We introduce a systematic, concurrent execution scheme for Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) based on a previously proposed sequential goal-based CHR semantics. We establish strong correspondence results to the abstract CHR semantics, thus guaranteeing that any answer in the concurrent, goal-based CHR semantics is reproducible in the abstract CHR semantics. Our work provides the foundation to obtain efficient, parallel CHR execution schemes.

We present trichotomy results characterizing the complexity of reasoning with disjunctive logic programs. To this end, we introduce a certain definition schema for classes of programs based on a set of allowed arities of rules. We show that each such class of programs has a finite representation, and for each of the classes definable in the schema, we characterize the complexity of the existence of an answer set problem. Next, we derive similar characterizations of the complexity of skeptical and credulous reasoning with disjunctive logic programs. Such results are of potential interest. On the one hand, they reveal some reasons responsible for the hardness of computing answer sets. On the other hand, they identify classes of problem instances, for which the problem is “easy” (in P) or “easier than in general” (in NP). We obtain similar results for the complexity of reasoning with disjunctive programs under the supported-model semantics.

We study active integrity constraints and revision programming, two formalisms designed to describe integrity constraints on databases and to specify policies on preferred ways to enforce them. Unlike other more commonly accepted approaches, these two formalisms attempt to provide a declarative solution to the problem. However, the original semantics of founded repairs for active integrity constraints and justified revisions for revision programs differ. Our main goal is to establish a comprehensive framework of semantics for active integrity constraints, to find a parallel framework for revision programs, and to relate the two. By doing so, we demonstrate that the two formalisms proposed independently of each other and based on different intuitions when viewed within a broader semantic framework turn out to be notational variants of each other. That lends support to the adequacy of the semantics we develop for each of the formalisms as the foundation for a declarative approach to the problem of database update and repair. In the paper, we also study computational properties of the semantics we consider and establish results concerned with the concept of the minimality of change and the invariance under the shifting transformation.

Using the notion of an elementary loop, Gebser and Schaub (2005. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR'05), 53–65) refined the theorem on loop formulas attributable to Lin and Zhao (2004) by considering loop formulas of elementary loops only. In this paper, we reformulate the definition of an elementary loop, extend it to disjunctive programs, and study several properties of elementary loops, including how maximal elementary loops are related to minimal unfounded sets. The results provide useful insights into the stable model semantics in terms of elementary loops. For a nondisjunctive program, using a graph-theoretic characterization of an elementary loop, we show that the problem of recognizing an elementary loop is tractable. On the other hand, we also show that the corresponding problem is coNP-complete for a disjunctive program. Based on the notion of an elementary loop, we present the class of Head-Elementary-loop-Free (HEF) programs, which strictly generalizes the class of Head-Cycle-Free (HCF) programs attributable to Ben-Eliyahu and Dechter (1994. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 12, 53–87). Like an HCF program, an HEF program can be turned into an equivalent nondisjunctive program in polynomial time by shifting head atoms into the body.