Search Results for author: Michael Morak

Found 11 papers, 2 papers with code

Solving Projected Model Counting by Utilizing Treewidth and its Limits

no code implementations30 May 2023 Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Patrick Thier, Stefan Woltran

Inspired by the observation that the so-called "treewidth" is one of the most prominent structural parameters, our algorithm utilizes small treewidth of the primal graph of the input instance.

2k

Determining ActionReversibility in STRIPS Using Answer Set and Epistemic Logic Programming

no code implementations11 Aug 2021 Wolfgang Faber, Michael Morak, Lukáš Chrpa

In particular, we leverage an existing translation from PDDL to Answer Set Programming (ASP), and then use several different encodings to tackle the problem of action reversibility for the STRIPS fragment of PDDL.

Translation

Structural Decompositions of Epistemic Logic Programs

no code implementations13 Jan 2020 Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Epistemic logic programs (ELPs) are a popular generalization of standard Answer Set Programming (ASP) providing means for reasoning over answer sets within the language.

selp: A Single-Shot Epistemic Logic Program Solver

no code implementations4 Jan 2020 Manuel Bichler, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Epistemic Logic Programs (ELPs) are an extension of Answer Set Programming (ASP) with epistemic operators that allow for a form of meta-reasoning, that is, reasoning over multiple possible worlds.

Translation

On Uniform Equivalence of Epistemic Logic Programs

no code implementations25 Jul 2019 Wolfgang Faber, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Epistemic Logic Programs (ELPs) extend Answer Set Programming (ASP) with epistemic negation and have received renewed interest in recent years.

Negation

Exploiting Treewidth for Projected Model Counting and its Limits

no code implementations14 May 2018 Johannes K. Fichte, Michael Morak, Markus Hecher, Stefan Woltran

It runs in time $O({2^{2^{k+4}} n^2})$ where k is the treewidth and n is the input size of the instance.

DynASP2.5: Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions in Action

1 code implementation28 Jun 2017 Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

In this paper, we describe underlying concepts of our new implementation (DynASP2. 5) that shows competitive behavior to state-of-the-art ASP solvers even for finding just one solution when solving problems as the Steiner tree problem that have been modeled in ASP on graphs with low treewidth.

Steiner Tree Problem

Answer Set Solving with Bounded Treewidth Revisited

1 code implementation9 Feb 2017 Johannes Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

Parameterized algorithms are a way to solve hard problems more efficiently, given that a specific parameter of the input is small.

Counting Answer Sets via Dynamic Programming

no code implementations22 Dec 2016 Johannes Fichte, Markus Hecher, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

While the solution counting problem for propositional satisfiability (#SAT) has received renewed attention in recent years, this research trend has not affected other AI solving paradigms like answer set programming (ASP).

lpopt: A Rule Optimization Tool for Answer Set Programming

no code implementations19 Aug 2016 Manuel Bichler, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

State-of-the-art answer set programming (ASP) solvers rely on a program called a grounder to convert non-ground programs containing variables into variable-free, propositional programs.

The Power of Non-Ground Rules in Answer Set Programming

no code implementations5 Aug 2016 Manuel Bichler, Michael Morak, Stefan Woltran

In its traditional application, a fixed ASP program for a given problem is designed and the actual instance of the problem is fed into the program as a set of facts.

Cannot find the paper you are looking for? You can Submit a new open access paper.