As the popularity of adhesive joints in industry increases, so does the need for tools to support the process of selecting a suitable adhesive. While some such tools already exist, they are either too limited in scope or offer too little flexibility in use. This work presents a more advanced tool, that was developed together with a team of adhesive experts. We first extract the experts’ knowledge about this domain and formalize it in a Knowledge Base (KB). The IDP-Z3 reasoning system can then be used to derive the necessary functionality from this KB. Together with a user-friendly interactive interface, this creates an easy-to-use tool capable of assisting the adhesive experts. To validate our approach, we performed user testing in the form of qualitative interviews. The experts are very positive about the tool, stating that, among others, it will help save time and find more suitable adhesives.

Technological progress in Answer Set Programming (ASP) has been stimulated by the use of common standards, such as the ASP-Core-2 language. While ASP has its roots in nonmonotonic reasoning, efforts have also been made to reconcile ASP with classical first-order (FO) logic. This has resulted in the development of FO(·), an expressive extension of FO, which allows ASP-like problem solving in a purely classical setting. This language may be more accessible to domain experts already familiar with FO and may be easier to combine with other formalisms that are based on classical logic. It is supported by the IDP inference system, which has successfully competed in a number of ASP competitions. Here, however, technological progress has been hampered by the limited number of systems that are available for FO(·). In this paper, we aim to address this gap by means of a translation tool that transforms an FO(·) specification into ASP-Core-2, thereby allowing ASP-Core-2 solvers to be used as solvers for FO(·) as well. We present experimental results to show that the resulting combination of our translation with an off-the-shelf ASP solver is competitive with the IDP system as a way of solving problems formulated in FO(·).

We present three natural but distinct formalisations of Einstein’s special principle of relativity, and demonstrate the relationships between them. In particular, we prove that they are logically distinct, but that they can be made equivalent by introducing a small number of additional, intuitively acceptable axioms.

We consider logics on $\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{N}$ which are weaker than Presburger arithmetic and we settle the following decision problem: given a k-ary relation on $\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{N}$ which are first order definable in Presburger arithmetic, are they definable in these weaker logics? These logics, intuitively, are obtained by considering modulo and threshold counting predicates for differences of two variables.