Feature selection is an important topic in traditional machine learning [Li et al., 2018], which motivated a large number of widely adopted works, e.g., Lasso [Tibshirani, 1996]. In various cases, the process of obtaining input measurements requires considerable effort (e.g., time, money, technology). For example, in medical datasets input features may correspond to lab tests, medical imaging results, or even answers to questionnaires, which are expensive and slow to produce. Allowing oneself to to be able to accurately predict a response variable from a small set of input features is thus a desirable goal, which can be manifested in saving time, money, and sometimes even human lives. As a running example, consider the case of a patient complaining to a family doctor about not feeling well. The doctor then asks the patients several questions about his current condition and medical background, and may also ask the patient to do some lab tests. Implicitly, the doctor is aiming at quickly collecting relevant details on the patient that will allow her to have a clear understanding of the patients' medical status, and consequently decide on an appropriate action (e.g., medication prescription, admit for hospitalization etc.).

Bidding and acceptance strategies have a substantial impact on the outcome of negotiations in scenarios with linear additive and nonlinear utility functions. Over the years, it has become clear that there is no single best strategy for all negotiation settings, yet many fixed strategies are still being developed. We envision a shift in the strategy design question from: What is a good strategy?, towards: What could be a good strategy? For this purpose, we developed a method leveraging automated algorithm configuration to find the best strategies for a specific set of negotiation settings. By empowering automated negotiating agents using automated algorithm configuration, we obtain a flexible negotiation agent that can be configured automatically for a rich space of opponents and negotiation scenarios. To critically assess our approach, the agent was tested in an ANAC-like bilateral automated negotiation tournament setting against past competitors. We show that our automatically configured agent outperforms all other agents, with a 5.1% increase in negotiation payoff compared to the next-best agent. We note that without our agent in the tournament, the top-ranked agent wins by a margin of only 0.01%.

Existing patient data analytics platforms fail to incorporate information that has context, is personal, and topical to patients. For a recommendation system to give a suitable response to a query or to derive meaningful insights from patient data, it should consider personal information about the patient's health history, including but not limited to their preferences, locations, and life choices that are currently applicable to them. In this review paper, we critique existing literature in this space and also discuss the various research challenges that come with designing, building, and operationalizing a personal health knowledge graph (PHKG) for patients.

In science, macro level descriptions of the causal interactions within complex, dynamical systems are typically deemed convenient, but ultimately reducible to a complete causal account of the underlying micro constituents. Yet, such a reductionist perspective is hard to square with several issues related to autonomy and agency: (1) agents require (causal) borders that separate them from the environment, (2) at least in a biological context, agents are associated with macroscopic systems, and (3) agents are supposed to act upon their environment. Integrated information theory (IIT) (Oizumi et al., 2014) offers a quantitative account of causation based on a set of causal principles, including notions such as causal specificity, composition, and irreducibility, that challenges the reductionist perspective in multiple ways. First, the IIT formalism provides a complete account of a system's causal structure, including irreducible higher-order mechanisms constituted of multiple system elements. Second, a system's amount of integrated information ($\Phi$) measures the causal constraints a system exerts onto itself and can peak at a macro level of description (Hoel et al., 2016; Marshall et al., 2018). Finally, the causal principles of IIT can also be employed to identify and quantify the actual causes of events ("what caused what"), such as an agent's actions (Albantakis et al., 2019). Here, we demonstrate this framework by example of a simulated agent, equipped with a small neural network, that forms a maximum of $\Phi$ at a macro scale.

Evolution gave rise to human and animal intelligence here on Earth. We argue that the path to developing artificial human-like-intelligence will pass through mimicking the evolutionary process in a nature-like simulation. In Nature, there are two processes driving the development of the brain: evolution and learning. Evolution acts slowly, across generations, and amongst other things, it defines what agents learn by changing their internal reward function. Learning acts fast, across one's lifetime, and it quickly updates agents' policy to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. The reward function is slowly aligned with the fitness function by evolution, however, as agents evolve the environment and its fitness function also change, increasing the misalignment between reward and fitness. It is extremely computationally expensive to replicate these two processes in simulation. This work proposes Evolution via Evolutionary Reward (EvER) that allows learning to single-handedly drive the search for policies with increasingly evolutionary fitness by ensuring the alignment of the reward function with the fitness function. In this search, EvER makes use of the whole state-action trajectories that agents go through their lifetime. In contrast, current evolutionary algorithms discard this information and consequently limit their potential efficiency at tackling sequential decision problems. We test our algorithm in two simple bio-inspired environments and show its superiority at generating more capable agents at surviving and reproducing their genes when compared with a state-of-the-art evolutionary algorithm.

Peer review forms the backbone of modern scientific manuscript evaluation. But after two hundred and eighty-nine years of egalitarian service to the scientific community, does this protocol remain fit for purpose in 2020? In this work, we answer this question in the negative (strong reject, high confidence) and propose instead State-Of-the-Art Review (SOAR), a neoteric reviewing pipeline that serves as a "plug-and-play" replacement for peer review. At the heart of our approach is an interpretation of the review process as a multi-objective, massively distributed and extremely-high-latency optimisation, which we scalarise and solve efficiently for PAC and CMT-optimal solutions. We make the following contributions: (1) We propose a highly scalable, fully automatic methodology for review, drawing inspiration from best-practices from premier computer vision and machine learning conferences; (2) We explore several instantiations of our approach and demonstrate that SOAR can be used to both review prints and pre-review pre-prints; (3) We wander listlessly in vain search of catharsis from our latest rounds of savage CVPR rejections 1 . If a decision tree in a forest makes marginal improvements, and no one is around to publish it, is it really "state-of-the-art"?

New machine translations (MT) technologies are emerging rapidly and with them, bold claims of achieving human parity such as: (i) the results produced approach "accuracy achieved by average bilingual human translators" (Wu et al., 2017b) or (ii) the "translation quality is at human parity when compared to professional human translators" (Hassan et al., 2018) have seen the light of day (Laubli et al., 2018). Aside from the fact that many of these papers craft their own definition of human parity, these sensational claims are often not supported by a complete analysis of all aspects involved in translation. Establishing the discrepancies between the strengths of statistical approaches to MT and the way humans translate has been the starting point of our research. By looking at MT output and linguistic theory, we were able to identify some remaining issues. The problems range from simple number and gender agreement errors to more complex phenomena such as the correct translation of aspectual values and tenses. Our experiments confirm, along with other studies (Bentivogli et al., 2016), that neural MT has surpassed statistical MT in many aspects. However, some problems remain and others have emerged. We cover a series of problems related to the integration of specific linguistic features into statistical and neural MT, aiming to analyse and provide a solution to some of them. Our work focuses on addressing three main research questions that revolve around the complex relationship between linguistics and MT in general. We identify linguistic information that is lacking in order for automatic translation systems to produce more accurate translations and integrate additional features into the existing pipelines. We identify overgeneralization or 'algorithmic bias' as a potential drawback of neural MT and link it to many of the remaining linguistic issues.

The question of whether artificial beings or machines could become self-aware or consciousness has been a philosophical question for centuries. The main problem is that self-awareness cannot be observed from an outside perspective and the distinction of whether something is really self-aware or merely a clever program that pretends to do so cannot be answered without access to accurate knowledge about the mechanism's inner workings. We review the current state-of-the-art regarding these developments and investigate common machine learning approaches with respect to their potential ability to become self-aware. We realise that many important algorithmic steps towards machines with a core consciousness have already been devised. For human-level intelligence, however, many additional techniques have to be discovered.

In the context of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, several reports and studies have attempted to model and predict the spread of the disease. There is also intense debate about policies for limiting the damage, both to health and to the economy. On the one hand, the health and safety of the population is the principal consideration for most countries. On the other hand, we cannot ignore the potential for long-term economic damage caused by strict nation-wide lockdowns. In this working paper, we present a quantitative way to compute lockdown decisions for individual cities or regions, while balancing health and economic considerations. Furthermore, these policies are \textit{learnt} automatically by the proposed algorithm, as a function of disease parameters (infectiousness, gestation period, duration of symptoms, probability of death) and population characteristics (density, movement propensity). We account for realistic considerations such as imperfect lockdowns, and show that the policy obtained using reinforcement learning is a viable quantitative approach towards lockdowns.

Semantic parsing transforms a natural language question into a formal query over a knowledge base. Many existing methods rely on syntactic parsing like dependencies. However, the accuracy of producing such expressive formalisms is not satisfying on long complex questions. In this paper, we propose a novel skeleton grammar to represent the high-level structure of a complex question. This dedicated coarse-grained formalism with a BERT-based parsing algorithm helps to improve the accuracy of the downstream fine-grained semantic parsing. Besides, to align the structure of a question with the structure of a knowledge base, our multi-strategy method combines sentence-level and word-level semantics. Our approach shows promising performance on several datasets.