Synthesis from Temporal Specifications Using Preferred Answer Set Programming

  • Stijn Heymans
  • Davy Van Nieuwenborgh
  • Dirk Vermeir
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3701)

Abstract

We use extended answer set programming (ASP), a logic programming paradigm which allows for the defeat of conflicting rules, to check satisfiability of computation tree logic (CTL) temporal formulas via an intuitive translation. This translation, to the best of our knowledge the first of its kind for CTL, allows CTL reasoning with existing answer set solvers.

Furthermore, we demonstrate how preferred ASP, where rules are ordered according to preference for satisfaction, can be used for synthesizing synchronization skeletons of processes in a concurrent program from a temporal specification. We argue that preferred ASP is put to good use since a preference order can be used to make explicit some of the decisions tableau algorithms make, e.g. declaratively specifying a preference for maximal concurrency makes synthesis more transparent and thus less error-prone.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Attie, P.C., Emerson, E.A.: Synthesis of Concurrent Programs for an Atomic Read/Write Model of Computation. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 23(2), 187–242 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.: The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baral, C.: Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge Press, Newyork (2003)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P.: Automatic Verification of Finite-state Concurrent Systems using Temporal Logic Specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 8(2), 244–263 (1986)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dantsin, E., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Voronkov, A.: Complexity and Expressive Power of Logic Programming. ACM Comput. Surv. 33(3), 374–425 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eiter, T., Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Polleres, A.: Planning under Incomplete Knowledge. In: Palamidessi, C., Moniz Pereira, L., Lloyd, J.W., Dahl, V., Furbach, U., Kerber, M., Lau, K.-K., Sagiv, Y., Stuckey, P.J. (eds.) CL 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1861, pp. 807–821. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Emerson, E.A.: Temporal and Modal Logic. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 995–1072. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam (1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emerson, E.A., Clarke, E.M.: Using Branching Time Temporal Logic to Synthesize Synchronization Skeletons. Sciene of Computer Programming 2(3), 241–266 (1982)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Emerson, E.A., Halpern, J.Y.: Decision Procedures and Expressiveness in the Temporal Logic of Branching Time. In: Proc. of the fourteenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 169–180. ACM Press, New York (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G.: Pushing goal derivation in DLP computations. In: Gelfond, M., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G. (eds.) LPNMR 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1730, pp. 177–191. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming. In: Proc. of ICLP 1988, pp. 1070–1080. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heljanko, K., Niemelä, I.: Answer Set Programming and Bounded Model Checking. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Spring 2001 Symposium on Answer Set Programming, pp. 90–96. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heljanko, K., Niemelä, I.: Bounded LTL Model Checking with Stable Models. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2173, pp. 200–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Horrocks, I.: The FaCT system. In: de Swart, H. (ed.) TABLEAUX 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1397, pp. 307–312. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huth, M.R.A., Ryan, M.: Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kupferman, O., Vardi, M.: Synthesis with Incomplete Information. In: Proc. of ICTL 1997 (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lifschitz, V.: Answer Set Programming and Plan Generation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence 138(1-2), 39–54 (2002)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Manna, Z., Wolper, P.: Synthesis of Communicating Processes from Temporal Logic Specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 6(1), 68–93 (1984)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Van Nieuwenborgh, D., Heymans, S., Vermeir, D.: An Ordered Logic Program Solver. In: Proc. of PADL 2005. LNCS. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) (To Appear)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sistla, A.P., Clarke, E.M.: The Complexity of Propositional Linear Temporal Logics. J. ACM 32(3), 733–749 (1985)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Son, T.C., Pontelli, E.: Planning with Preferences Using Logic Programming. In: Lifschitz, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) LPNMR 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2923, pp. 247–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Son, T.C., Baral, C., McIlraith, S.A.: Planning with Different Forms of Domain-Dependent Control Knowledge - An Answer Set Programming Approach. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2173, pp. 226–239. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Syrjänen, T., Niemelä, I.: The smodels system. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2173, pp. 434–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van Nieuwenborgh, D., Vermeir, D.: Preferred Answer Sets for Ordered Logic Programs. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 432–443. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stijn Heymans
    • 1
  • Davy Van Nieuwenborgh
    • 1
  • Dirk Vermeir
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceVrije Universiteit Brussel, VUBBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations