Integrating the expressive power of first-order logic with the ability of probabilistic reasoning of Bayesian networks has attracted the interest of many researchers for decades. We present an approach to integration that translates logical knowledge into Bayesian networks and uses Bayesian network composition to build a uniform representation that supports both logical and probabilistic reasoning. In particular, we propose a new way of translation of logical knowledge, relation search. Through the use of the proposed framework, without learning new languages or tools, modelers are allowed to 1) specify special knowledge using the most suitable languages, while reasoning in a uniform engine; 2) make use of pre-existing logical knowledge bases for probabilistic reasoning (to complete the model or minimize potential inconsistencies).

From an automated planning perspective the problem of practical mobile robot control in realistic environments poses many important and contrary challenges. On the one hand, the planning process must be lightweight, robust, and timely. Over the lifetime of the robot it must always respond quickly with new plans that accommodate exogenous events, changing objectives, and the underlying unpredictability of the environment. On the other hand, in order to promote efficient behaviours the planning process must perform computationally expensive reasoning about contingencies and possible revisions of subjective beliefs according to quantitatively modelled uncertainty in acting and sensing. Towards addressing these challenges, we develop a continual planning approach that switches between using a fast satisficing "classical" planner, to decide on the overall strategy, and decision-theoretic planning to solve small abstract subproblems where deeper consideration of the sensing model is both practical, and can significantly impact overall performance. We evaluate our approach in large problems from a realistic robot exploration domain.

Peer reviewing is the key ingredient of evaluating the quality of scientific work. Based on the review scores assigned by the individual reviewers to the submissions, program committees of conferences and journal editors decide which papers to accept for publication and which to reject. However, some reviewers may be more rigorous than others, they may be biased one way or the other, and they often have highly subjective preferences over the papers they review. Moreover, each reviewer usually has only a very local view, as he or she evaluates only a small fraction of the submissions. Despite all these shortcomings, the review scores obtained need to be aggregrated in order to globally rank all submissions and to make the acceptance/rejection decision. A common method is to simply take the average of each submission's review scores, possibly weighted by the reviewers' confidence levels. Unfortunately, the global ranking thus produced often suffers a certain unfairness, as the reviewers' biases and limitations are not taken into account. We propose a method for calibrating the scores of reviewers that are potentially biased and blindfolded by having only partial information. Our method uses a maximum likelihood estimator, which estimates both the bias of each individual reviewer and the unknown "ideal" score of each submission. This yields a quadratic program whose solution transforms the individual review scores into calibrated, globally comparable scores. We argue why our method results in a fairer and more reasonable global ranking than simply taking the average of scores. To show its usefulness, we test our method empirically using real-world data.

Sentiment analysis is the task of determining the attitude (positive or negative) of documents. While the polarity of words in the documents is informative for this task, polarity of some words cannot be determined without domain knowledge. Detecting word polarity thus poses a challenge for multiple-domain sentiment analysis. Previous approaches tackle this problem with transfer learning techniques, but they cannot handle multiple source domains and multiple target domains. This paper proposes a novel Bayesian probabilistic model to handle multiple source and multiple target domains. In this model, each word is associated with three factors: Domain label, domain dependence/independence and word polarity. We derive an efficient algorithm using Gibbs sampling for inferring the parameters of the model, from both labeled and unlabeled texts. Using real data, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our model in a document polarity classification task compared with a method not considering the differences between domains. Moreover our method can also tell whether each word's polarity is domain-dependent or domain-independent. This feature allows us to construct a word polarity dictionary for each domain.

We focus on a class of models used for representing the dynamics between a discrete set of probabilistic events in a continuous-time setting. The proposed framework offers tractable learning and inference procedures and provides compact state representations for processes which exhibit variable delays between events. The approach is applied to a heart sound labeling task that exhibits long-range dependencies on previous events, and in which explicit modeling of the rhythm timings is justifiable by cardiological principles.

In this paper, we propose a new unsupervised approach for word segmentation. The core idea of our approach is a novel word induction criterion called WordRank, which estimates the goodness of word hypotheses (character or phoneme sequences). We devise a method to derive exterior word boundary information from the link structures of adjacent word hypotheses and incorporate interior word boundary information to complete the model. In light of WordRank, word segmentation can be modeled as an optimization problem. A Viterbi-styled algorithm is developed for the search of the optimal segmentation. Extensive experiments conducted on phonetic transcripts as well as standard Chinese and Japanese data sets demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. On the standard Brent version of Bernstein-Ratner corpora, our approach outperforms the state-of-the-art Bayesian models by more than 3%. Plus, our approach is simpler and more efficient than the Bayesian methods. Consequently, our approach is more suitable for real-world applications.

We present a novel approach for identifying exact and approximate behavioral equivalence between models of agents. This is significant because both decision making and game play in multiagent settings must contend with behavioral models of other agents in order to predict their actions. One approach that reduces the complexity of the model space is to group models that are behaviorally equivalent. Identifying equivalence between models requires solving them and comparing entire policy trees. Because the trees grow exponentially with the horizon, our approach is to focus on partial policy trees for comparison and determining the distance between updated beliefs at the leaves of the trees. We propose a principled way to determine how much of the policy trees to consider, which trades off solution quality for efficiency. We investigate this approach in the context of the interactive dynamic influence diagram and evaluate its performance.

We present a spectrum-based, sequential software debugging approach coined Sequoia, that greedily selects tests out of a suite of tests to narrow down the set of diagnostic candidates with a minimum number of tests. Sequoia handles multiple faults, that can be intermittent, at polynomial time and space complexity, due to a novel, approximate diagnostic entropy estimation approach, which considers the subset of diagnoses that cover almost all Bayesian posterior probability mass. Synthetic experiments show that Sequoia achieves much better diagnostic uncertainty reduction compared to random test sequencing.Real programs, taken from the Software Infrastructure Repository, confirm Sequoia's better performance, with a test reduction up to 80% compared to random test sequences.

Computer Go presents a challenging problem for machine learning agents. With the number of possible board states estimated to be larger than the number of hydrogen atoms in the universe, learning effective policies or board evaluation functions is extremely difficult. In this paper we describe Cortigo, a system that efficiently and autonomously learns useful generalizations for large state-space classification problems such as Go. Cortigo uses a hierarchical generative model loosely related to the human visual cortex to recognize Go board positions well enough to suggest promising next moves. We begin by briefly describing and providing motivation for research in the computer Go domain. We describe Cortigo’s ability to learn predictive models based on large subsets of the Go board and demonstrate how using Cortigo’s learned models as additive knowledge in a state-of-the-art computer Go player (Fuego) significantly improves its playing strength.

Consider the problem of protecting endangered species by selecting patches of land to be used for conservation purposes. Typically, the availability of patches changes over time, and recommendations must be made dynamically. This is a challenging prototypical example of a sequential optimization problem under uncertainty in computational sustainability. Existing techniques do not scale to problems of realistic size. In this paper, we develop an efficient algorithm for adaptively making recommendations for dynamic conservation planning, and prove that it obtains near-optimal performance. We further evaluate our approach on a detailed reserve design case study of conservation planning for three rare species in the Pacific Northwest of the United States.