Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T23:27:35.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

onlineSPARC: A Programming Environment for Answer Set Programming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2018

ELIAS MARCOPOULOS  and
YUANLIN ZHANG
ELIAS MARCOPOULOS
Affiliation:
Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA (e-mail: emarcopoulos@gmail.com)
YUANLIN ZHANG
Affiliation:
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA (e-mail: y.zhang@ttu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent progress in logic programming (e.g. the development of the answer set programming (ASP) paradigm) has made it possible to teach it to general undergraduate and even middle/high school students. Given the limited exposure of these students to computer science, the complexity of downloading, installing, and using tools for writing logic programs could be a major barrier for logic programming to reach a much wider audience. We developed onlineSPARC, an online ASP environment with a self-contained file system and a simple interface. It allows users to type/edit logic programs and perform several tasks over programs, including asking a query to a program, getting the answer sets of a program, and producing a drawing/animation based on the answer sets of a program.

Keywords

CS educationlogic programminganswer set programmingintegrated development environmentvisualization

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Theory and Practice of Logic Programming , Volume 19 , Special Issue 2: User-Oriented Logic Programming and Reasoning Paradigms , March 2019 , pp. 262 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

The authors were partially supported by the National Science Foundation (Grant No. CNS-1359359). We thank Christian Reotutar, Evgenii Balai, Mbathio Diagne, Peter Lee, Maede Rayatidamavandi, Crisel Suarez, Edward Wertz, and Shao-Lon Yeh for their contribution to the implementation of the environment. Christian Reotutar also contributed to the early preparation of this paper. We thank Michael Gelfond and Yinan Zhang for their input and help. We thank the anonymous reviewers whose feedback helps to improve the quality of this paper as well as that of onlineSPARC.

References

Ambroz, T., Charwat, G., Jusits, A., Wallner, J. P. and Woltran, S. 2013. Arvis: Visualizing relations between answer sets. In International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Springer, Berlin, 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balai, E. 2013. SPARC manual. URL: https://github.com/iensen/sparc/tree/master/user_manual. [Retrieved in April 2018].Google Scholar
Balai, E., Gelfond, M. and Zhang, Y. 2013. Towards answer set programming with sorts. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, 12th International Conference, LPNMR 2013, Corunna, Spain, 15–19 Sep. 2013. Proceedings. 135–147.Google Scholar
Brewka, G., Eiter, T. and Truszczyński, M. 2011. Answer set programming at a glance. Communications of the ACM 54, 12, 92–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, D., Nelson, B., Sengupta, P. and Dangelo, C. 2009. Rethinking science learning through digital games and simulations: Genres, examples, and evidence. In Learning Science: Computer Games, Simulations, and Education Workshop Sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Cliffe, O., De Vos, M., Brain, M. and Padget, J. 2008. Aspviz: Declarative visualisation and animation using answer set programming. In International Conference on Logic Programming. Springer, Berlin, 724–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasseville, I. and Janssens, G. 2015. A web-based IDE for IDP. Arxiv preprint. arXiv:1511.00920.Google Scholar
Dodaro, C., Gasteiger, P., Musitsch, B., Ricca, F. and Shchekotykhin, K. 2015. Interactive debugging of non-ground asp programs. In International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Springer, Berlin, 279–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dovier, A., Benoli, P., Brocato, M. C., Dereani, L. and Tabacco, F. 2016. Reasoning in high schools: Do it with asp! In CILC, 205–213.Google Scholar
Febbraro, O., Reale, K. and Ricca, F. 2011. ASPIDE: Integrated development environment for answer set programming. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning– 11th International Conference, LPNMR 2011, Vancouver, Canada, 16–19 May 2011. Proceedings. 317–330.Google Scholar
Gebser, M., Kaufmann, B., Kaminski, R., Ostrowski, M., Schaub, T. and Schneider, M. 2011. Potassco: The potsdam answer set solving collection. AI Communications 24, 2, 107–124.Google Scholar
Gelfond, M. and Kahl, Y. 2014. Knowledge Representation, Reasoning, and the Design of Intelligent Agents. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germano, S., Calimeri, F. and Palermiti, E. 2018. LoIDE: A web-based IDE for logic programming preliminary report. In International Symposium on Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages. Springer, Berlin, 152–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzdial, M. 2001. Use of collaborative multimedia in computer science classes. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 33, 3, 17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
iGROM. URL: http://igrom.sourceforge.net/.Google Scholar
Kloimüllner, C., Oetsch, J., Pührer, J. and Tompits, H. 2013. Kara: A system for visualising and visual editing of interpretations for answer-set programs. In Applications of Declarative Programming and Knowledge Management. Springer, Berlin, 325–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kowalski, R. 2014. Logic programming. In Computational Logic, Vol. 9 Handbook of the History of Logic.Google Scholar
Kowalski, R. and Sadri, F. 2016. Programming in logic without logic programming. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 16, 03, 269–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapauw, R., Dasseville, I. and Denecker, M. 2015. Visualising interactive inferences with IDPD3. ArXiv preprint. arXiv:1511.00928.Google Scholar
McIlraith, S. 2011. What’s hot in knowledge representation and reasoning. Talk in the AAAI-12 SUBAREA SPOTLIGHTS TRACK on Knowledge Representation.Google Scholar
Mendelsohn, P., Green, T. and Brna, P. 1990. Programming languages in education: The search for an easy start. In Psychology of Programming, Hoc, J.-M., Green, T. R. G., Samurçay, R., and Gilmore, D. J., Eds. 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oetsch, J., Pührer, J. and Tompits, H. 2013. The SeaLion has landed: An IDE for answer-set programming – preliminary report. In Applications of Declarative Programming and Knowledge Management. Springer, Berlin, 305–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, B. C. 2002. Types and Programming Languages. MIT press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Reyes, M., Perez, C., Upchurch, R., Yuen, T. and Zhang, Y. 2016. Using declarative programming in an introductory computer science course for high school students. In Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
Sureshkumar, A., De Vos, M., Brain, M. and Fitch, J. 2007. APE: An ansprolog* environment. In Proc. SEA, Vol. 7, 101–115.Google Scholar