (2009) Answer set programming with constraints using lazy grounding. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming (ICLP’09). LNCS, vol 5649. Springer, Berlin, pp 115–129

  Google Scholar 

• Pearce D (1996) A new logical characterisation of stable models and answer sets. In: Non-monotonic extensions of logic programming (NMELP’96). Springer, Berlin, pp 57–70

  Google Scholar 

• Reiter R (1980) A logic for default reasoning. Artif Intell 13(1–2):81–132

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Robinson J (1965) A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle. J ACM 12(1):23–41

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Rossi F, van Beek P, Walsh T (eds) (2006) Handbook of constraint programming. Elsevier, Amsterdam

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Sakama C, Inoue K (1993) Relating disjunctive logic programs to default theories. In: Proceedings of the international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR’93), pp 266–282

  Google Scholar 

• Schaub T, Wang K (2001) A comparative study of logic programs with preference. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’01), pp 597–602

  Google Scholar 

• Simons P, Niemelä I, Soininen T (2002) Extending and implementing the stable model semantics. Artif Intell 138(1–2):181–234

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Somogyi Z, Henderson F, Conway T (1996) The execution algorithm of Mercury, an efficient purely declarative logic programming language. J Log Program 29

  Google Scholar 

• Son TC, Pontelli E (2006) Planning with preferences using logic programming. TPLP 6(5):559–607

  MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Stéphan I, Mota BD, Nicolas P (2009) From (quantified) boolean formulae to answer set programming. J Log Comput 19(4):565–590

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Syrjänen T (1998) Implementation of local grounding for logic programs for stable model semantics. Technical report, Helsinki University of Technology

  Google Scholar 

• Van Roy P, Brand P, Duchier D, Haridi S, Henz M, Schulte C (2003) Logic programming in the context of multiparadigm programming: the Oz experience. Theory Prac Log Program 3(6):717–763

  Article MATH  Google Scholar 

• Vos MD, Eiter T, Lierler Y, Toni F (eds) (2015) Proceedings of the technical communications of the 31st international conference on logic programming (ICLP 2015), Cork, Ireland, 31 August– 4 September 2015. CEUR workshop proceedings, vol 1433.http://CEUR-WS.org

• Waltz D (1975) Understanding line drawings in scenes with shadow. Hill McGraw, New York, pp 19–91

  Google Scholar 

• Warren DS (1983) An abstract Prolog instruction set. Technical note 309, SRI

  Google Scholar 

• Wielemaker J, Schrijvers T, Triska M, Lager T (2012) Swi-prolog. TPLP 12(1–2):67–96

  Google Scholar 

• Yahya AH, Henschen LJ (1985) Deduction in non-Horn databases. J Autom Reason 1(2):141–160

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

• Yuan L-Y, You J-H (1993) Autoepistemic circumscription and logic programming. J Autom Reason 10(2):143–160

  Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references