Belief Propagation has been widely used for marginal inference, however it is slow on problems with large-domain variables and high-order factors. Previous work provides useful approximations to facilitate inference on such models, but lacks important anytime properties such as: 1) providing accurate and consistent marginals when stopped early, 2) improving the approximation when run longer, and 3) converging to the fixed point of BP. To this end, we propose a message passing algorithm that works on sparse (partially instantiated) domains, and converges to consistent marginals using dynamic message scheduling. The algorithm grows the sparse domains incrementally, selecting the next value to add using prioritization schemes based on the gradients of the marginal inference objective. Our experiments demonstrate local anytime consistency and fast convergence, providing significant speedups over BP to obtain low-error marginals: up to 25 times on grid models, and up to 6 times on a real-world natural language processing task.

In classical, AGM-style belief change, it is assumed that the underlying logic contains classical propositional logic. This is clearly a limiting assumption, particularly in Artificial Intelligence. Consequently there has been recent interest in studying belief change in approaches where the full expressivity of classical propositional logic is not obtained. In this paper we investigate belief contraction in Horn knowledge bases. We point out that the obvious extension to the Horn case, involving Horn remainder sets as a starting point, is problematic. Not only do Horn remainder sets have undesirable properties, but also some desirable Horn contraction functions are not captured by this approach. For Horn belief set contraction, we develop an account in terms of a model-theoretic characterisation involving weak remainder sets. Maxichoice and partial meet Horn contraction is specified, and we show that the problems arising with earlier work are resolved by these approaches. As well, constructions of the specific operators and sets of postulates are provided, and representation results are obtained. We also examine Horn package contraction, or contraction by a set of formulas. Again, we give a construction and postulate set, linking them via a representation result. Last, we investigate the closely-related notion of forgetting in Horn clauses. This work is arguably interesting since Horn clauses have found widespread use in AI; as well, the results given here may potentially be extended to other areas which make use of Horn-like reasoning, such as logic programming, rule-based systems, and description logics. Finally, since Horn reasoning is weaker than classical reasoning, this work sheds light on the foundations of belief change

Defeasible inheritance networks are a non-monotonic framework that deals with hierarchical knowledge. On the other hand, rational closure is acknowledged as a landmark of the preferential approach to non-monotonic reasoning. We will combine these two approaches and define a new non-monotonic closure operation for propositional knowledge bases that combines the advantages of both. Then we redefine such a procedure for Description Logics (DLs), a family of logics well-suited to model structured information. In both cases we will provide a simple reasoning method that is built on top of the classical entailment relation and, thus, is amenable of an implementation based on existing reasoners. Eventually, we evaluate our approach on well-known landmark test examples.

Computational models of goal recognition hold considerable promise for enhancing the capabilities of drama managers and director agents for interactive narratives. The problem of goal recognition, and its more general form plan recognition, has been the subject of extensive investigation in the AI community. However, there have been relatively few empirical investigations of goal recognition models in the intelligent narrative technologies community to date, and little is known about how computational models of interactive narrative can inform goal recognition. In this paper, we investigate a novel goal recognition model based on Markov Logic Networks (MLNs) that leverages narrative discovery events to enrich its representation of narrative state. An empirical evaluation shows that the enriched model outperforms a prior state-of-the-art MLN model in terms of accuracy, convergence rate, and the point of convergence.

One of Judea Pearl's many, many important contributions to the study of causality was the first attempt to use the mathematical tools of causal modeling to give an account of "actual causation", a notion that has been of considerable interest among philosophers and legal theorists (Pearl, 2000, Chapter 10). Pearl later revised his account of actual causation in joint work with Halpern (Halpern & Pearl, 2005). A number of authors (Hall, 2007; Halpern, 2008; Hitchcock, 2007; Menzies, 2004) have suggested that an account of actual causation must be sensitive to considerations of normality, as well as to causal structure. In (Halpern & Hitchcock, 2011), we suggest a way of incorporating considerations of normality into the Halpern-Pearl theory, and show how to extend the account to illuminate features of the psychology of causal judgment, as well as features of causal reasoning in the law. Our account of actual causation makes use of "extended causal models", which include both structural equations among a set of variables, and a partial preorder on possible worlds, which represents the relative "normality" of those worlds. We actually want to think of people as working with the structural equations and normality order to evaluate actual causation. However, consideration of even simple examples immediately suggests a problem. A direct representation of the equations and normality order is too cumbersome for cognitively limited agents to use effectively. If our account of actual causation is to be at all realistic as a model of human causal judgment, some form of compact representation will be needed.

The combined approach of the Qualitative Reasoning and Probabilistic Functions for the knowledge representation is proposed. The method aims at represent uncertain, qualitative knowledge that is essential for the moving blocks task's execution. The attempt to formalize the commonsense knowledge is performed with the Situation Calculus language for reasoning and robot's beliefs representation. The method is implemented in the Prolog programming language and tested for a specific simulated scenario. In most cases the implementation enables us to solve a given task, i.e., move blocks to desired positions. The example of robot's reasoning and main parts of the implemented program's code are presented.

Judging by the increasing impact of machine learning on large-scale data analysis in the last decade, one can anticipate a substantial growth in diversity of the machine learning applications for "big data" over the next decade. This exciting new opportunity, however, also raises many challenges. One of them is scaling inference within and training of graphical models. Typical ways to address this scaling issue are inference by approximate message passing, stochastic gradients, and MapReduce, among others. Often, we encounter inference and training problems with symmetries and redundancies in the graph structure. It has been shown that inference and training can indeed benefit from exploiting symmetries, for example by lifting loopy belief propagation (LBP).% can be lifted. That is, a model is compressed by grouping nodes together that send and receive identical messages so that a modified LBP running on the lifted graph yields the same marginals as LBP on the original one, but often in a fraction of time. By establishing a link between lifting and radix sort, we show that lifting is MapReduce-able and thus combine the two orthogonal approaches to scaling inference, namely exploiting symmetries and employing parallel computations.

Graphical models have gained a lot of attention recently as a tool for learning and representing dependencies among variables in multivariate data. Often, domain scientists are looking specifically for differences among the dependency networks of different conditions or populations (e.g. differences between regulatory networks of different species, or differences between dependency networks of diseased versus healthy populations). The standard method for finding these differences is to learn the dependency networks for each condition independently and compare them. We show that this approach is prone to high false discovery rates (low precision) that can render the analysis useless. We then show that by imposing a bias towards learning similar dependency networks for each condition the false discovery rates can be reduced to acceptable levels, at the cost of finding a reduced number of differences. Algorithms developed in the transfer learning literature can be used to vary the strength of the imposed similarity bias and provide a natural mechanism to smoothly adjust this differential precision-recall tradeoff to cater to the requirements of the analysis conducted. We present real case studies (oncological and neurological) where domain experts use the proposed technique to extract useful differential networks that shed light on the biological processes involved in cancer and brain function.

The intuitive notion of evidence has both semantic and syntactic features. In this paper, we develop an {\em evidence logic} for epistemic agents faced with possibly contradictory evidence from different sources. The logic is based on a neighborhood semantics, where a neighborhood $N$ indicates that the agent has reason to believe that the true state of the world lies in $N$. Further notions of relative plausibility between worlds and beliefs based on the latter ordering are then defined in terms of this evidence structure, yielding our intended models for evidence-based beliefs. In addition, we also consider a second more general flavor, where belief and plausibility are modeled using additional primitive relations, and we prove a representation theorem showing that each such general model is a $p$-morphic image of an intended one. This semantics invites a number of natural special cases, depending on how uniform we make the evidence sets, and how coherent their total structure. We give a structural study of the resulting `uniform' and `flat' models. Our main result are sound and complete axiomatizations for the logics of all four major model classes with respect to the modal language of evidence, belief and safe belief. We conclude with an outlook toward logics for the dynamics of changing evidence, and the resulting language extensions and connections with logics of plausibility change.

Logic programs under the stable model semantics, or answer-set programs, provide an expressive rule-based knowledge representation framework, featuring a formal, declarative and well-understood semantics. However, handling the evolution of rule bases is still a largely open problem. The AGM framework for belief change was shown to give inappropriate results when directly applied to logic programs under a non-monotonic semantics such as the stable models. The approaches to address this issue, developed so far, proposed update semantics based on manipulating the syntactic structure of programs and rules. More recently, AGM revision has been successfully applied to a significantly more expressive semantic characterisation of logic programs based on SE-models. This is an important step, as it changes the focus from the evolution of a syntactic representation of a rule base to the evolution of its semantic content. In this paper, we borrow results from the area of belief update to tackle the problem of updating (instead of revising) answer-set programs. We prove a representation theorem which makes it possible to constructively define any operator satisfying a set of postulates derived from Katsuno and Mendelzon's postulates for belief update. We define a specific operator based on this theorem, examine its computational complexity and compare the behaviour of this operator with syntactic rule update semantics from the literature. Perhaps surprisingly, we uncover a serious drawback of all rule update operators based on Katsuno and Mendelzon's approach to update and on SE-models.