We will discuss how over the last 30 to 50 years, systems that focused only on data have been handicapped with success focused on narrowly focused tasks, and knowledge has been critical in developing smarter, intelligent, more effective systems. We will draw a parallel with the role of knowledge and experience in human intelligence based on cognitive science. And we will end with the recent interest in neuro-symbolic or hybrid AI systems in which knowledge is the critical enabler for combining data-intensive statistical AI systems with symbolic AI systems which results in more capable AI systems that support more human-like intelligence.

This paper focuses on the first. It encompasses knowledge representation and reasoning, with a focus here on (non-classical) reasoning (a second companion paper will focus on representation). The focus is on the act of reasoning that determines if some data can be seen (or interpreted) as belonging to a particular class, not on long chains of reasoning using diverse knowledge. A significant weakness of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems relative to humans is the inability to apply existing knowledge to a new problem, or to a situation that varies from what they were programmed for or trained for (also called transfer ability in some contexts). This causes systems to fail to recognise objects or activities in new settings, or to fail to adapt skills to variations (Davis and Marcus, 2015; Ersen et al., 2017).

In this paper, we propose the beginnings of a formal framework for modeling narrative \textit{qua} narrative. Our framework affords the ability to discuss key qualities of stories and their communication, including the flow of information from a Narrator to a Reader, the evolution of a Reader's story model over time, and Reader uncertainty. We demonstrate its applicability to computational narratology by giving explicit algorithms for measuring the accuracy with which information was conveyed to the Reader and two novel measurements of story coherence.

Goal Recognition is the task of discerning the correct intended goal that an agent aims to achieve, given a set of possible goals, a domain model, and a sequence of observations as a sample of the plan being executed in the environment. Existing approaches assume that the possible goals are formalized as a conjunction in deterministic settings. In this paper, we develop a novel approach that is capable of recognizing temporally extended goals in Fully Observable Non-Deterministic (FOND) planning domain models, focusing on goals on finite traces expressed in Linear Temporal Logic (LTLf) and (Pure) Past Linear Temporal Logic (PLTLf). We empirically evaluate our goal recognition approach using different LTLf and PLTLf goals over six common FOND planning domain models, and show that our approach is accurate to recognize temporally extended goals at several levels of observability.

In recent years, the world has witnessed various primitives pertaining to the complexity of human behavior. Identifying an event in the presence of insufficient, incomplete, or tentative premises along with the constraints on resources such as time, data and memory is a vital aspect of an intelligent system. Data explosion presents one of the most challenging research issues for intelligent systems; to optimally represent and store this heterogeneous and voluminous data semantically to provide human behavior. There is a requirement of intelligent but personalized human behavior subject to constraints on resources and priority of the user. Knowledge, when represented in the form of an ontology, procures an intelligent response to a query posed by users; but it does not offer content in accordance with the user context. To this aim, we propose a model to quantify the user context and provide semantic contextual reasoning. A diagnostic belief algorithm (DBA) is also presented that identifies a given event and also computes the confidence of the decision as a function of available resources, premises, exceptions, and desired specificity. We conduct an empirical study in the domain of day-to-day routine queries and the experimental results show that the answer to queries and also its confidence varies with user context.

This work provides a starting point for researchers interested in gaining a deeper understanding of the big picture of artificial intelligence (AI). To this end, a narrative is conveyed that allows the reader to develop an objective view on current developments that is free from false promises that dominate public communication. An essential takeaway for the reader is that AI must be understood as an umbrella term encompassing a plethora of different methods, schools of thought, and their respective historical movements. Consequently, a bottom-up strategy is pursued in which the field of AI is introduced by presenting various aspects that are characteristic of the subject. This paper is structured in three parts: (i) Discussion of current trends revealing false public narratives, (ii) an introduction to the history of AI focusing on recurring patterns and main characteristics, and (iii) a critical discussion on the limitations of current methods in the context of the potential emergence of a strong(er) AI. It should be noted that this work does not cover any of these aspects holistically; rather, the content addressed is a selection made by the author and subject to a didactic strategy.

Conformance checking is a key process mining task for comparing the expected behavior captured in a process model and the actual behavior recorded in a log. While this problem has been extensively studied for pure control-flow processes, conformance checking with multi-perspective processes is still at its infancy. In this paper, we attack this challenging problem by considering processes that combine the data and control-flow dimensions. In particular, we adopt data Petri nets (DPNs) as the underlying reference formalism, and show how solid, well-established automated reasoning techniques can be effectively employed for computing conformance metrics and data-aware alignments. We do so by introducing the CoCoMoT (Computing Conformance Modulo Theories) framework, with a fourfold contribution. First, we show how SAT-based encodings studied in the pure control-flow setting can be lifted to our data-aware case, using SMT as the underlying formal and algorithmic framework. Second, we introduce a novel preprocessing technique based on a notion of property-preserving clustering, to speed up the computation of conformance checking outputs. Third, we provide a proof-of-concept implementation that uses a state-of-the-art SMT solver and report on preliminary experiments. Finally, we discuss how CoCoMoT directly lends itself to a number of further tasks, like multi- and anti-alignments, log analysis by clustering, and model repair.

Recent years have seen increasing popularity of logic-based reasoning systems, with research and industrial interest as well as many flourishing applications in the area of Knowledge Graphs. Despite that, one can observe a substantial lack of specific tools able to generate nontrivial reasoning settings and benchmark scenarios. As a consequence, evaluating, analysing and comparing reasoning systems is a complex task, especially when they embody sophisticated optimizations and execution techniques that leverage the theoretical underpinnings of the adopted logic fragment. In this paper, we aim at filling this gap by introducing iWarded, a system that can generate very large, complex, realistic reasoning settings to be used for the benchmarking of logic-based reasoning systems adopting Datalog+/-, a family of extensions of Datalog that has seen a resurgence in the last few years. In particular, iWarded generates reasoning settings for Warded Datalog+/-, a language with a very good tradeoff between computational complexity and expressive power. In the paper, we present the iWarded system and a set of novel theoretical results adopted to generate effective scenarios. As Datalog-based languages are of general interest and see increasing adoption, we believe that iWarded is a step forward in the empirical evaluation of current and future systems.

Clinicians often do not sufficiently adhere to evidence-based clinical guidelines in a manner sensitive to the context of each patient. It is important to detect such deviations, typically including redundant or missing actions, even when the detection is performed retrospectively, so as to inform both the attending clinician and policy makers. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to detect such deviations in a manner proportional to the level of the deviation, and not to simply use arbitrary cut-off values. In this study, we introduce a new approach for automated guideline-based quality assessment of the care process, the bidirectional knowledge-based assessment of compliance (BiKBAC) method. Our BiKBAC methodology assesses the degree of compliance when applying clinical guidelines, with respect to multiple different aspects of the guideline (e.g., the guideline's process and outcome objectives). The assessment is performed through a highly detailed, automated quality-assessment retrospective analysis, which compares a formal representation of the guideline and of its process and outcome intentions (we use the Asbru language for that purpose) with the longitudinal electronic medical record of its continuous application over a significant time period, using both a top-down and a bottom-up approach, which we explain in detail. Partial matches of the data to the process and to the outcome objectives are resolved using fuzzy temporal logic. We also introduce the DiscovErr system, which implements the BiKBAC approach, and present its detailed architecture. The DiscovErr system was evaluated in a separate study in the type 2 diabetes management domain, by comparing its performance to a panel of three clinicians, with highly encouraging results with respect to the completeness and correctness of its comments.

In this paper we establish a link between preferential semantics for description logics and self-organising maps, which have been proposed as possible candidates to explain the psychological mechanisms underlying category generalisation. In particular, we show that a concept-wise multipreference semantics, which takes into account preferences with respect to different concepts and has been recently proposed for defeasible description logics, can be used to to provide a logical interpretation of SOMs. We also provide a logical interpretation of SOMs in terms of a fuzzy description logic as well as a probabilistic account.