Bayesian optimization (BO) is a powerful approach to sample-efficient optimization of black-box functions. However, in settings with very few function evaluations, a successful application of BO may require transferring information from historical experiments. These related experiments may not have exactly the same tunable parameters (search spaces), motivating the need for BO with transfer learning for heterogeneous search spaces. In this paper, we propose two methods for this setting. The first approach leverages a Gaussian process (GP) model with a conditional kernel to transfer information between different search spaces. Our second approach treats the missing parameters as hyperparameters of the GP model that can be inferred jointly with the other GP hyperparameters or set to fixed values. We show that these two methods perform well on several benchmark problems.

In this paper, we take first steps toward developing defeasible reasoning on concepts in KLM framework. We define generalizations of cumulative reasoning system C and cumulative reasoning system with loop CL to conceptual setting. We also generalize cumulative models, cumulative ordered models, and preferential models to conceptual setting and show the soundness and completeness results for these models.

Achieving human-level intelligence requires refining cognitive distinctions between System 1 and System 2 thinking. While contemporary AI, driven by large language models, demonstrates human-like traits, it falls short of genuine cognition. Transitioning from structured benchmarks to real-world scenarios presents challenges for visual agents, often leading to inaccurate and overly confident responses. To address the challenge, we introduce FaST, which incorporates the Fast and Slow Thinking mechanism into visual agents. FaST employs a switch adapter to dynamically select between System 1/2 modes, tailoring the problem-solving approach to different task complexity. It tackles uncertain and unseen objects by adjusting model confidence and integrating new contextual data. With this novel design, we advocate a flexible system, hierarchical reasoning capabilities, and a transparent decision-making pipeline, all of which contribute to its ability to emulate human-like cognitive processes in visual intelligence. Empirical results demonstrate that FaST outperforms various well-known baselines, achieving 80.8% accuracy over VQA^{v2} for visual question answering and 48.7% GIoU score over ReasonSeg for reasoning segmentation, demonstrate FaST's superior performance. Extensive testing validates the efficacy and robustness of FaST's core components, showcasing its potential to advance the development of cognitive visual agents in AI systems. The code is available at ttps://github.com/GuangyanS/Sys2-LLaVA.

Current robot autonomy struggles to operate beyond the assumed Operational Design Domain (ODD), the specific set of conditions and environments in which the system is designed to function, while the real-world is rife with uncertainties that may lead to failures. Automating recovery remains a significant challenge. Traditional methods often rely on human intervention to manually address failures or require exhaustive enumeration of failure cases and the design of specific recovery policies for each scenario, both of which are labor-intensive. Foundational Vision-Language Models (VLMs), which demonstrate remarkable common-sense generalization and reasoning capabilities, have broader, potentially unbounded ODDs. However, limitations in spatial reasoning continue to be a common challenge for many VLMs when applied to robot control and motion-level error recovery. In this paper, we investigate how optimizing visual and text prompts can enhance the spatial reasoning of VLMs, enabling them to function effectively as black-box controllers for both motion-level position correction and task-level recovery from unknown failures. Specifically, the optimizations include identifying key visual elements in visual prompts, highlighting these elements in text prompts for querying, and decomposing the reasoning process for failure detection and control generation. In experiments, prompt optimizations significantly outperform pre-trained Vision-Language-Action Models in correcting motion-level position errors and improve accuracy by 65.78% compared to VLMs with unoptimized prompts. Additionally, for task-level failures, optimized prompts enhanced the success rate by 5.8%, 5.8%, and 7.5% in VLMs' abilities to detect failures, analyze issues, and generate recovery plans, respectively, across a wide range of unknown errors in Lego assembly.

This book uses the modern theory of artificial intelligence (AI) to understand human suffering or mental pain. Both humans and sophisticated AI agents process information about the world in order to achieve goals and obtain rewards, which is why AI can be used as a model of the human brain and mind. This book intends to make the theory accessible to a relatively general audience, requiring only some relevant scientific background. The book starts with the assumption that suffering is mainly caused by frustration. Frustration means the failure of an agent (whether AI or human) to achieve a goal or a reward it wanted or expected. Frustration is inevitable because of the overwhelming complexity of the world, limited computational resources, and scarcity of good data. In particular, such limitations imply that an agent acting in the real world must cope with uncontrollability, unpredictability, and uncertainty, which all lead to frustration. Fundamental in such modelling is the idea of learning, or adaptation to the environment. While AI uses machine learning, humans and animals adapt by a combination of evolutionary mechanisms and ordinary learning. Even frustration is fundamentally an error signal that the system uses for learning. This book explores various aspects and limitations of learning algorithms and their implications regarding suffering. At the end of the book, the computational theory is used to derive various interventions or training methods that will reduce suffering in humans. The amount of frustration is expressed by a simple equation which indicates how it can be reduced. The ensuing interventions are very similar to those proposed by Buddhist and Stoic philosophy, and include mindfulness meditation. Therefore, this book can be interpreted as an exposition of a computational theory justifying why such philosophies and meditation reduce human suffering.

The rise of multi-modal large language models(MLLMs) has spurred their applications in autonomous driving. Recent MLLM-based methods perform action by learning a direct mapping from perception to action, neglecting the dynamics of the world and the relations between action and world dynamics. In contrast, human beings possess world model that enables them to simulate the future states based on 3D internal visual representation and plan actions accordingly. To this end, we propose OccLLaMA, an occupancy-language-action generative world model, which uses semantic occupancy as a general visual representation and unifies vision-language-action(VLA) modalities through an autoregressive model. Specifically, we introduce a novel VQVAE-like scene tokenizer to efficiently discretize and reconstruct semantic occupancy scenes, considering its sparsity and classes imbalance. Then, we build a unified multi-modal vocabulary for vision, language and action. Furthermore, we enhance LLM, specifically LLaMA, to perform the next token/scene prediction on the unified vocabulary to complete multiple tasks in autonomous driving. Extensive experiments demonstrate that OccLLaMA achieves competitive performance across multiple tasks, including 4D occupancy forecasting, motion planning, and visual question answering, showcasing its potential as a foundation model in autonomous driving.

Specifically focusing on the landscape of abstractive text summarization, as opposed to extractive techniques, this survey presents a comprehensive overview, delving into state-of-the-art techniques, prevailing challenges, and prospective research directions. We categorize the techniques into traditional sequence-to-sequence models, pre-trained large language models, reinforcement learning, hierarchical methods, and multi-modal summarization. Unlike prior works that did not examine complexities, scalability and comparisons of techniques in detail, this review takes a comprehensive approach encompassing state-of-the-art methods, challenges, solutions, comparisons, limitations and charts out future improvements - providing researchers an extensive overview to advance abstractive summarization research. We provide vital comparison tables across techniques categorized - offering insights into model complexity, scalability and appropriate applications. The paper highlights challenges such as inadequate meaning representation, factual consistency, controllable text summarization, cross-lingual summarization, and evaluation metrics, among others. Solutions leveraging knowledge incorporation and other innovative strategies are proposed to address these challenges. The paper concludes by highlighting emerging research areas like factual inconsistency, domain-specific, cross-lingual, multilingual, and long-document summarization, as well as handling noisy data. Our objective is to provide researchers and practitioners with a structured overview of the domain, enabling them to better understand the current landscape and identify potential areas for further research and improvement.

Most of the work on learning action models focus on learning the actions' dynamics from input plans. This allows us to specify the valid plans of a planning task. However, very little work focuses on learning action costs, which in turn allows us to rank the different plans. In this paper we introduce a new problem: that of learning the costs of a set of actions such that a set of input plans are optimal under the resulting planning model. To solve this problem we present $LACFIP^k$, an algorithm to learn action's costs from unlabeled input plans. We provide theoretical and empirical results showing how $LACFIP^k$ can successfully solve this task.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a framework enabling large language models (LLMs) to enhance their accuracy and reduce hallucinations by integrating external knowledge bases. In this paper, we introduce a hybrid RAG system enhanced through a comprehensive suite of optimizations that significantly improve retrieval quality, augment reasoning capabilities, and refine numerical computation ability. We refined the text chunks and tables in web pages, added attribute predictors to reduce hallucinations, conducted LLM Knowledge Extractor and Knowledge Graph Extractor, and finally built a reasoning strategy with all the references. We evaluated our system on the CRAG dataset through the Meta CRAG KDD Cup 2024 Competition. Both the local and online evaluations demonstrate that our system significantly enhances complex reasoning capabilities. In local evaluations, we have significantly improved accuracy and reduced error rates compared to the baseline model, achieving a notable increase in scores. In the meanwhile, we have attained outstanding results in online assessments, demonstrating the performance and generalization capabilities of the proposed system. The source code for our system is released in \url{https://gitlab.aicrowd.com/shizueyy/crag-new}.

The dominant practice of AI alignment assumes (1) that preferences are an adequate representation of human values, (2) that human rationality can be understood in terms of maximizing the satisfaction of preferences, and (3) that AI systems should be aligned with the preferences of one or more humans to ensure that they behave safely and in accordance with our values. Whether implicitly followed or explicitly endorsed, these commitments constitute what we term a preferentist approach to AI alignment. In this paper, we characterize and challenge the preferentist approach, describing conceptual and technical alternatives that are ripe for further research. We first survey the limits of rational choice theory as a descriptive model, explaining how preferences fail to capture the thick semantic content of human values, and how utility representations neglect the possible incommensurability of those values. We then critique the normativity of expected utility theory (EUT) for humans and AI, drawing upon arguments showing how rational agents need not comply with EUT, while highlighting how EUT is silent on which preferences are normatively acceptable. Finally, we argue that these limitations motivate a reframing of the targets of AI alignment: Instead of alignment with the preferences of a human user, developer, or humanity-writ-large, AI systems should be aligned with normative standards appropriate to their social roles, such as the role of a general-purpose assistant. Furthermore, these standards should be negotiated and agreed upon by all relevant stakeholders. On this alternative conception of alignment, a multiplicity of AI systems will be able to serve diverse ends, aligned with normative standards that promote mutual benefit and limit harm despite our plural and divergent values.