Document Open Access Logo

SMT-Based Constraint Answer Set Solver EZSMT (System Description)

Authors Benjamin Susman, Yuliya Lierler



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

OASIcs.ICLP.2016.1.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.54 MB
  • 15 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Benjamin Susman
Yuliya Lierler

Cite AsGet BibTex

Benjamin Susman and Yuliya Lierler. SMT-Based Constraint Answer Set Solver EZSMT (System Description). In Technical Communications of the 32nd International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2016). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 52, pp. 1:1-1:15, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)
https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ICLP.2016.1

Abstract

Constraint answer set programming is a promising research direction that integrates answer set programming with constraint processing. Recently, the formal link between this research area and satisfiability modulo theories (or SMT) was established. This link allows the cross-fertilization between traditionally different solving technologies. The paper presents the system ezsmt, one of the first SMT-based solvers for constraint answer set programming. It also presents the comparative analysis of the performance of ezsmt in relation to its peers including solvers EZCSP, CLINGCON, and MINGO. Experimental results demonstrate that SMT is a viable technology for constraint answer set programming.
Keywords
  • constraint answer set programming
  • constraint satisfaction processing
  • satisfiability modulo theories

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Marcello Balduccini. Representing constraint satisfaction problems in answer set programming. In ICLP Workshop on Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms (ASPOCP), 2009. URL: https://www.mat.unical.it/ASPOCP09/.
  2. Marcello Balduccini and Yuliya Lierler. Constraint answer set solver EZCSP and why integration schemas matter. Unpublished draft, available at https://works.bepress.com/yuliya_lierler/64/, 2016.
  3. Clark Barrett, Christopher L. Conway, Morgan Deters, Liana Hadarean, Dejan Jovanović, Tim King, Andrew Reynolds, and Cesare Tinelli. Cvc4. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV'11), volume 6806 of LNCS. Springer, 2011. Google Scholar
  4. Clark Barrett, Pascal Fontaine, and Cesare Tinelli. The SMT-LIB Standard: Version 2.5. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, The University of Iowa, 2015. Google Scholar
  5. Michael Bartholomew and Joohyung Lee. System aspmt2smt: Computing aspmt theories by smt solvers. In European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence, JELIA, pages 529-542. Springer, 2014. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11558-0_37.
  6. Leonardo De Moura and Nikolaj Bjørner. Z3: An efficient smt solver. In Proceedings of the Theory and Practice of Software, 14th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, pages 337-340, 2008. Google Scholar
  7. Christian Drescher and Toby Walsh. A translational approach to constraint answer set solving. Theory and Practice of Logic programming (TPLP), 10(4-6):465-480, 2010. Google Scholar
  8. François Fages. Consistency of Clark’s completion and existence of stable models. Journal of Methods of Logic in Computer Science, 1:51-60, 1994. Google Scholar
  9. Paolo Ferraris and Vladimir Lifschitz. Weight constraints as nested expressions. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 5:45-74, 2005. Google Scholar
  10. Martin Gebser, Roland Kaminski, Arne König, and Torsten Schaub. Advances in gringo series 3. In Proceedings of International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR), pages 345-351. Springer, 2011. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20895-9_39.
  11. Martin Gebser, Max Ostrowski, and Torsten Schaub. Constraint answer set solving. In Proceedings of 25th International Conference on Logic Programming, pages 235-249. Springer, 2009. Google Scholar
  12. Enrico Giunchiglia, Yuliya Lierler, and Marco Maratea. Answer set programming based on propositional satisfiability. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 36:345-377, 2006. Google Scholar
  13. Tomi Janhunen, Guohua Liu, and Ilkka Niemela. Tight integration of non-ground answer set programming and satisfiability modulo theories. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Grounding and Transformations for Theories with Variables, 2011. Google Scholar
  14. Yuliya Lierler and Benjamin Susman. Constraint answer set programming versus satisfiability modulo theories. In Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), 2016. Google Scholar
  15. Vladimir Lifschitz, Lappoon R. Tang, and Hudson Turner. Nested expressions in logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 25:369-389, 1999. Google Scholar
  16. Guohua Liu, Tomi Janhunen, and Ilkka Niemela. Answer set programming via mixed integer programming. In Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Conference, 2012. URL: https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/KR/KR12/paper/view/4516.
  17. Kim Marriott and Peter J. Stuckey. Programming with Constraints: An Introduction. MIT Press, 1998. Google Scholar
  18. Ilkka Niemelä. Stable models and difference logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 53:313-329, 2008. Google Scholar
  19. Ilkka Niemelä and Patrik Simons. Extending the Smodels system with cardinality and weight constraints. In Jack Minker, editor, Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence, pages 491-521. Kluwer, 2000. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail