The concept of "affordance" represents the relationship between human perceivers and their environment. Affordance perception, representation, and inference are central to commonsense reasoning, tool-use and creative problem-solving in artificial agents. Existing approaches fail to provide flexibility with which to reason about affordances in the open world, where they are influenced by changing context, social norms, historical precedence, and uncertainty. We develop a formal rules-based logical representational format coupled with an uncertainty-processing framework to reason about cognitive affordances in a more general manner than shown in the existing literature. Our framework allows agents to make deductive and abductive inferences about functional and social affordances, collectively and dynamically, thereby allowing the agent to adapt to changing conditions. We demonstrate our approach with an example, and show that an agent can successfully reason through situations that involve a tight interplay between various social and functional norms.

In many scenarios where the integration of information into a knowledge base (KB) leads to inconsistencies there is a need to change the KB minimally. In belief revision, relevance postulates meet the minimality requirement by restricting the elimination of KB elements to those that are relevant for the incoming information. This paper focuses on two minimality postulates in an ontology revision scenario in which conflicts are caused by ambiguous use of symbols: a relevance postulate and a generalized inclusion postulate which limits the creativity of the operators. Both postulates exploit the (satisfiably) equivalent representation of a first-order logic KB by its prime implicates, which, intuitively, represent the most atomic logical components of the KB. The paper shows that reinterpretation operators (which are ontology revision operators) fulfill both postulates.

In this paper we show that the problem of deciding the consistency of a knowledge base in the Description Logic ALCM is ExpTime-complete. The M stands for meta-modelling as defined by Motz, Rohrer and Severi. To show our main result, we define an ExpTime Tableau algorithm as an extension of an algorithm for ALC by Nguyen and Szalas.

We introduce Scheduling MTL (SMTL) an extension of Metric Temporal Logic that supports the specification of complex scheduling problems with repeated and conditional occurrences of activities, and rich temporal relationships among them. We define the syntax and semantics of SMTL, and explore natural restrictions of the language to gain tractability. We also provide an algorithm for finding a schedule to a problem specified as an SMTL formula, and establish a novel equivalence between a fragment of MTL and simple temporal networks, a widely-used formalism in AI temporal planning.

Graphol is a visual language designed to help non-experts to understand and specify ontologies. Our language builds on the Entity-Relationship model, but has a formal semantics and higher expressiveness. Notably, OWL 2 can be completely encoded in Graphol. Thanks to the novel open-source Eddy ontology editor, designers can easily draw Graphol diagrams corresponding to OWL ontologies and export them into standard OWL 2 format. Both Graphol and Eddy have been used in several successful industrial projects and are currently under active development. This paper reports on our more recent progresses.

The situation calculus has proved to be a very popular formalism for modeling and reasoning about dynamic systems. This otherwise elegant and refined language however lacks a natural way of dealing with "infinite future histories". To this end, in this paper we introduce a new sort ranging over infinite paths in the situation calculus and propose an axiomatization for infinite paths. We thus obtain a convenient way of specifying several kinds of notions that involve infinite futures such as temporal properties of non-terminating executions of agents or programs and mental attitudes such as desires and intentions. We prove the correctness of the axiomatization and show that our formalization has some intuitively desirable properties.

Algorithms based on first-order knowledge compilation are currently the state-of-the-art for lifted inference. These algorithms typically compile a probabilistic relational model into an intermediate data structure and use it to answer many inference queries. In this paper, we propose compiling a probabilistic relational model directly into a low-level target (e.g., C or C++) program instead of an intermediate data structure and taking advantage of advances in program compilation. Our experiments represent orders of magnitude speedup compared to existing approaches.

Knowledge graph embedding refers to projecting entities and relations in knowledge graph into continuous vector spaces. Current state-of-the-art models are translation-based model, which build embeddings by treating relation as translation from head entity to tail entity. However, previous models is too strict to model the complex and diverse entities and relations(e.g. symmetric/transitive/one-to-many/many-to-many relations). To address these issues, we propose a new principle to allow flexible translation between entity and relation vectors. We can design a novel score function to favor flexible translation for each translation-based models without increasing model complexity. To evaluate the proposed principle, we incorporate it into previous method and conduct triple classification on benchmark datasets. Experimental results show that the principle can remarkably improve the performance compared with several state-of-the-art baselines.

We investigate case-based reasoning (CBR) problems where cases are represented by abstract factors and (positive or negative) outcomes, and an outcome for a new case, represented by abstract factors, needs to be established. To this end, we employ abstract argumentation (AA) and propose a novel methodology for CBR, called AA-CBR. The argumentative formulation naturally allows to characterise the computation of an outcome as a dialogical process between a proponent and an opponent, and can also be used to extract explanations for why an outcome for a new case is (not) computed.

Domain-independent planning requires only to specify planning problems in a standard language (e.g. PDDL) in order to utilise planning in some application. Despite a huge advancement in domain-independent planning, some relatively-easy problems are still challenging for existing planning engines. Such an issue can be mitigated by specifying Domain Control Knowledge (DCK) that can provide better guidance for planning engines. In this paper, we introduce transition-based DCK, inspired by Finite State Automata, that is efficient as demonstrated empirically, planner-independent (can be encoded within planning problems) and easy to specify.