One prominent way to deal with conflicting view-points among agents is to conduct an argumentative debate: by exchanging arguments, agents can seek to persuade each other. In this paper we investigate the problem, for an agent, of optimizing a sequence of moves to be put forward in a debate, against an opponent assumed to behave stochastically, and equipped with an unknown initial belief state. Despite the prohibitive number of states induced by a naive mapping to Markov models, we show that exploiting several features of such interaction settings allows for optimal resolution in practice, in particular: (1) as debates take place in a public space (or common ground), they can readily be modelled as Mixed Observability Markov Decision Processes, (2) as argumentation problems are highly structured, one can design optimization techniques to prune the initial instance. We report on the experimental evaluation of these techniques.

Weighted model counting (WMC) on a propositional knowledge base is an effective and general approach to probabilistic inference in a variety of formalisms, including Bayesian and Markov Networks. However, an inherent limitation of WMC is that it only admits the inference of discrete probability distributions. In this paper, we introduce a strict generalization of WMC called weighted model integration that is based on annotating Boolean and arithmetic constraints, and combinations thereof. This methodology is shown to capture discrete, continuous and hybrid Markov networks. We then consider the task of parameter learning for a fragment of the language. An empirical evaluation demonstrates the applicability and promise of the proposal.

Core-guided algorithms proved to be effective on industrial instances of MaxSAT, the optimization variant of the satisfiability problem for propositional formulas. These algorithms work by iteratively checking satisfiability of a formula that is relaxed at each step by using the information provided by unsatisfiable cores. The paper introduces a new core-guided algorithm that adds cardinality constraints for each detected core, but also limits the number of literals in each constraint in order to control the number of refutations in subsequent satisfiability checks. The performance gain of the new algorithm is assessed on the industrial instances of the 2014 MaxSAT Evaluation.

Computing the set of optimal solutions for a multi-objective constraint optimisation problem can be computationally very challenging. Also, when solutions are only partially ordered, there can be a number of different natural notions of optimality, one of the most important being the notion of Possibly Optimal, i.e., optimal in at least one scenario compatible with the inter-objective tradeoffs. We develop an AND/OR Branch-and-Bound algorithm for computing the set of Possibly Optimal solutions, and compare variants of the algorithm experimentally.

Epistemic planning is a very expressive framework that extends automated planning by the incorporation of dynamic epistemic logic (DEL). We provide complexity results on the plan existence problem for multi-agent planning tasks, focusing on purely epistemic actions with propositional preconditions. We show that moving from epistemic preconditions to propositional preconditions makes it decidable, more precisely in EXPSPACE. The plan existence problem is PSPACE-complete when the underlying graphs are trees and NP-complete when they are chains (including singletons). We also show PSPACE-hardness of the plan verification problem, which strengthens previous results on the complexity of DEL model checking.

The idea of only knowing is a natural and intuitive notion to precisely capture the beliefs of a knowledge base. However, an extension to the many agent case, as would be needed in many applications, has been shown to be far from straightforward. For example, previous Kripke frame-based accounts appeal to proof-theoretic constructions like canonical models, while more recent works in the area abandoned Kripke semantics entirely. We propose a new account based on Moss’ characteristic formulas, formulated for the usual Kripke semantics. This is shown to come with other benefits: the logic admits a group version of only knowing, and an operator for assessing the epistemic entrenchment of what an agent or a group only knows is definable. Finally, the multi-agent only knowing operator is shown to be expressible with the cover modality of classical modal logic, which then allows us to obtain a completeness result for a fragment of the logic.

Modeling causal dependencies often demands cycles at a coarse-grained temporal scale. If Bayesian networks are to be used for modeling uncertainties, cycles are eliminated with dynamic Bayesian networks, spreading indirect dependencies over time and enforcing an infinitesimal resolution of time. Without a "causal design," i.e., without anticipating indirect influences appropriately in time, we argue that such networks return spurious results. By introducing activator random variables, we propose template fragments for modeling dynamic Bayesian networks under a causal use of time, anticipating indirect influences on a solid mathematical basis, obeying the laws of Bayesian networks.

Abstract artists use non-figurative elements (i.e. colours, lines, shapes, and textures) to convey emotions and often rely on the titles of their various compositions to generate (or enhance) an emotional reaction in the audience. Several psychological works observed that the metadata (i.e., titles, description and/or artist statements) associated with paintings increase the understanding and the aesthetic appreciation of artworks. In this paper we explore if the same metadata could facilitate the computational analysis of artworks, and reveal what kind of emotional responses they awake. To this end, we employ computer vision and sentiment analysis to learn statistical patterns associated with positive and negative emotions on abstract paintings. We propose a multimodal approach which combines both visual and metadata features in order to improve the machine performance. In particular, we propose a novel joint flexible Schatten p-norm model which can exploit the sharing patterns between visual and textual information for abstract painting emotion analysis. Moreover, we conduct a qualitative analysis on the cases in which metadata help improving the machine performance.

Our work deals with the important problem of globally characterizing truthful mechanisms where players have multi-parameter, additive valuations, like scheduling unrelated machines or additive combinatorial auctions. Very few mechanisms are known for these settings and the question is: Can we prove that no other truthful mechanisms exist? We characterize truthful mechanisms for n players and 2 tasks or items, as either task-independent, or a player-grouping minimizer, a new class of mechanisms we discover, which generalizes affine minimizers. We assume decisiveness, strong monotonicity and that the truthful payments (The (normalized) payments are uniquely determined by the allocation function of the mechanism; thus the assumptions concern properties of the allocation.) are continuous functions of players' bids.

Solvers for the Maximum satisfiability (MaxSAT) problem find an increasing number of applications today. We focus on improving MaxHS — one of the most successful recent MaxSAT algorithms — via SAT-based preprocessing. We show that employing SAT-based preprocessing via the so-called labelled CNF (LCNF) framework before calling MaxHS can in some cases greatly degrade the performance of the solver. As a remedy, we propose a lifting of MaxHS that works directly on LCNFs, allowing for a tighter integration of SAT-based preprocessing and MaxHS. Our empirical results on standard crafted and industrial weighted partial MaxSAT Evaluation benchmarks show overall improvements over the original MaxHS algorithm both with and without SAT-based preprocessing.