Declarative languages offer unprecedented opportunities for the use of parallelism to speed up execution. A declarative language, being not procedural, removes the need to perform operations in a strict order and reduces the number of dependencies among operations, thus opening the doors for concurrent execution. The potential for transparent exploitation of parallelism in logic programming emerged almost immediately with the birth of the paradigm (Pollard 1981).

This paper presents an example of formal reasoning about the semantics of a Prolog program of practical importance (the SAT solver of Howe and King). The program is treated as a definite clause logic program with added control. The logic program is constructed by means of stepwise refinement, hand in hand with its correctness and completeness proofs. The proofs are declarative – they do not refer to any operational semantics. Each step of the logic program construction follows a systematic approach to constructing programs which are provably correct and complete. We also prove that correctness and completeness of the logic program is preserved in the final Prolog program. Additionally, we prove termination, occur-check freedom and non-floundering.

Our example shows how dealing with “logic” and with “control” can be separated. Most of the proofs can be done at the “logic” level, abstracting from any operational semantics.

The example employs approximate specifications; they are crucial in simplifying reasoning about logic programs. It also shows that the paradigm of semantics-preserving program transformations may be not sufficient. We suggest considering transformations which preserve correctness and completeness with respect to an approximate specification.

Logic underlies many fundamental techniques in computer science. It helps us to rigorously formalize these techniques and prove them correct. The last decade has witnessed a growing interest in the use of computational logic methods for program verification. It has attracted researchers from both computational logic and program verification communities, giving rise to a fruitful exchange of ideas and experiences.

This special issue of Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) contains the regular papers accepted for presentation at the 34-th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2018), held in Oxford, United Kingdom, from July 14th to July 17th, 2018.

It is well-known that the verification of partial correctness properties of imperative programs can be reduced to the satisfiability problem for constrained Horn clauses (CHCs). However, state-of-the-art solvers for constrained Horn clauses (or CHC solvers) based on predicate abstraction are sometimes unable to verify satisfiability because they look for models that are definable in a given class 𝓐 of constraints, called 𝓐-definable models. We introduce a transformation technique, called Predicate Pairing, which is able, in many interesting cases, to transform a set of clauses into an equisatisfiable set whose satisfiability can be proved by finding an 𝓐-definable model, and hence can be effectively verified by a state-of-the-art CHC solver. In particular, we prove that, under very general conditions on 𝓐, the unfold/fold transformation rules preserve the existence of an 𝓐-definable model, that is, if the original clauses have an 𝓐-definable model, then the transformed clauses have an 𝓐-definable model. The converse does not hold in general, and we provide suitable conditions under which the transformed clauses have an 𝓐-definable model if and only if the original ones have an 𝓐-definable model. Then, we present a strategy, called Predicate Pairing, which guides the application of the transformation rules with the objective of deriving a set of clauses whose satisfiability problem can be solved by looking for 𝓐-definable models. The Predicate Pairing (PP) strategy introduces a new predicate defined by the conjunction of two predicates occurring in the original set of clauses, together with a conjunction of constraints. We will show through some examples that an 𝓐-definable model may exist for the new predicate even if it does not exist for its defining atomic conjuncts. We will also present some case studies showing that Predicate Pairing plays a crucial role in the verification of relational properties of programs, that is, properties relating two programs (such as program equivalence) or two executions of the same program (such as non-interference). Finally, we perform an experimental evaluation of the proposed techniques to assess the effectiveness of Predicate Pairing in increasing the power of CHC solving.

We introduce a stepping methodology for answer-set programming (ASP) that allows for debugging answer-set programs and is based on the stepwise application of rules. Similar to debugging in imperative languages, where the behaviour of a program is observed during a step-by-step execution, stepping for ASP allows for observing the effects that rule applications have in the computation of an answer set. While the approach is inspired from debugging in imperative programming, it is conceptually different to stepping in other paradigms due to non-determinism and declarativity that are inherent to ASP. In particular, unlike statements in an imperative program that are executed following a strict control flow, there is no predetermined order in which to consider rules in ASP during a computation. In our approach, the user is free to decide which rule to consider active in the next step following his or her intuition. This way, one can focus on interesting parts of the debugging search space. Bugs are detected during stepping by revealing differences between the actual semantics of the program and the expectations of the user. As a solid formal basis for stepping, we develop a framework of computations for answer-set programs. For fully supporting different solver languages, we build our framework on an abstract ASP language that is sufficiently general to capture different solver languages. To this end, we make use of abstract constraints as an established abstraction for popular language constructs such as aggregates. Stepping has been implemented in SeaLion, an integrated development environment for ASP. We illustrate stepping using an example scenario and discuss the stepping plugin of SeaLion. Moreover, we elaborate on methodological aspects and the embedding of stepping in the ASP development process.

Aggregates are among the most frequently used linguistic extensions of answer set programming. The result of an aggregation may introduce new constants during the instantiation of the input program, a feature known as value invention. When the aggregation involves literals whose truth value is undefined at instantiation time, modern grounders introduce several instances of the aggregate, one for each possible interpretation of the undefined literals. This paper introduces new data structures and techniques to handle such cases, and more in general aggregations on the same aggregate set identified in the ground program in input. The proposed solution reduces the memory footprint of the solver without sacrificing efficiency. On the contrary, the performance of the solver may improve thanks to the addition of some simple entailed clauses which are not easily discovered otherwise, and since redundant computation is avoided during propagation. Empirical evidence of the potential impact of the proposed solution is given.

As multi-core computing is now standard, it seems irresponsible for constraints researchers to ignore the implications of it. Researchers need to address a number of issues to exploit parallelism, such as: investigating which constraint algorithms are amenable to parallelisation; whether to use shared memory or distributed computation; whether to use static or dynamic decomposition; and how to best exploit portfolios and cooperating search. We review the literature, and see that we can sometimes do quite well, some of the time, on some instances, but we are far from a general solution. Yet there seems to be little overall guidance that can be given on how best to exploit multi-core computers to speed up constraint solving. We hope at least that this survey will provide useful pointers to future researchers wishing to correct this situation.

In Constraint Programming, a portfolio solver combines a variety of different constraint solvers for solving a given problem. This fairly recent approach enables to significantly boost the performance of single solvers, especially when multicore architectures are exploited. In this work, we give a brief overview of the portfolio solver sunny-cp, and we discuss its performance in the MiniZinc Challenge—the annual international competition for Constraint Programming solvers—where it won two gold medals in 2015 and 2016.

Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is both an effective concurrent declarative programming language and a versatile computational logic formalism. In CHR, guarded reactive rules rewrite a multi-set of constraints. Concurrency is inherent, since rules can be applied to the constraints in parallel. In this comprehensive survey, we give an overview of the concurrent, parallel as well as distributed CHR semantics, standard and more exotic, that have been proposed over the years at various levels of refinement. These semantics range from the abstract to the concrete. They are related by formal soundness results. Their correctness is proven as a correspondence between parallel and sequential computations. On the more practical side, we present common concise example CHR programs that have been widely used in experiments and benchmarks. We review parallel and distributed CHR implementations in software as well as hardware. The experimental results obtained show a parallel speed-up for unmodified sequential CHR programs. The software implementations are available online for free download and we give the web links. Due to its high level of abstraction, the CHR formalism can also be used to implement and analyse models for concurrency. To this end, the Software Transaction Model, the Actor Model, Colored Petri Nets and the Join-Calculus have been faithfully encoded in CHR. Finally, we identify and discuss commonalities of the approaches surveyed and indicate what problems are left open for future research.

Many applications require conformance with specifications that constrain the use of resources, such as execution time, energy, bandwidth, etc. We present a configurable framework for static resource usage verification where specifications can include data size-dependent resource usage functions, expressing both lower and upper bounds. Ensuring conformance with respect to such specifications is an undecidable problem. Therefore, to statically check such specifications, our framework infers the same type of resource usage functions, which safely approximate the actual resource usage of the program, and compares them against the specification. We review how this framework supports several languages and compilation output formats by translating them to an intermediate representation based on Horn clauses and using the configurability of the framework to describe the resource semantics of the input language. We provide a detailed formalization and extend the framework so that both resource usage specification and analysis/verification output can include preconditions expressing intervals for the input data sizes for which assertions are intended to hold, proved, or disproved. Most importantly, we also extend the classes of functions that can be checked. We also report on and provide results from an implementation within the Ciao/CiaoPP framework, as well as on a practical tool built by instantiating this framework for the verification of energy consumption specifications for imperative/embedded programs. Finally, we show as an example how embedded software developers can use this tool, in particular, for determining values for program parameters that ensure meeting a given energy budget while minimizing the loss in quality of service.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a logic-based knowledge representation framework, supporting—among other reasoning modes—the central task of query answering. In the propositional case, query answering amounts to computing cautious consequences of the input program among the atoms in a given set of candidates, where a cautious consequence is an atom belonging to all stable models. Currently, the most efficient algorithms either iteratively verify the existence of a stable model of the input program extended with the complement of one candidate, where the candidate is heuristically selected, or introduce a clause enforcing the falsity of at least one candidate, so that the solver is free to choose which candidate to falsify at any time during the computation of a stable model. This paper introduces new algorithms for the computation of cautious consequences, with the aim of driving the solver to search for stable models discarding more candidates. Specifically, one of such algorithms enforces minimality on the set of true candidates, where different notions of minimality can be used, and another takes advantage of unsatisfiable cores computation. The algorithms are implemented in wasp, and experiments on benchmarks from the latest ASP competitions show that the new algorithms perform better than the state of the art.

In this paper, we show how the notion of tree dimension can be used in the verification of constrained Horn clauses (CHCs). The dimension of a tree is a numerical measure of its branching complexity and the concept here applies to Horn clause derivation trees. Derivation trees of dimension zero correspond to derivations using linear CHCs, while trees of higher dimension arise from derivations using non-linear CHCs. We show how to instrument CHCs predicates with an extra argument for the dimension, allowing a CHC verifier to reason about bounds on the dimension of derivations. Given a set of CHCs P, we define a transformation of P yielding a dimension-bounded set of CHCs P≤k. The set of derivations for P≤k consists of the derivations for P that have dimension at most k. We also show how to construct a set of clauses denoted P>k whose derivations have dimension exceeding k. We then present algorithms using these constructions to decompose a CHC verification problem. One variation of this decomposition considers derivations of successively increasing dimension. The paper includes descriptions of implementations and experimental results.

A natural approach to software quality assurance consists in writing unit tests securing programmer-declared code invariants. Throughout the literature, a great body of work has been devoted to tools and techniques automating this labour-intensive process. A prominent example is the successful use of randomness, in particular, random typable λ-terms, in testing functional programming compilers such as the Glasgow Haskell Compiler. Unfortunately, due to the intrinsically difficult combinatorial structure of typable λ-terms, no effective uniform sampling method is known, setting it as a fundamental open problem in the random software testing approach. In this paper, we combine the framework of Boltzmann samplers, a powerful technique of random combinatorial structure generation, with today's Prolog systems offering a synergy between logic variables, unification with occurs check and efficient backtracking. This allows us to develop a novel sampling mechanism able to construct uniformly random closed simply typed λ-terms of up size 120. We apply our techniques to the generation of uniformly random closed simply typed normal forms and design a parallel execution mechanism pushing forward the achievable term size to 140.

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.

BigDatalog is an extension of Datalog that achieves performance and scalability on both Apache Spark and multicore systems to the point that its graph analytics outperform those written in GraphX. Looking back, we see how this realizes the ambitious goal pursued by deductive database researchers beginning 40 years ago: this is the goal of combining the rigor and power of logic in expressing queries and reasoning with the performance and scalability by which relational databases managed BigData. This goal led to Datalog which is based on Horn Clauses like Prolog but employs implementation techniques, such as semi-naïve fixpoint and magic sets, that extend the bottom-up computation model of relational systems, and thus obtain the performance and scalability that relational systems had achieved, as far back as the 80s, using data-parallelization on shared-nothing architectures. But this goal proved difficult to achieve because of major issues at (i) the language level and (ii) at the system level. The paper describes how (i) was addressed by simple rules under which the fixpoint semantics extends to programs using count, sum and extrema in recursion, and (ii) was tamed by parallel compilation techniques that achieve scalability on multicore systems and Apache Spark. This paper is under consideration for acceptance in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming.

Spatial information is often expressed using qualitative terms such as natural language expressions instead of coordinates; reasoning over such terms has several practical applications, such as bus routes planning. Representing and reasoning on trajectories is a specific case of qualitative spatial reasoning that focuses on moving objects and their paths. In this work, we propose two versions of a trajectory calculus based on the allowed properties over trajectories, where trajectories are defined as a sequence of non-overlapping regions of a partitioned map. More specifically, if a given trajectory is allowed to start and finish at the same region, 6 base relations are defined (TC-6). If a given trajectory should have different start and finish regions but cycles are allowed within, 10 base relations are defined (TC-10). Both versions of the calculus are implemented as ASP programs; we propose several different encodings, including a generalised program capable of encoding any qualitative calculus in ASP. All proposed encodings are experimentally evaluated using a real-world dataset. Experiment results show that the best performing implementation can scale up to an input of 250 trajectories for TC-6 and 150 trajectories for TC-10 for the problem of discovering a consistent configuration, a significant improvement compared to previous ASP implementations for similar qualitative spatial and temporal calculi.

A recent trend in object-oriented programming languages is the use of access permissions (APs) as an abstraction for controlling concurrent executions of programs. The use of AP source code annotations defines a protocol specifying how object references can access the mutable state of objects. Although the use of APs simplifies the task of writing concurrent code, an unsystematic use of them can lead to subtle problems. This paper presents a declarative interpretation of APs as linear concurrent constraint programs (lcc). We represent APs as constraints (i.e., formulas in logic) in an underlying constraint system whose entailment relation models the transformation rules of APs. Moreover, we use processes in lcc to model the dependencies imposed by APs, thus allowing the faithful representation of their flow in the program. We verify relevant properties about AP programs by taking advantage of the interpretation of lcc processes as formulas in Girard's intuitionistic linear logic (ILL). Properties include deadlock detection, program correctness (whether programs adhere to their AP specifications or not), and the ability of methods to run concurrently. By relying on a focusing discipline for ILL, we provide a complexity measure for proofs of the above-mentioned properties. The effectiveness of our verification techniques is demonstrated by implementing the Alcove tool that includes an animator and a verifier. The former executes the lcc model, observing the flow of APs, and quickly finding inconsistencies of the APs vis-à-vis the implementation. The latter is an automatic theorem prover based on ILL.

New generations of distributed systems are opening novel perspectives for logic programming (LP): On the one hand, service-oriented architectures represent nowadays the standard approach for distributed systems engineering; on the other hand, pervasive systems mandate for situated intelligence. In this paper, we introduce the notion of Logic Programming as a Service (LPaaS) as a means to address the needs of pervasive intelligent systems through logic engines exploited as a distributed service. First, we define the abstract architectural model by re-interpreting classical LP notions in the new context; then we elaborate on the nature of LP interpreted as a service by describing the basic LPaaS interface. Finally, we show how LPaaS works in practice by discussing its implementation in terms of distributed tuProlog engines, accounting for basic issues such as interoperability and configurability.

Algorithm 4 on page 960 of the above named article (Wielemaker and Harris 2016) is flawed. The issue is illustrated by algorithm 1 (supplementary figure 1). If a thread A detects the condition table too full is false it proceeds adding its atom to the table. If thread B detects the table is (now) too full it starts a resize. The resize allocates a new table and copies the atoms from the old to the new table. If thread A adds the new atom after the copy loop passes its location and before thread B activates the new table the insertion is considered successful, but the new atom is only in the deactivated old table.