In this paper, we study the problem of formal verification for Answer Set Programming (ASP), namely, obtaining a formal proof showing that the answer sets of a given (non-ground) logic program P correctly correspond to the solutions to the problem encoded by P, regardless of the problem instance. To this aim, we use a formal specification language based on ASP modules, so that each module can be proved to capture some informal aspect of the problem in an isolated way. This specification language relies on a novel definition of (possibly nested, first order) program modules that may incorporate local hidden atoms at different levels. Then, verifying the logic program P amounts to prove some kind of equivalence between P and its modular specification.

This paper focusses on how conflicts that arise during a design process and the management of conflicts can be modelled. A number of possible conflict types are distinguished and it is described how each of them can be detected during the design process, using an explicit meta-representation. Furthermore, it is shown how these conflict types can be analyzed and managed by means of strategic meta-knowledge about design processes.