In this paper, we propose causality as a unified framework to explain query answers and non-answers, thus generalizing and extending several previously proposed approaches of provenance and missing query result explanations. We develop our framework starting from the well-studied definition of actual causes by Halpern and Pearl. After identifying some undesirable characteristics of the original definition, we propose functional causes as a refined definition of causality with several desirable properties. These properties allow us to apply our notion of causality in a database context and apply it uniformly to define the causes of query results and their individual contributions in several ways: (i) we can model both provenance as well as non-answers, (ii) we can define explanations as either data in the input relations or relational operations in a query plan, and (iii) we can give graded degrees of responsibility to individual causes, thus allowing us to rank causes. In particular, our approach allows us to explain contributions to relational aggregate functions and to rank causes according to their respective responsibilities. We give complexity results and describe polynomial algorithms for evaluating causality in tractable cases. Throughout the paper, we illustrate the applicability of our framework with several examples. Overall, we develop in this paper the theoretical foundations of causality theory in a database context.

In this paper, we present AutoMed, an automated mediator for multi-issue bilateral negotiation under time constraints. AutoMed uses a qualitative model to represent the negotiators' preferences. It analyzes the negotiators' preferences, monitors the negotiations and proposes possible solutions for resolving the conflict. We conducted experiments in a simulated environment. The results show that negotiations mediated by AutoMed are concluded significantly faster than non-mediated ones and without any of the negotiators opting out. Furthermore, the subjects in the mediated negotiations are more satisfied from the resolutions than the subjects in the non-mediated negotiations.

Although it has contributed to remarkable improvements in some specific areas, attempts to develop a universal design theory are generally characterized by failure. This paper sketches arguments for a new approach to engineering design based on Semiotics - the science about signs. The approach is to combine different design theories over all the product life cycle stages into one coherent and traceable framework. Besides, it is to bring together the designer's and user's understandings of the notion of 'good product'. Building on the insight from natural sciences that complex systems always exhibit a self-organizing meaning-influential hierarchical dynamics, objective laws controlling product development are found through an examination of design as a semiosis process. These laws are then applied to support evolutionary design of products. An experiment validating some of the theoretical findings is outlined, and concluding remarks are given.

This paper discusses the systematic use of product feedback information to support life-cycle design approaches and provides guidelines for developing a design at both the product and the system levels. Design activities are surveyed in the light of the product life cycle, and the design information flow is interpreted from a semiotic perspective. The natural evolution of a design is considered, the notion of design expectations is introduced, and the importance of evaluation of these expectations in dynamic environments is argued. Possible strategies for reconciliation of the expectations and environmental factors are described. An Internet-enabled technology is proposed to monitor product functionality, usage, and operational environment and supply the designer with relevant information. A pilot study of assessing design expectations of a refrigerator is outlined, and conclusions are drawn.

We propose a new definition of actual cause, using structural equations to model counterfactuals. We show that the definition yields a plausible and elegant account of causation that handles well examples which have caused problems for other definitions and resolves major difficulties in the traditional account.

In conventional supervised pattern recognition tasks, model selection is typically accomplished by minimizing the classification error rate on a set of so-called development data, subject to ground-truth labeling by human experts or some other means. In the context of speech processing systems and other large-scale practical applications, however, such labeled development data are typically costly and difficult to obtain. This article proposes an alternative semi-supervised framework for likelihood-based model selection that leverages unlabeled data by using trained classifiers representing each model to automatically generate putative labels. The errors that result from this automatic labeling are shown to be amenable to results from robust statistics, which in turn provide for minimax-optimal censored likelihood ratio tests that recover the nonparametric sign test as a limiting case. This approach is then validated experimentally using a state-of-the-art automatic speech recognition system to select between candidate word pronunciations using unlabeled speech data that only potentially contain instances of the words under test. Results provide supporting evidence for the utility of this approach, and suggest that it may also find use in other applications of machine learning.

As machines become more intelligent and take on more responsibilities, their decision-making capabilities must be informed and constrained by a coherent, integrated moral/ethical structure with no internal inconsistencies for everyone’s safety and well-being. Unfortunately, no such structure is currently agreed upon to exist. We propose to solve this problem by a) drawing upon experimental evidence and lessons learned from evolution and economics to show that morality is actually objective and derivable from first principles; b) presenting a coherent, integrated, platonic ethical system with no internal inconsistencies that flows naturally from a single high-level logically-derived Kantian imperative to low-level reflexive "rules of thumb" that match current human sensibilities; and c) suggesting a biologically-inspired architecture which supports and enforces this system which can be relatively easily implemented.

Formal and computational models of argument are ideally suited for education in ill-defined domains such as law, public policy, and science.  Open-ended arguments play a central role in these areas but students of the domains may not have been taught an explicit model of argument.  Computational models of argument may be ideally suited to act as argument tutors guiding students in the formation of arguments and argument analysis according to an explicit model.  In order to achieve this it is important to establish that the models can be understood and evaluated reliably, an empirical question.  In this paper we report ongoing work on the diagnostic utility of argument diagrams produced in the LARGO tutoring system.

International law is a singular exception to the top-down systems of law within nations. It presents the puzzle of how the law can be created or changed in the absence of authoritative rule-making institutions. The present paper is part of a work in progress that locates the law-making apparatus of international law in a complex adaptive system. Herein the focus is on thresholds. The first and most detailed threshold describes the emergence of the complex adaptive system. The second threshold consists of the transformation of international law from the voluntary to the automatic. The third threshold is here but has not yet been crossed: actualizing human rights as enforceable claims by individuals against States.

A state is not alive, yet it performs many of the central enjoys few bonds of kinship: and residence depends upon functions of life like replication and adaptation to new conditions occupational specialization rather than blood relations. A to balance social protection and opportunity. As a modern state can declare war on behalf of the entire collectivity, lifelike system the rise of the modern state raises four sets reserving the right to declare mandatory participation of fundamental questions about its evolutionary design. A and to contract the area of private vengeance. They proclaim first set concerns how it became a sustainable, autonomously a monopoly of force and of law, while requiring citizens to replicating system, capable of evolution. All non-state agglomerations forgo violence; vengeance is not the responsibility of the offended such as empires or chiefdoms eventually stagnate party. Almost any crime against one member is a because they are closed systems that break down over crime against the state. Subgroups seeking vengeance are time (Weber). A state is an open system that must able to viewed as threatening to the order of the state.