Creating a domain model, even for classical, domain-independent planning, is a notoriously hard knowledge-engineering task. A natural approach to solve this problem is to learn a domain model from observations. However, model learning approaches frequently do not provide safety guarantees: the learned model may assume actions are applicable when they are not, and may incorrectly capture actions' effects. This may result in generating plans that will fail when executed. In some domains such failures are not acceptable, due to the cost of failure or inability to replan online after failure. In such settings, all learning must be done offline, based on some observations collected, e.g., by some other agents or a human. Through this learning, the task is to generate a plan that is guaranteed to be successful. This is called the model-free planning problem. Prior work proposed an algorithm for solving the model-free planning problem in classical planning. However, they were limited to learning grounded domains, and thus they could not scale. We generalize this prior work and propose the first safe model-free planning algorithm for lifted domains. We prove the correctness of our approach, and provide a statistical analysis showing that the number of trajectories needed to solve future problems with high probability is linear in the potential size of the domain model. We also present experiments on twelve IPC domains showing that our approach is able to learn the real action model in all cases with at most two trajectories.

Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com. Members of the Problem Solvers Caucus announced on Tuesday announced their support of the $973 billion bipartisan deal announced last month by a bipartisan group of senators. The caucus, which is comprised of a bipartisan group of 58 representatives, said it "strongly supports" the Senate infrastructure framework that is "closely aligned with our own'Building Bridges' proposal." Rep. Josh Gottheimer, a co-chair from the caucus, said the group worked with colleagues in the Senate on the framework.

Human reasoning can often be understood as an interplay between two systems: the intuitive and associative ("System 1") and the deliberative and logical ("System 2"). Neural sequence models -- which have been increasingly successful at performing complex, structured tasks -- exhibit the advantages and failure modes of System 1: they are fast and learn patterns from data, but are often inconsistent and incoherent. In this work, we seek a lightweight, training-free means of improving existing System 1-like sequence models by adding System 2-inspired logical reasoning. We explore several variations on this theme in which candidate generations from a neural sequence model are examined for logical consistency by a symbolic reasoning module, which can either accept or reject the generations. Our approach uses neural inference to mediate between the neural System 1 and the logical System 2. Results in robust story generation and grounded instruction-following show that this approach can increase the coherence and accuracy of neurally-based generations.

Many games often share common ideas or aspects between them, such as their rules, controls, or playing area. However, in the context of General Game Playing (GGP) for board games, this area remains under-explored. We propose to formalise the notion of "game concept", inspired by terms generally used by game players and designers. Through the Ludii General Game System, we describe concepts for several levels of abstraction, such as the game itself, the moves played, or the states reached. This new GGP feature associated with the ludeme representation of games opens many new lines of research. The creation of a hyper-agent selector, the transfer of AI learning between games, or explaining AI techniques using game terms, can all be facilitated by the use of game concepts. Other applications which can benefit from game concepts are also discussed, such as the generation of plausible reconstructed rules for incomplete ancient games, or the implementation of a board game recommender system.

In most contemporary approaches to decision making, a decision problem is described by a sets of states and set of outcomes, and a rich set of acts, which are functions from states to outcomes over which the decision maker (DM) has preferences. Most interesting decision problems, however, do not come with a state space and an outcome space. Indeed, in complex problems it is often far from clear what the state and outcome spaces would be. We present an alternative foundation for decision making, in which the primitive objects of choice are syntactic programs. A representation theorem is proved in the spirit of standard representation theorems, showing that if the DM's preference relation on objects of choice satisfies appropriate axioms, then there exist a set S of states, a set O of outcomes, a way of interpreting the objects of choice as functions from S to O, a probability on S, and a utility function on O, such that the DM prefers choice a to choice b if and only if the expected utility of a is higher than that of b. Thus, the state space and outcome space are subjective, just like the probability and utility; they are not part of the description of the problem. In principle, a modeler can test for SEU behavior without having access to states or outcomes. We illustrate the power of our approach by showing that it can capture decision makers who are subject to framing effects.

Reasoning on defeasible knowledge is a topic of interest in the area of description logics, as it is related to the need of representing exceptional instances in knowledge bases. In this direction, in our previous works we presented a framework for representing (contextualized) OWL RL knowledge bases with a notion of justified exceptions on defeasible axioms: reasoning in such framework is realized by a translation into ASP programs. The resulting reasoning process for OWL RL, however, introduces a complex encoding in order to capture reasoning on the negative information needed for reasoning on exceptions. In this paper, we apply the justified exception approach to knowledge bases in $\textit{DL-Lite}_{\cal R}$, i.e., the language underlying OWL QL. We provide a definition for $\textit{DL-Lite}_{\cal R}$ knowledge bases with defeasible axioms and study their semantic and computational properties. In particular, we study the effects of exceptions over unnamed individuals. The limited form of $\textit{DL-Lite}_{\cal R}$ axioms allows us to formulate a simpler ASP encoding, where reasoning on negative information is managed by direct rules. The resulting materialization method gives rise to a complete reasoning procedure for instance checking in $\textit{DL-Lite}_{\cal R}$ with defeasible axioms. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

Current domain-independent, classical planners require symbolic models of the problem domain and instance as input, resulting in a knowledge acquisition bottleneck. Meanwhile, although deep learning has achieved significant success in many fields, the knowledge is encoded in a subsymbolic representation which is incompatible with symbolic systems such as planners. We propose Latplan, an unsupervised architecture combining deep learning and classical planning. Given only an unlabeled set of image pairs showing a subset of transitions allowed in the environment (training inputs), Latplan learns a complete propositional PDDL action model of the environment. Later, when a pair of images representing the initial and the goal states (planning inputs) is given, Latplan finds a plan to the goal state in a symbolic latent space and returns a visualized plan execution. We evaluate Latplan using image-based versions of 6 planning domains: 8-puzzle, 15-Puzzle, Blocksworld, Sokoban and Two variations of LightsOut.

We present ASDiv (Academia Sinica Diverse MWP Dataset), a diverse (in terms of both language patterns and problem types) English math word problem (MWP) corpus for evaluating the capability of various MWP solvers. Existing MWP corpora for studying AI progress remain limited either in language usage patterns or in problem types. We thus present a new English MWP corpus with 2,305 MWPs that cover more text patterns and most problem types taught in elementary school. Each MWP is annotated with its problem type and grade level (for indicating the level of difficulty). Furthermore, we propose a metric to measure the lexicon usage diversity of a given MWP corpus, and demonstrate that ASDiv is more diverse than existing corpora. Experiments show that our proposed corpus reflects the true capability of MWP solvers more faithfully.

What does it take to deliver a machine learning (ML) application that provides real business value to your company? Once you've done that and proved the substantial benefit that ML can bring to the company, how do you expand that effort to additional use cases, and really start to fulfill the promise of ML? And then, how do you scale up ML across the organization and streamline the ML development and delivery process to standardize ML initiatives, share and reuse work and iterate quickly? What are the best practices that some of the world's leading tech companies have adopted? Over a series of articles, my goal is to explore these fascinating questions and understand the challenges and learnings along the way.

Graphs have become the best way we know of representing knowledge. The computing community has investigated and developed the support for managing graphs by means of digital technology. Graph databases and knowledge graphs surface as the most successful solutions to this program. This tutorial will provide a conceptual map of the data management tasks underlying these developments, paying particular attention to data models and query languages for graphs.