Extending ASP with constraints (CASP) enhances its expressiveness and performance. This extension is not straightforward as the grounding phase, present in most ASP systems, removes variables and the links among them, and also causes a combinatorial explosion in the size of the program. Several methods to overcome this issue have been devised: restricting the constraint domains (e.g., discrete instead of dense), or the type (or number) of models that can be returned. In this paper we propose to incorporate constraints into s(ASP), a goal-directed, top-down execution model which implements ASP while retaining logical variables both during execution and in the answer sets. The resulting model, s(CASP), can constrain variables that, as in CLP, are kept during the execution and in the answer sets. s(CASP) inherits and generalizes the execution model of s(ASP) and is parametric w.r.t. the constraint solver. We describe this novel execution model and show through several examples the enhanced expressiveness of s(CASP) w.r.t. ASP, CLP, and other CASP systems. We also report improved performance w.r.t. other very mature, highly optimized ASP systems in some benchmarks.

Ethical and legal concerns make it necessary for programs that may directly influence the life of people (via, e.g., legal or health counseling) to justify in human-understandable terms the advice given. Answer Set Programming has a rich semantics that makes it possible to very concisely express complex knowledge. However, justifying why an answer is a consequence from an ASP program may be non-trivial -even more so when the user is an expert in a given domain, but not necessarily knowledgeable in ASP. Most ASP systems generate answers using SAT-solving procedures on ground rules that do not match how humans perceive reasoning. We propose using s(CASP), a query-driven, top-down execution model for predicate ASP with constraints to generate justification trees of (constrained) answer sets. The operational semantics of s(CASP) relies on backward chaining, which is intuitive to follow and lends itself to generating explanations that are easier to translate into natural language. We show how s(CASP) provides minimal justifications for, among others, relevant examples proposed in the literature, both as search trees but, more importantly, as explanations in natural language. We validate our design with real ASP applications and evaluate the cost of generating s(CASP) justification trees.

Logic programming with tabling and constraints (TCLP, tabled constraint logic programming) has been shown to be more expressive and in some cases more efficient than LP, CLP, or LP + tabling. Previous designs of TCLP systems did not fully use entailment to determine call/answer subsumption and did not provide a simple and well-documented interface to facilitate the integration of constraint solvers in existing tabling systems. We study the role of projection and entailment in the termination, soundness, and completeness of TCLP systems and present the design and an experimental evaluation of Mod TCLP, a framework that eases the integration of additional constraint solvers. Mod TCLP views constraint solvers as clients of the tabling system, which is generic w.r.t. the solver and only requires a clear interface from the latter. We validate our design by integrating four constraint solvers: a previously existing constraint solver for difference constraints, written in C; the standard versions of Holzbaur’s and , written in Prolog; and a new constraint solver for equations over finite lattices. We evaluate the performance of our framework in several benchmarks using the aforementioned solvers. Mod TCLP is developed in Ciao Prolog, a robust, mature, next-generation Prolog system.

Automated commonsense reasoning (CR) is essential for building human-like AI systems featuring, for example, explainable AI. Event calculus (EC) is a family of formalisms that model CR with a sound, logical basis. Previous attempts to mechanize reasoning using EC faced difficulties in the treatment of the continuous change in dense domains (e.g. time and other physical quantities), constraints among variables, default negation, and the uniform application of different inference methods, among others. We propose the use of s(CASP), a query-driven, top-down execution model for Predicate Answer Set Programming with Constraints, to model and reason using EC. We show how EC scenarios can be naturally and directly encoded in s(CASP) and how it enables deductive and abductive reasoning tasks in domains featuring constraints involving both dense time and dense fluents.

Empirical research using optimal hedge ratios usually suggests that producers should hedge much more than they do. In this study, a new theoretical model of hedging is derived. Optimal hedge and leverage ratios and their relationship with yield risk, price variability, basis risk, taxes, and financial risk are determined using alternative assumptions. The motivation to hedge is provided by progressive tax rates and cost of bankruptcy. An empirical example for a wheat and stocker‐steer producer is provided. Results show that there are many factors, often assumed away in the literature, that make farmers hedge little or not at all. Progressive tax rates provide an incentive for farmers to hedge in order to reduce their tax liabilities and increase their after‐tax income. Farmers will hedge when the cost of hedging is less than the benefits of hedging that come from reducing tax liabilities, liquidity costs, or bankruptcy costs. When tax‐loss carryback is allowed, hedging decreases as the amount of tax loss that can be carried back increases. Higher profitability makes benefits from futures trading negligible and hedging unattractive, since farmers move to higher income brackets with near constant marginal tax rates. Increasing basis risk or yield risk also reduce the incentive to hedge. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 20: 375–396, 2000

No abstract

No abstract

Aggregates are used to compute single pieces of information from separate data items, such as records in a database or answers to a query to a logic program. The maximum and minimum are well-known examples of aggregates. The computation of aggregates in Prolog or variant-based tabling can loop even if the aggregate at hand can be finitely determined. When answer subsumption or mode-directed tabling is used, termination improves, but the behavior observed in existing proposals is not consistent. We present a framework to incrementally compute aggregates for elements in a lattice. We use the entailment and join relations of the lattice to define (and compute) aggregates and decide whether some atom is compatible with (entails) the aggregate. The semantics of the aggregates defined in this way is consistent with the LFP semantics of tabling with constraints. Our implementation is based on the TCLP framework available in Ciao Prolog, and improves its termination properties w.r.t. similar approaches. Defining aggregates that do not fit into the lattice structure is possible, but some properties guaranteed by the lattice may not hold. However, the flexibility provided by this possibility justifies its inclusion. We validate our design with several examples and we evaluate their performance.