Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Non-monotonic spatial reasoning with answer set programming modulo theories*

  • PRZEMYSŁAW ANDRZEJ WAŁĘGA (a1) (a2) (a3) (a4) (a5), CARL SCHULTZ (a1) (a2) (a3) (a4) (a5) and MEHUL BHATT (a1) (a2) (a3) (a4) (a5)

The systematic modelling of dynamic spatial systems is a key requirement in a wide range of application areas such as commonsense cognitive robotics, computer-aided architecture design, and dynamic geographic information systems. We present Answer Set Programming Modulo Theories (ASPMT)(QS), a novel approach and fully implemented prototype for non-monotonic spatial reasoning — a crucial requirement within dynamic spatial systems — based on ASPMT. ASPMT(QS) consists of a (qualitative) spatial representation module (QS) and a method for turning tight ASPMT instances into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) instances in order to compute stable models by means of SMT solvers. We formalise and implement concepts of default spatial reasoning and spatial frame axioms. Spatial reasoning is performed by encoding spatial relations as systems of polynomial constraints, and solving via SMT with the theory of real non-linear arithmetic. We empirically evaluate ASPMT(QS) in comparison with other contemporary spatial reasoning systems both within and outside the context of logic programming. ASPMT(QS) is currently the only existing system that is capable of reasoning about indirect spatial effects (i.e., addressing the ramification problem), and integrating geometric and QS information within a non-monotonic spatial reasoning context.

Hide All

This is an extended version of a paper presented at the Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Conference (LPNMR 2015), invited as a rapid communication in TPLP. The authors acknowledge the assistance of the conference program chairs Giovambattista Ianni and Miroslaw Truszczynski.

This paper comes with an online appendix containing Appendices A-H. The online appendix is available via the supplementary materials link from the TPLP web-site.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

M. Aiello , I. E. Pratt-Hartmann and J. F. V. Benthem 2007. In Handbook of Spatial Logics. Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc., Secaucus, NJ, USA.

J. F. Allen 1983. Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Communications of the ACM 26 (11), 832843.

D. S. Arnon , G. E. Collins and S. McCallum 1984. Cylindrical algebraic decomposition I: The basic algorithm. SIAM Journal on Computing 13 (4), 865877.

M. Bhatt , H. Guesgen , S. Wölfl and S. Hazarika 2011. Qualitative spatial and temporal reasoning: Emerging applications, trends, and directions. Spatial Cognition & Computation 11 (1), 114.

M. Bhatt and S. Loke 2008. Modelling dynamic spatial systems in the situation calculus. Spatial Cognition and Computation 8 (1), 86130.

M. Bhatt and J. O. Wallgrün 2014. Geospatial narratives and their spatio-temporal dynamics: Commonsense reasoning for high-level analyses in geographic information systems. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Information 3 (1), 166205.

D. Bouhineau 1996. Solving geometrical constraint systems using CLP based on linear constraint solver. In Artificial Intelligence and Symbolic Mathematical Computation. Springer, 274288.

D. Bouhineau , L. Trilling and J. Cohen 1999. An application of CLP: Checking the correctness of theorems in geometry. Constraints 4 (4), 383405.

P. Cabalar and P. E. Santos 2011. Formalising the fisherman's folly puzzle. Artificial Intelligence 175 (1), 346377.

G. E. Collins 1975. Quantifier elimination for real closed fields by cylindrical algebraic decompostion. In Automata Theory and Formal Languages 2nd GI Conference Kaiserslautern, May 20–23, 1975. Springer, 134183.

G. E. Collins and H. Hong 1991. Partial cylindrical algebraic decomposition for quantifier elimination. Journal of Symbolic Computation 12 (3), 299328.

E. Davis 2008. Pouring liquids: A study in commonsense physical reasoning. Artif. Intell. 172 (12–13), 15401578.

E. Davis 2011. How does a box work? A study in the qualitative dynamics of solid objects. Artificial Intelligence 175 (1), 299345.

L. De Moura and N. Bjørner 2008. Z3: An efficient smt solver. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Springer, 337340.

P. Ferraris 2005. Answer sets for propositional theories. In Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Springer, 119131.

P. Ferraris , J. Lee and V. Lifschitz 2011. Stable models and circumscription. Artificial Intelligence 175 (1), 236263.

M. Gelfond 2008. Answer sets. In Handbook of Knowledge Representation, Vol. 1. Elsevier, 285.

G. Pesant and M. Boyer 1994. QUAD-CLP (R): Adding the power of quadratic constraints. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. Springer, 95108.

G. Pesant and M. Boyer 1999. Reasoning about solids using constraint logic programming. Journal of Automated Reasoning 22 (3), 241262.

M. Shanahan 1995. Default reasoning about spatial occupancy. Artificial Intelligence 74 (1), 147163.

A. C. Varzi 1996. Parts, wholes, and part-whole relations: The prospects of mereotopology. Data & Knowledge Engineering 20 (3), 259286.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
  • ISSN: 1471-0684
  • EISSN: 1475-3081
  • URL: /core/journals/theory-and-practice-of-logic-programming
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 36 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 361 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 20th September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.