GEPOC, short for Generic Population Concept, is a collection of models and methods for analysing population-level research questions. For the valid application of the models for a specific country or region, stable and reproducible data processes are necessary, which provide valid and ready-to-use model parameters. This work contains a complete description of the data-processing methods for computation of model parameters for Austria, based exclusively on freely and publicly accessible data. In addition to the description of the source data used, this includes all algorithms used for aggregation, disaggregation, fusion, cleansing or scaling of the data, as well as a description of the resulting parameter files. The document places particular emphasis on the computation of parameters for the most important GEPOC model, GEPOC ABM, a continuous-time agent-based population model. An extensive validation study using this particular model was made and is presented at the end of this work.

Monitoring urban tree dynamics is vital for supporting greening policies and reducing risks to electrical infrastructure. Airborne laser scanning has advanced large-scale tree management, but challenges remain due to complex urban environments and tree variability. Multispectral (MS) light detection and ranging (LiDAR) improves this by capturing both 3D spatial and spectral data, enabling detailed mapping. This study explores tree point extraction using MS-LiDAR and deep learning (DL) models. Three state-of-the-art models are evaluated: Superpoint Transformer (SPT), Point Transformer V3 (PTv3), and Point Transformer V1 (PTv1). Results show the notable time efficiency and accuracy of SPT, with a mean intersection over union (mIoU) of 85.28%. The highest detection accuracy is achieved by incorporating pseudo normalized difference vegetation index (pNDVI) with spatial data, reducing error rate by 10.61 percentage points (pp) compared to using spatial information alone. These findings highlight the potential of MS-LiDAR and DL to improve tree extraction and further tree inventories.

Argumentation is a central subarea of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for modeling and reasoning about arguments. The semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) is given by sets of arguments (extensions) and conditions on the relationship between them, such as stable or admissible. Today's solvers implement tasks such as finding extensions, deciding credulous or skeptical acceptance, counting, or enumerating extensions. While these tasks are well charted, the area between decision, counting/enumeration and fine-grained reasoning requires expensive reasoning so far. We introduce a novel concept (facets) for reasoning between decision and enumeration. Facets are arguments that belong to some extensions (credulous) but not to all extensions (skeptical). They are most natural when a user aims to navigate, filter, or comprehend the significance of specific arguments, according to their needs. We study the complexity and show that tasks involving facets are much easier than counting extensions. Finally, we provide an implementation, and conduct experiments to demonstrate feasibility.

This paper introduces ISAC, an invertible and stable, perceptually-motivated filter bank that is specifically designed to be integrated into machine learning paradigms. More precisely, the center frequencies and bandwidths of the filters are chosen to follow a non-linear, auditory frequency scale, the filter kernels have user-defined maximum temporal support and may serve as learnable convolutional kernels, and there exists a corresponding filter bank such that both form a perfect reconstruction pair. ISAC provides a powerful and user-friendly audio front-end suitable for any application, including analysis-synthesis schemes.

This chapter provides an overview of recent and promising Machine Learning applications, i.e. pose estimation, feature estimation, event detection, data exploration & clustering, and automated classification, in gait (walking and running) and sports biomechanics. It explores the potential of Machine Learning methods to address challenges in biomechanical workflows, highlights central limitations, i.e. data and annotation availability and explainability, that need to be addressed, and emphasises the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for fully harnessing the potential of Machine Learning in gait and sports biomechanics.

Classical planning asks for a sequence of operators reaching a given goal. While the most common case is to compute a plan, many scenarios require more than that. However, quantitative reasoning on the plan space remains mostly unexplored. A fundamental problem is to count plans, which relates to the conditional probability on the plan space. Indeed, qualitative and quantitative approaches are well-established in various other areas of automated reasoning. We present the first study to quantitative and qualitative reasoning on the plan space. In particular, we focus on polynomially bounded plans. On the theoretical side, we study its complexity, which gives rise to rich reasoning modes. Since counting is hard in general, we introduce the easier notion of facets, which enables understanding the significance of operators. On the practical side, we implement quantitative reasoning for planning. Thereby, we transform a planning task into a propositional formula and use knowledge compilation to count different plans. This framework scales well to large plan spaces, while enabling rich reasoning capabilities such as learning pruning functions and explainable planning.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a prominent problem-modeling and solving framework, whose solutions are called answer sets. Epistemic logic programs (ELP) extend ASP to reason about all or some answer sets. Solutions to an ELP can be seen as consequences over multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. While the complexity of propositional programs is well studied, the non-ground case remains open. This paper establishes the complexity of non-ground ELPs. We provide a comprehensive picture for well-known program fragments, which turns out to be complete for the class NEXPTIME with access to oracles up to \Sigma^P_2. In the quantitative setting, we establish complexity results for counting complexity beyond #EXP. To mitigate high complexity, we establish results in case of bounded predicate arity, reaching up to the fourth level of the polynomial hierarchy. Finally, we provide ETH-tight runtime results for the parameter treewidth, which has applications in quantitative reasoning, where we reason on (marginal) probabilities of epistemic literals.

Abstract argumentation is a popular toolkit for modeling, evaluating, and comparing arguments. Relationships between arguments are specified in argumentation frameworks (AFs), and conditions are placed on sets (extensions) of arguments that allow AFs to be evaluated. For more expressiveness, AFs are augmented with \emph{acceptance conditions} on directly interacting arguments or a constraint on the admissible sets of arguments, resulting in dialectic frameworks or constrained argumentation frameworks. In this paper, we consider flexible conditions for \emph{rejecting} an argument from an extension, which we call rejection conditions (RCs). On the technical level, we associate each argument with a specific logic program. We analyze the resulting complexity, including the structural parameter treewidth. Rejection AFs are highly expressive, giving rise to natural problems on higher levels of the polynomial hierarchy.

Recent advances have made non-autoregressive (NAT) translation comparable to autoregressive methods (AT). However, their evaluation using BLEU has been shown to weakly correlate with human annotations. Limited research compares non-autoregressive translation and autoregressive translation comprehensively, leaving uncertainty about the true proximity of NAT to AT. To address this gap, we systematically evaluate four representative NAT methods across various dimensions, including human evaluation. Our empirical results demonstrate that despite narrowing the performance gap, state-of-the-art NAT still underperforms AT under more reliable evaluation metrics. Furthermore, we discover that explicitly modeling dependencies is crucial for generating natural language and generalizing to out-of-distribution sequences.

Answer set programming (ASP) is a logic programming formalism used in various areas of artificial intelligence like combinatorial problem solving and knowledge representation and reasoning. It is known that enhancing ASP with function symbols makes basic reasoning problems highly undecidable. However, even in simple cases, state of the art reasoners, specifically those relying on a ground-and-solve approach, fail to produce a result. Therefore, we reconsider consistency as a basic reasoning problem for ASP. We show reductions that give an intuition for the high level of undecidability. These insights allow for a more fine-grained analysis where we characterize ASP programs as "frugal" and "non-proliferous". For such programs, we are not only able to semi-decide consistency but we also propose a grounding procedure that yields finite groundings on more ASP programs with the concept of "forbidden" facts.