In this paper we formulate the problem of inference under incomplete information in very general terms. This includes modelling the process responsible for the incompleteness, which we call the incompleteness process. We allow the process behaviour to be partly unknown. Then we use Walleys theory of coherent lower previsions, a generalisation of the Bayesian theory to imprecision, to derive the rule to update beliefs under incompleteness that logically follows from our assumptions, and that we call conservative inference rule. This rule has some remarkable properties: it is an abstract rule to update beliefs that can be applied in any situation or domain; it gives us the opportunity to be neither too optimistic nor too pessimistic about the incompleteness process, which is a necessary condition to draw reliable while strong enough conclusions; and it is a coherent rule, in the sense that it cannot lead to inconsistencies. We give examples to show how the new rule can be applied in expert systems, in parametric statistical inference, and in pattern classification, and discuss more generally the view of incompleteness processes defended here as well as some of its consequences.

Thanks to recent advances, AI Planning has become the underlying technique for several applications. Figuring prominently among these is automated Web Service Composition (WSC) at the "capability" level, where services are described in terms of preconditions and effects over ontological concepts. A key issue in addressing WSC as planning is that ontologies are not only formal vocabularies; they also axiomatize the possible relationships between concepts. Such axioms correspond to what has been termed "integrity constraints" in the actions and change literature, and applying a web service is essentially a belief update operation. The reasoning required for belief update is known to be harder than reasoning in the ontology itself. The support for belief update is severely limited in current planning tools. Our first contribution consists in identifying an interesting special case of WSC which is both significant and more tractable. The special case, which we term "forward effects", is characterized by the fact that every ramification of a web service application involves at least one new constant generated as output by the web service. We show that, in this setting, the reasoning required for belief update simplifies to standard reasoning in the ontology itself. This relates to, and extends, current notions of "message-based" WSC, where the need for belief update is removed by a strong (often implicit or informal) assumption of "locality" of the individual messages. We clarify the computational properties of the forward effects case, and point out a strong relation to standard notions of planning under uncertainty, suggesting that effective tools for the latter can be successfully adapted to address the former. Furthermore, we identify a significant sub-case, named "strictly forward effects", where an actual compilation into planning under uncertainty exists. This enables us to exploit off-the-shelf planning tools to solve message-based WSC in a general form that involves powerful ontologies, and requires reasoning about partial matches between concepts. We provide empirical evidence that this approach may be quite effective, using Conformant-FF as the underlying planner.

The recently introduced series of description logics under the common moniker DL-Lite has attracted attention of the description logic and semantic web communities due to the low computational complexity of inference, on the one hand, and the ability to represent conceptual modeling formalisms, on the other. The main aim of this article is to carry out a thorough and systematic investigation of inference in extensions of the original DL-Lite logics along five axes: by (i) adding the Boolean connectives and (ii) number restrictions to concept constructs, (iii) allowing role hierarchies, (iv) allowing role disjointness, symmetry, asymmetry, reflexivity, irreflexivity and transitivity constraints, and (v) adopting or dropping the unique same assumption. We analyze the combined complexity of satisfiability for the resulting logics, as well as the data complexity of instance checking and answering positive existential queries. Our approach is based on embedding DL-Lite logics in suitable fragments of the one-variable first-order logic, which provides useful insights into their properties and, in particular, computational behavior.

Coalition formation is a fundamental type of interaction that involves the creation of coherent groupings of distinct, autonomous, agents in order to efficiently achieve their individual or collective goals. Forming effective coalitions is a major research challenge in the field of multi-agent systems. Central to this endeavour is the problem of determining which of the many possible coalitions to form in order to achieve some goal. This usually requires calculating a value for every possible coalition, known as the coalition value, which indicates how beneficial that coalition would be if it was formed. Once these values are calculated, the agents usually need to find a combination of coalitions, in which every agent belongs to exactly one coalition, and by which the overall outcome of the system is maximized. However, this coalition structure generation problem is extremely challenging due to the number of possible solutions that need to be examined, which grows exponentially with the number of agents involved. To date, therefore, many algorithms have been proposed to solve this problem using different techniques ranging from dynamic programming, to integer programming, to stochastic search all of which suffer from major limitations relating to execution time, solution quality, and memory requirements. With this in mind, we develop an anytime algorithm to solve the coalition structure generation problem. Specifically, the algorithm uses a novel representation of the search space, which partitions the space of possible solutions into sub-spaces such that it is possible to compute upper and lower bounds on the values of the best coalition structures in them. These bounds are then used to identify the sub-spaces that have no potential of containing the optimal solution so that they can be pruned. The algorithm, then, searches through the remaining sub-spaces very efficiently using a branch-and-bound technique to avoid examining all the solutions within the searched subspace(s). In this setting, we prove that our algorithm enumerates all coalition structures efficiently by avoiding redundant and invalid solutions automatically. Moreover, in order to effectively test our algorithm we develop a new type of input distribution which allows us to generate more reliable benchmarks compared to the input distributions previously used in the field. Given this new distribution, we show that for 27 agents our algorithm is able to find solutions that are optimal in 0.175% of the time required by the fastest available algorithm in the literature. The algorithm is anytime, and if interrupted before it would have normally terminated, it can still provide a solution that is guaranteed to be within a bound from the optimal one. Moreover, the guarantees we provide on the quality of the solution are significantly better than those provided by the previous state of the art algorithms designed for this purpose. For example, for the worst case distribution given 25 agents, our algorithm is able to find a 90% efficient solution in around 10% of time it takes to find the optimal solution.

We investigate the computational complexity of testing dominance and consistency in CP-nets. Previously, the complexity of dominance has been determined for restricted classes in which the dependency graph of the CP-net is acyclic. However, there are preferences of interest that define cyclic dependency graphs; these are modeled with general CP-nets. In our main results, we show here that both dominance and consistency for general CP-nets are PSPACE-complete. We then consider the concept of strong dominance, dominance equivalence and dominance incomparability, and several notions of optimality, and identify the complexity of the corresponding decision problems. The reductions used in the proofs are from STRIPS planning, and thus reinforce the earlier established connections between both areas.

A weighted constraint satisfaction problem (WCSP) is a constraint satisfaction problem in which preferences among solutions can be expressed. Bucket elimination is a complete technique commonly used to solve this kind of constraint satisfaction problem. When the memory required to apply bucket elimination is too high, a heuristic method based on it (denominated mini-buckets) can be used to calculate bounds for the optimal solution. Nevertheless, the curse of dimensionality makes these techniques impractical on large scale problems. In response to this situation, we present a memetic algorithm for WCSPs in which bucket elimination is used as a mechanism for recombining solutions, providing the best possible child from the parental set. Subsequently, a multi-level model in which this exact/metaheuristic hybrid is further hybridized with branch-and-bound techniques and mini-buckets is studied. As a case study, we have applied these algorithms to the resolution of the maximum density still life problem, a hard constraint optimization problem based on Conways game of life. The resulting algorithm consistently finds optimal patterns for up to date solved instances in less time than current approaches. Moreover, it is shown that this proposal provides new best known solutions for very large instances.

Soft goals extend the classical model of planning with a simple model of preferences. The best plans are then not the ones with least cost but the ones with maximum utility, where the utility of a plan is the sum of the utilities of the soft goals achieved minus the plan cost. Finding plans with high utility appears to involve two linked problems: choosing a subset of soft goals to achieve and finding a low-cost plan to achieve them. New search algorithms and heuristics have been developed for planning with soft goals, and a new track has been introduced in the International Planning Competition (IPC) to test their performance. In this note, we show however that these extensions are not needed: soft goals do not increase the expressive power of the basic model of planning with action costs, as they can easily be compiled away. We apply this compilation to the problems of the net-benefit track of the most recent IPC, and show that optimal and satisficing cost-based planners do better on the compiled problems than optimal and satisficing net-benefit planners on the original problems with explicit soft goals. Furthermore, we show that penalties, or negative preferences expressing conditions to avoid, can also be compiled away using a similar idea.

In the last two decades, modal and description logics have been applied to numerous areas of computer science, including knowledge representation, formal verification, database theory, distributed computing and, more recently, semantic web and ontologies. For this reason, the problem of automated reasoning in modal and description logics has been thoroughly investigated. In particular, many approaches have been proposed for efficiently handling the satisfiability of the core normal modal logic K(m), and of its notational variant, the description logic ALC. Although simple in structure, K(m)/ALC is computationally very hard to reason on, its satisfiability being PSPACE-complete. In this paper we start exploring the idea of performing automated reasoning tasks in modal and description logics by encoding them into SAT, so that to be handled by state-of-the-art SAT tools; as with most previous approaches, we begin our investigation from the satisfiability in K(m). We propose an efficient encoding, and we test it on an extensive set of benchmarks, comparing the approach with the main state-of-the-art tools available. Although the encoding is necessarily worst-case exponential, from our experiments we notice that, in practice, this approach can handle most or all the problems which are at the reach of the other approaches, with performances which are comparable with, or even better than, those of the current state-of-the-art tools.

This paper presents a multilayered architecture that enhances the capabilities of current QA systems and allows different types of complex questions or queries to be processed. The answers to these questions need to be gathered from factual information scattered throughout different documents. Specifically, we designed a specialized layer to process the different types of temporal questions. Complex temporal questions are first decomposed into simple questions, according to the temporal relations expressed in the original question. In the same way, the answers to the resulting simple questions are recomposed, fulfilling the temporal restrictions of the original complex question. A novel aspect of this approach resides in the decomposition which uses a minimal quantity of resources, with the final aim of obtaining a portable platform that is easily extensible to other languages. In this paper we also present a methodology for evaluation of the decomposition of the questions as well as the ability of the implemented temporal layer to perform at a multilingual level. The temporal layer was first performed for English, then evaluated and compared with: a) a general purpose QA system (F-measure 65.47% for QA plus English temporal layer vs. 38.01% for the general QA system), and b) a well-known QA system. Much better results were obtained for temporal questions with the multilayered system. This system was therefore extended to Spanish and very good results were again obtained in the evaluation (F-measure 40.36% for QA plus Spanish temporal layer vs. 22.94% for the general QA system).

Prime implicates and prime implicants have proven relevant to a number of areas of artificial intelligence, most notably abductive reasoning and knowledge compilation. The purpose of this paper is to examine how these notions might be appropriately extended from propositional logic to the modal logic K. We begin the paper by considering a number of potential definitions of clauses and terms for K. The different definitions are evaluated with respect to a set of syntactic, semantic, and complexity-theoretic properties characteristic of the propositional definition. We then compare the definitions with respect to the properties of the notions of prime implicates and prime implicants that they induce. While there is no definition that perfectly generalizes the propositional notions, we show that there does exist one definition which satisfies many of the desirable properties of the propositional case. In the second half of the paper, we consider the computational properties of the selected definition. To this end, we provide sound and complete algorithms for generating and recognizing prime implicates, and we show the prime implicate recognition task to be PSPACE-complete. We also prove upper and lower bounds on the size and number of prime implicates. While the paper focuses on the logic K, all of our results hold equally well for multi-modal K and for concept expressions in the description logic ALC.