@article{KrstićWeidlingPetrovicetal., author = {Krstić, Miloš and Weidling, Stefan and Petrovic, Vladimir and Sogomonyan, Egor S.}, title = {Enhanced architectures for soft error detection and correction in combinational and sequential circuits}, series = {Microelectronics Reliability}, volume = {56}, journal = {Microelectronics Reliability}, issn = {0026-2714}, pages = {212 -- 220}, abstract = {In this paper two new methods for the design of fault-tolerant pipelined sequential and combinational circuits, called Error Detection and Partial Error Correction (EDPEC) and Full Error Detection and Correction (FEDC), are described. The proposed methods are based on an Error Detection Logic (EDC) in the combinational circuit part combined with fault tolerant memory elements implemented using fault tolerant master-slave flip-flops. If a transient error, due to a transient fault in the combinational circuit part is detected by the EDC, the error signal controls the latching stage of the flip-flops such that the previous correct state of the register stage is retained until the transient error disappears. The system can continue to work in its previous correct state and no additional recovery procedure (with typically reduced clock frequency) is necessary. The target applications are dataflow processing blocks, for which software-based recovery methods cannot be easily applied. The presented architectures address both single events as well as timing faults of arbitrarily long duration. An example of this architecture is developed and described, based on the carry look-ahead adder. The timing conditions are carefully investigated and simulated up to the layout level. The enhancement of the baseline architecture is demonstrated with respect to the achieved fault tolerance for the single event and timing faults. It is observed that the number of uncorrected single events is reduced by the EDPEC architecture by 2.36 times compared with previous solution. The FEDC architecture further reduces the number of uncorrected events to zero and outperforms the Triple Modular Redundancy (TMR) with respect to correction of timing faults. The power overhead of both new architectures is about 26-28\% lower than the TMR.}, language = {en} } @article{SchickBojahrHerzogetal.2014, author = {Schick, Daniel and Bojahr, Andre and Herzog, Marc and Shayduk, Roman and von Korff Schmising, Clemens and Bargheer, Matias}, title = {Udkm1Dsim-A simulation toolkit for 1D ultrafast dynamics in condensed matter}, series = {Computer physics communications : an international journal devoted to computational physics and computer programs in physics}, volume = {185}, journal = {Computer physics communications : an international journal devoted to computational physics and computer programs in physics}, number = {2}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0010-4655}, doi = {10.1016/j.cpc.2013.10.009}, pages = {651 -- 660}, year = {2014}, abstract = {The UDKM1DSIM toolbox is a collection of MATLAB (MathWorks Inc.) classes and routines to simulate the structural dynamics and the according X-ray diffraction response in one-dimensional crystalline sample structures upon an arbitrary time-dependent external stimulus, e.g. an ultrashort laser pulse. The toolbox provides the capabilities to define arbitrary layered structures on the atomic level including a rich database of corresponding element-specific physical properties. The excitation of ultrafast dynamics is represented by an N-temperature model which is commonly applied for ultrafast optical excitations. Structural dynamics due to thermal stress are calculated by a linear-chain model of masses and springs. The resulting X-ray diffraction response is computed by dynamical X-ray theory. The UDKM1DSIM toolbox is highly modular and allows for introducing user-defined results at any step in the simulation procedure. Program summary Program title: udkm1Dsim Catalogue identifier: AERH_v1_0 Program summary URL: http://cpc.cs.qub.ac.uk/summaries/AERH_v1_0.html Licensing provisions: BSD No. of lines in distributed program, including test data, etc.: 130221 No. of bytes in distributed program, including test data, etc.: 2746036 Distribution format: tar.gz Programming language: Matlab (MathWorks Inc.). Computer: PC/Workstation. Operating system: Running Matlab installation required (tested on MS Win XP -7, Ubuntu Linux 11.04-13.04). Has the code been vectorized or parallelized?: Parallelization for dynamical XRD computations. Number of processors used: 1-12 for Matlab Parallel Computing Toolbox; 1 - infinity for Matlab Distributed Computing Toolbox External routines: Optional: Matlab Parallel Computing Toolbox, Matlab Distributed Computing Toolbox Required (included in the package): mtimesx Fast Matrix Multiply for Matlab by James Tursa, xml io tools by Jaroslaw Tuszynski, textprogressbar by Paul Proteus Nature of problem: Simulate the lattice dynamics of 1D crystalline sample structures due to an ultrafast excitation including thermal transport and compute the corresponding transient X-ray diffraction pattern. Solution method: Restrictions: The program is restricted to 1D sample structures and is further limited to longitudinal acoustic phonon modes and symmetrical X-ray diffraction geometries. Unusual features: The program is highly modular and allows the inclusion of user-defined inputs at any time of the simulation procedure. Running time: The running time is highly dependent on the number of unit cells in the sample structure and other simulation parameters such as time span or angular grid for X-ray diffraction computations. However, the example files are computed in approx. 1-5 min each on a 8 Core Processor with 16 GB RAM available.}, language = {en} } @article{CabalarFandinoFarinasdelCerro2021, author = {Cabalar, Pedro and Fandi{\~n}o, Jorge and Fari{\~n}as del Cerro, Luis}, title = {Splitting epistemic logic programs}, series = {Theory and practice of logic programming / publ. for the Association for Logic Programming}, volume = {21}, journal = {Theory and practice of logic programming / publ. for the Association for Logic Programming}, number = {3}, publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press}, address = {Cambridge [u.a.]}, issn = {1471-0684}, doi = {10.1017/S1471068420000058}, pages = {296 -- 316}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Epistemic logic programs constitute an extension of the stable model semantics to deal with new constructs called subjective literals. Informally speaking, a subjective literal allows checking whether some objective literal is true in all or some stable models. As it can be imagined, the associated semantics has proved to be non-trivial, since the truth of subjective literals may interfere with the set of stable models it is supposed to query. As a consequence, no clear agreement has been reached and different semantic proposals have been made in the literature. Unfortunately, comparison among these proposals has been limited to a study of their effect on individual examples, rather than identifying general properties to be checked. In this paper, we propose an extension of the well-known splitting property for logic programs to the epistemic case. We formally define when an arbitrary semantics satisfies the epistemic splitting property and examine some of the consequences that can be derived from that, including its relation to conformant planning and to epistemic constraints. Interestingly, we prove (through counterexamples) that most of the existing approaches fail to fulfill the epistemic splitting property, except the original semantics proposed by Gelfond 1991 and a recent proposal by the authors, called Founded Autoepistemic Equilibrium Logic.}, language = {en} } @article{FandinoLifschitzLuehneetal.2020, author = {Fandi{\~n}o, Jorge and Lifschitz, Vladimir and L{\"u}hne, Patrick and Schaub, Torsten H.}, title = {Verifying tight logic programs with Anthem and Vampire}, series = {Theory and practice of logic programming}, volume = {20}, journal = {Theory and practice of logic programming}, number = {5}, publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press}, address = {Cambridge [u.a.]}, issn = {1471-0684}, doi = {10.1017/S1471068420000344}, pages = {735 -- 750}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This paper continues the line of research aimed at investigating the relationship between logic programs and first-order theories. We extend the definition of program completion to programs with input and output in a subset of the input language of the ASP grounder gringo, study the relationship between stable models and completion in this context, and describe preliminary experiments with the use of two software tools, anthem and vampire, for verifying the correctness of programs with input and output. Proofs of theorems are based on a lemma that relates the semantics of programs studied in this paper to stable models of first-order formulas.}, language = {en} } @article{CabalarFandinoGareaetal.2020, author = {Cabalar, Pedro and Fandi{\~n}o, Jorge and Garea, Javier and Romero, Javier and Schaub, Torsten H.}, title = {Eclingo}, series = {Theory and practice of logic programming}, volume = {20}, journal = {Theory and practice of logic programming}, number = {6}, publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press}, address = {New York}, issn = {1471-0684}, doi = {10.1017/S1471068420000228}, pages = {834 -- 847}, year = {2020}, abstract = {We describe eclingo, a solver for epistemic logic programs under Gelfond 1991 semantics built upon the Answer Set Programming system clingo. The input language of eclingo uses the syntax extension capabilities of clingo to define subjective literals that, as usual in epistemic logic programs, allow for checking the truth of a regular literal in all or in some of the answer sets of a program. The eclingo solving process follows a guess and check strategy. It first generates potential truth values for subjective literals and, in a second step, it checks the obtained result with respect to the cautious and brave consequences of the program. This process is implemented using the multi-shot functionalities of clingo. We have also implemented some optimisations, aiming at reducing the search space and, therefore, increasing eclingo 's efficiency in some scenarios. Finally, we compare the efficiency of eclingo with two state-of-the-art solvers for epistemic logic programs on a pair of benchmark scenarios and show that eclingo generally outperforms their obtained results.}, language = {en} } @article{RoessnerLuedemannBrustetal.2001, author = {Roessner, Ute and Luedemann, A. and Brust, D. and Fiehn, Oliver and Linke, Thomas and Willmitzer, Lothar and Fernie, Alisdair R.}, title = {Metabolic profiling allows comprehensive phenotyping of genetically or environmentally modified plant systems}, issn = {1040-4651}, year = {2001}, language = {en} } @article{CabalarFandinoSchaubetal.2019, author = {Cabalar, Pedro and Fandi{\~n}o, Jorge and Schaub, Torsten H. and Schellhorn, Sebastian}, title = {Gelfond-Zhang aggregates as propositional formulas}, series = {Artificial intelligence}, volume = {274}, journal = {Artificial intelligence}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0004-3702}, doi = {10.1016/j.artint.2018.10.007}, pages = {26 -- 43}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Answer Set Programming (ASP) has become a popular and widespread paradigm for practical Knowledge Representation thanks to its expressiveness and the available enhancements of its input language. One of such enhancements is the use of aggregates, for which different semantic proposals have been made. In this paper, we show that any ASP aggregate interpreted under Gelfond and Zhang's (GZ) semantics can be replaced (under strong equivalence) by a propositional formula. Restricted to the original GZ syntax, the resulting formula is reducible to a disjunction of conjunctions of literals but the formulation is still applicable even when the syntax is extended to allow for arbitrary formulas (including nested aggregates) in the condition. Once GZ-aggregates are represented as formulas, we establish a formal comparison (in terms of the logic of Here-and-There) to Ferraris' (F) aggregates, which are defined by a different formula translation involving nested implications. In particular, we prove that if we replace an F-aggregate by a GZ-aggregate in a rule head, we do not lose answer sets (although more can be gained). This extends the previously known result that the opposite happens in rule bodies, i.e., replacing a GZ-aggregate by an F-aggregate in the body may yield more answer sets. Finally, we characterize a class of aggregates for which GZ- and F-semantics coincide.}, language = {en} } @article{AguadoCabalarFandinoetal.2019, author = {Aguado, Felicidad and Cabalar, Pedro and Fandi{\~n}o, Jorge and Pearce, David and Perez, Gilberto and Vidal, Concepcion}, title = {Forgetting auxiliary atoms in forks}, series = {Artificial intelligence}, volume = {275}, journal = {Artificial intelligence}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0004-3702}, doi = {10.1016/j.artint.2019.07.005}, pages = {575 -- 601}, year = {2019}, abstract = {In this work we tackle the problem of checking strong equivalence of logic programs that may contain local auxiliary atoms, to be removed from their stable models and to be forbidden in any external context. We call this property projective strong equivalence (PSE). It has been recently proved that not any logic program containing auxiliary atoms can be reformulated, under PSE, as another logic program or formula without them - this is known as strongly persistent forgetting. In this paper, we introduce a conservative extension of Equilibrium Logic and its monotonic basis, the logic of Here-and-There, in which we deal with a new connective '|' we call fork. We provide a semantic characterisation of PSE for forks and use it to show that, in this extension, it is always possible to forget auxiliary atoms under strong persistence. We further define when the obtained fork is representable as a regular formula.}, language = {en} } @article{AguadoCabalarFandinoetal.2019, author = {Aguado, Felicidad and Cabalar, Pedro and Fandi{\~n}o, Jorge and Pearce, David and Perez, Gilberto and Vidal-Peracho, Concepcion}, title = {Revisiting Explicit Negation in Answer Set Programming}, series = {Theory and practice of logic programming}, volume = {19}, journal = {Theory and practice of logic programming}, number = {5-6}, publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press}, address = {New York}, issn = {1471-0684}, doi = {10.1017/S1471068419000267}, pages = {908 -- 924}, year = {2019}, language = {en} }