@article{GebserKaminskiKaufmannetal.2018,
  author    = {Gebser, Martin and Kaminski, Roland and Kaufmann, Benjamin and L{\"u}hne, Patrick and Obermeier, Philipp and Ostrowski, Max and Romero Davila, Javier and Schaub, Torsten H. and Schellhorn, Sebastian and Wanko, Philipp},
  title     = {The Potsdam Answer Set Solving Collection 5.0},
  series = {K{\"u}nstliche Intelligenz},
  volume    = {32},
  journal   = {K{\"u}nstliche Intelligenz},
  number    = {2-3},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Heidelberg},
  issn      = {0933-1875},
  doi       = {10.1007/s13218-018-0528-x},
  pages     = {181 -- 182},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {The Potsdam answer set solving collection, or Potassco for short, bundles various tools implementing and/or applying answer set programming. The article at hand succeeds an earlier description of the Potassco project published in Gebser et al. (AI Commun 24(2):107-124, 2011). Hence, we concentrate in what follows on the major features of the most recent, fifth generation of the ASP system clingo and highlight some recent resulting application systems.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CabalarKaminskiSchaubetal.2018,
  author    = {Cabalar, Pedro and Kaminski, Roland and Schaub, Torsten H. and Schuhmann, Anna},
  title     = {Temporal answer set programming on finite traces},
  series = {Theory and practice of logic programming},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {Theory and practice of logic programming},
  number    = {3-4},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1471-0684},
  doi       = {10.1017/S1471068418000297},
  pages     = {406 -- 420},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In this paper, we introduce an alternative approach to Temporal Answer Set Programming that relies on a variation of Temporal Equilibrium Logic (TEL) for finite traces. This approach allows us to even out the expressiveness of TEL over infinite traces with the computational capacity of (incremental) Answer Set Programming (ASP). Also, we argue that finite traces are more natural when reasoning about action and change. As a result, our approach is readily implementable via multi-shot ASP systems and benefits from an extension of ASP's full-fledged input language with temporal operators. This includes future as well as past operators whose combination offers a rich temporal modeling language. For computation, we identify the class of temporal logic programs and prove that it constitutes a normal form for our approach. Finally, we outline two implementations, a generic one and an extension of the ASP system clingo. Under consideration for publication in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GebserKaminskiKaufmannetal.2018,
  author    = {Gebser, Martin and Kaminski, Roland and Kaufmann, Benjamin and Schaub, Torsten H.},
  title     = {Multi-shot ASP solving with clingo},
  series = {Theory and practice of logic programming},
  volume    = {19},
  journal   = {Theory and practice of logic programming},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1471-0684},
  doi       = {10.1017/S1471068418000054},
  pages     = {27 -- 82},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {We introduce a new flexible paradigm of grounding and solving in Answer Set Programming (ASP), which we refer to as multi-shot ASP solving, and present its implementation in the ASP system clingo. Multi-shot ASP solving features grounding and solving processes that deal with continuously changing logic programs. In doing so, they remain operative and accommodate changes in a seamless way. For instance, such processes allow for advanced forms of search, as in optimization or theory solving, or interaction with an environment, as in robotics or query answering. Common to them is that the problem specification evolves during the reasoning process, either because data or constraints are added, deleted, or replaced. This evolutionary aspect adds another dimension to ASP since it brings about state changing operations. We address this issue by providing an operational semantics that characterizes grounding and solving processes in multi-shot ASP solving. This characterization provides a semantic account of grounder and solver states along with the operations manipulating them. The operative nature of multi-shot solving avoids redundancies in relaunching grounder and solver programs and benefits from the solver's learning capacities. clingo accomplishes this by complementing ASP's declarative input language with control capacities. On the declarative side, a new directive allows for structuring logic programs into named and parameterizable subprograms. The grounding and integration of these subprograms into the solving process is completely modular and fully controllable from the procedural side. To this end, clingo offers a new application programming interface that is conveniently accessible via scripting languages. By strictly separating logic and control, clingo also abolishes the need for dedicated systems for incremental and reactive reasoning, like iclingo and oclingo, respectively, and its flexibility goes well beyond the advanced yet still rigid solving processes of the latter.},
  language  = {en}
}