This year's conferences were held in Perhaps one of the true litmus tests of any conference is the caliber of the invited speakers. Sensibility: Sentiment Analysis, Opinion and research manager at Microsoft Research) The distinguished Robert S. Englemore Mining, and the Computational who gave his AAAI presidential Memorial Award Lecture was delivered Treatment of Subjective Language"), address, "Artificial Intelligence in the by Kenneth Ford (Florida Institute while Seth C. Goldstein (Carnegie Open World." Mel lon University) discussed revolutionary Chris Urmson (Carnegie Mellon In his lecture, "Toward Cognitive work in self-reconfiguring programmable University), a leading member of the Prostheses," Ford discussed human-centered matter composed of ensembles of submillimeter robots in his DARPA Urban Grand Challenge winning computing to amplify talk, "Realizing Claytronics: A Challenge team, described the race and winning human cognition and perception. Instead of the learning for network analysis in ("From Images to Scenes: Using popular competition, which has his talk, "Making Sense of Complex Lots of Data to Infer Geometric, Photometric, pushed the envelope of mobile robotics Networks." David Haussler (University and Semantic Scene Properties since its inception, this year was of California, Santa Cruz) traced the from a Single Image"), and Lillian host to a Robot Workshop and Exhibition.

Often user interfaces of theorem proving systems focus on assisting particularly trained and skilled users, i.e., proof experts. As a result, the systems are difficult to use for non-expert users. This paper describes a paper and pencil HCI experiment, in which (non-expert) students were asked to make suggestions for a GUI for an interactive system for mathematical proofs. They had to explain the usage of the GUI by applying it to construct a proof sketch for a given theorem. The evaluation of the experiment provides insights for the interaction design for non-expert users and the needs and wants of this user group.

In many real-life optimisation problems, there are multiple interacting components in a solution. For example, different components might specify assignments to different kinds of resource. Often, each component is associated with different sets of soft constraints, and so with different measures of soft constraint violation. The goal is then to minimise a linear combination of such measures. This paper studies an approach to such problems, which can be thought of as multiphase exploitation of multiple objective-/value-restricted submodels. In this approach, only one computationally difficult component of a problem and the associated subset of objectives is considered at first. This produces partial solutions, which define interesting neighbourhoods in the search space of the complete problem. Often, it is possible to pick the initial component so that variable aggregation can be performed at the first stage, and the neighbourhoods to be explored next are guaranteed to contain feasible solutions. Using integer programming, it is then easy to implement heuristics producing solutions with bounds on their quality. Our study is performed on a university course timetabling problem used in the 2007 International Timetabling Competition, also known as the Udine Course Timetabling Problem. In the proposed heuristic, an objective-restricted neighbourhood generator produces assignments of periods to events, with decreasing numbers of violations of two period-related soft constraints. Those are relaxed into assignments of events to days, which define neighbourhoods that are easier to search with respect to all four soft constraints. Integer programming formulations for all subproblems are given and evaluated using ILOG CPLEX 11. The wider applicability of this approach is analysed and discussed.

In this paper, we explore methods for comparing agent behavior with human behavior to assist with validation. Our exploration begins by considering a simple method of behavior comparison. Motivated by shortcomings in this initial approach, we introduce behavior bounding, an automated model-based approach for comparing behavior that is inspired, in part, by Mitchell's Version Spaces. We show that behavior bounding can be used to compactly represent both human and agent behavior. We argue that relatively low amounts of human effort are required to build, maintain, and use the data structures that underlie behavior bounding, and we provide a theoretical basis for these arguments using notions of PAC Learnability. Next, we show empirical results indicating that this approach is effective at identifying differences in certain types of behaviors and that it performs well when compared against our initial benchmark methods. Finally, we demonstrate that behavior bounding can produce information that allows developers to identify and fix problems in an agent's behavior much more efficiently than standard debugging techniques.

Distance learning universities usually afford their students the flexibility to advance their studies at their own pace. This can lead to a considerable fluctuation of student populations within a program's courses, possibly affecting the academic viability of a program as well as the related required resources. Providing a method that estimates this population could be of substantial help to university management and academic personnel. We describe how to use course precedence constraints to calculate alternative tuition paths and then use Markov models to estimate future populations. In doing so, we identify key issues of a large scale potential deployment.

When genetic algorithms are used to evolve decision trees, key tree quality parameters can be recursively computed and re-used across generations of partially similar decision trees. Simply storing instance indices at leaves is enough for fitness to be piecewise computed in a lossless fashion. We show the derivation of the (substantial) expected speed-up on two bounding case problems and trace the attractive property of lossless fitness inheritance to the divide-and-conquer nature of decision trees. The theoretical results are supported by experimental evidence.

Affective computing has proven to be a viable field of research comprised of a large number of multidisciplinary researchers resulting in work that is widely published. The majority of this work consists of computational models of emotion recognition, computational modeling of causal factors of emotion and emotion expression through rendered and robotic faces. A smaller part is concerned with modeling the effects of emotion, formal modeling of cognitive appraisal theory and models of emergent emotions. Part of the motivation for affective computing as a field is to better understand emotional processes through computational modeling. One of the four major topics in affective computing is computers that have emotions (the others are recognizing, expressing and understanding emotions). A critical and neglected aspect of having emotions is the experience of emotion (Barrett, Mesquita, Ochsner, and Gross, 2007): what does the content of an emotional episode look like, how does this content change over time and when do we call the episode emotional. Few modeling efforts have these topics as primary focus. The launch of a journal on synthetic emotions should motivate research initiatives in this direction, and this research should have a measurable impact on emotion research in psychology. I show that a good way to do so is to investigate the psychological core of what an emotion is: an experience. I present ideas on how the experience of emotion could be modeled and provide evidence that several computational models of emotion are already addressing the issue.

IAAI-09) will be held July scholarship applications to AAAI by 2009. No late submissions will be accepted.

This article explains the benefits of preferences for AI systems and draws a picture of current AI research on preference handling. It thus provides an introduction to the topics covered by this special issue on preference handling.

A new method is presented, that can help a person become aware of his or her unconscious preferences, and convey them to others in the form of verbal explanation. The method combines the concepts of reflection, visualization, and verbalization. The method was tested in an experiment where the unconscious preferences of the subjects for various artworks were investigated. In the experiment, two lessons were learned. The first is that it helps the subjects become aware of their unconscious preferences to verbalize weak preferences as compared with strong preferences through discussion over preference diagrams. The second is that it is effective to introduce an adjustable factor into visualization to adapt to the differences in the subjects and to foster their mutual understanding.