SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling and Reasoning in Event Calculus Using Goal-Directed Constraint Answer Set Programming

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 12042))

Abstract

Automated commonsense reasoning is essential for building human-like AI systems featuring, for example, explainable AI. Event Calculus (EC) is a family of formalisms that model commonsense reasoning with a sound, logical basis. Previous attempts to mechanize reasoning using EC faced difficulties in the treatment of the continuous change in dense domains (e.g., time and other physical quantities), constraints among variables, default negation, and the uniform application of different inference methods, among others. We propose the use of s(CASP), a query-driven, top-down execution model for Predicate Answer Set Programming with Constraints, to model and reason using EC. We show how EC scenarios can be naturally and directly encoded in s(CASP) and how its expressiveness makes it possible to perform deductive and abductive reasoning tasks in domains featuring, for example, constraints involving both dense time and dense fluents.

Work partially supported by EIT Digital, MINECO project TIN2015-67522-C3-1-R (TRACES), Comunidad de Madrid project S2018/TCS-4339 BLOQUES-CM co-funded by EIE Funds of the European Union, and US NSF Grant IIS 1718945.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    For implementation convenience, and without loss of expressiveness, we assume that argument \(t_2\) in \(Trajectory(f_1, t_1, f_2, t_2)\) is not a time difference w.r.t. \(t_1\), but an absolute time after \(t_1\).

  2. 2.

    For simplicity the amount of water filled/leaked correspond directly to how long the water has been pouring in/spilling from the vessel.

References

  1. Arias, J., Carro, M., Salazar, E., Marple, K., Gupta, G.: Constraint answer set programming without grounding. Theory Pract. Logic Program. 18(3–4), 337–354 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Balduccini, M., Magazzeni, D., Maratea, M.: PDDL+ planning via constraint answer set programming. In: 9th Workshop on Answer Set Programming and Other Computing Paradigms, October 2016

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bartholomew, M., Lee, J.: System aspmt2smt: computing ASPMT theories by SMT solvers. In: Fermé, E., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8761, pp. 529–542. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11558-0_37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Chittaro, L., Montanari, A.: Efficient temporal reasoning in the cached event calculus. Comput. Intell. 12, 359–382 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Clark, K.L.: Negation as failure. In: Gallaire, H., Minker, J. (eds.) Logic and Data Bases, pp. 293–322. Springer, Boston (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3384-5_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Fox, M., Long, D.: PDDL+: modeling continuous time dependent effects. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International NASA Workshop on Planning and Scheduling for Space, vol. 4, p. 34 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gebser, M., Kaminski, R., Kaufmann, B., Schaub, T.: Clingo = ASP + control: preliminary report. ar**v preprint ar**v:1405.3694 (2014)

  8. Gelfond, M., Kahl, Y.: Knowledge Representation, Reasoning, and the Design of Intelligent Agents: The Answer-Set Programming Approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: 5th International Conference on Logic Programming, pp. 1070–1080 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Representing action and change by logic programs. J. Logic Program. 17(2–4), 301–321 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Gupta, G., Bansal, A., Min, R., Simon, L., Mallya, A.: Coinductive logic programming and its applications. In: Dahl, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) ICLP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4670, pp. 27–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74610-2_4

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Holzbaur, C.: OFAI CLP(Q, R) manual, edition 1.3.3. Technical report TR-95-09, Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Vienna (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kowalski, R., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. In: Schmidt, J.W., Thanos, C. (eds.) Foundations of Knowledge Base Management. Topics in Information Systems, pp. 23–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-83397-7_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee, J., Meng, Y.: Answer set programming modulo theories and reasoning about continuous changes. IJCAI 2013, 990–996 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lee, J., Palla, R.: F2LP: Computing Answer Sets of First Order Formulas (2009). http://reasoning.eas.asu.edu/f2lp/. Accessed on Feb 2020

  16. Lee, J., Palla, R.: Reformulating the situation calculus and the event calculus in the general theory of stable models and in answer set programming. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 43, 571–620 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Lifschitz, V.: What is answer set programming? In: 23rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3, pp. 1594–1597. AAAI Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Marple, K., Salazar, E., Gupta, G.: Computing stable models of normal logic programs without grounding. CoRR eprint ar**v:1709.00501 (2017)

  19. McCarthy, J.: Circumscription - a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artif. Intell. 13(1–2), 27–39 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mellarkod, V.S., Gelfond, M., Zhang, Y.: Integrating answer set programming and constraint logic programming. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 53(1–4), 251–287 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Mueller, E.T.: Chapter 17: Event calculus. In: Handbook of Knowledge Representation, Foundations of AI, vol. 3, pp. 671–708. Elsevier (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mueller, E.T.: Discrete event calculus reasoner documentation. Software documentation, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center (2008). http://decreasoner.sourceforge.net/. Accessed Feb 2020

  23. Mueller, E.T.: Commonsense Reasoning: An Event Calculus Based Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Shanahan, M.: The event calculus explained. In: Wooldridge, M.J., Veloso, M. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence Today. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1600, pp. 409–430. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48317-9_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Shanahan, M.: An abductive event calculus planner. J. Logic Program. 44(1–3), 207–240 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IMDEA Software Institute, Madrid, Spain

    Joaquín Arias & Manuel Carro

  2. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Joaquín Arias & Manuel Carro

  3. University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, USA

    Zhuo Chen & Gopal Gupta

Authors
  1. Joaquín Arias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhuo Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manuel Carro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gopal Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joaquín Arias .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Maurizio Gabbrielli

Appendices

A F2LP Encoding of the Light Scenario

The next figure shows the F2LP [15] program for the light scenario described in Sect. 5 using discrete Event Calculus. Since the directive is not available in clingo 5.1.1 [7], we had to adapt the translation of F2LP adding and to make the clauses safe.

figure bs

B Adapted F2LP Translation of the Light Scenario with Increased Precision

The next figure shows an F2LP [15] program for the light scenario described in Sect. 5, where the new predicate makes it possible to have a finer grain for the possible values of by increasing the value of .

figure bw

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Arias, J., Chen, Z., Carro, M., Gupta, G. (2020). Modeling and Reasoning in Event Calculus Using Goal-Directed Constraint Answer Set Programming. In: Gabbrielli, M. (eds) Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation. LOPSTR 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12042. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45260-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45260-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-45259-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-45260-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation