We propose a new approach to the analysis of Loopy Belief Propagation (LBP) by establishing a formula that connects the Hessian of the Bethe free energy with the edge zeta function. The formula has a number of theoretical implications on LBP. It is applied to give a sufficient condition that the Hessian of the Bethe free energy is positive definite, which shows non-convexity for graphs with multiple cycles. The formula clarifies the relation between the local stability of a fixed point of LBP and local minima of the Bethe free energy. We also propose a new approach to the uniqueness of LBP fixed point, and show various conditions of uniqueness.

We propose a database model that allows users to annotate data with belief statements. Our motivation comes from scientific database applications where a community of users is working together to assemble, revise, and curate a shared data repository. As the community accumulates knowledge and the database content evolves over time, it may contain conflicting information and members can disagree on the information it should store. For example, Alice may believe that a tuple should be in the database, whereas Bob disagrees. He may also insert the reason why he thinks Alice believes the tuple should be in the database, and explain what he thinks the correct tuple should be instead. We propose a formal model for Belief Databases that interprets users' annotations as belief statements. These annotations can refer both to the base data and to other annotations. We give a formal semantics based on a fragment of multi-agent epistemic logic and define a query language over belief databases. We then prove a key technical result, stating that every belief database can be encoded as a canonical Kripke structure. We use this structure to describe a relational representation of belief databases, and give an algorithm for translating queries over the belief database into standard relational queries. Finally, we report early experimental results with our prototype implementation on synthetic data.

We address the problem of belief change in (nonmonotonic) logic programming under answer set semantics. Unlike previous approaches to belief change in logic programming, our formal techniques are analogous to those of distance-based belief revision in propositional logic. In developing our results, we build upon the model theory of logic programs furnished by SE models. Since SE models provide a formal, monotonic characterisation of logic programs, we can adapt techniques from the area of belief revision to belief change in logic programs. We introduce methods for revising and merging logic programs, respectively. For the former, we study both subset-based revision as well as cardinality-based revision, and we show that they satisfy the majority of the AGM postulates for revision. For merging, we consider operators following arbitration merging and IC merging, respectively. We also present encodings for computing the revision as well as the merging of logic programs within the same logic programming framework, giving rise to a direct implementation of our approach in terms of off-the-shelf answer set solvers. These encodings reflect in turn the fact that our change operators do not increase the complexity of the base formalism.

In this paper we propose a new family of Belief Conditioning Rules (BCRs) for belief revision. These rules are not directly related with the fusion of several sources of evidence but with the revision of a belief assignment available at a given time according to the new truth (i.e. conditioning constraint) one has about the space of solutions of the problem.

This paper describes a novel and competitive complete conformant planner. Key to the enhanced performance is an efficient encoding of belief states as disjunctive normal form formulae and an efficient procedure for computing the successor belief state. We provide experimental comparative evaluation on a large pool of benchmarks. The novel design provides great efficiency and enhanced scalability, along with the intuitive structure of disjunctive normal form representations.

In this paper we look at the problem of composing services that export their behavior in terms of a transition system, characterizing the choices of actions given to a client at each point in time. The composition consists of synthesizing an orchestrator that coordinates the available services so as to mimic the desired target service asked by the client. Specifically, in this paper we study the "conformant form" of the problem, where available services are partially controllable and partially observable, and hence, the orchestrator has to make its decisions exploiting the observations made so far only. We give a sound and complete procedure to synthesize the orchestrator in such case, and characterize the computational complexity of the problem. The procedure is based on working with belief (or knowledge) states, a standard technique to tackle conformant planning. Moreover we show that, although in general unavoidable, the powerset construction at the base of the belief state approach can be delegated to the symbolic manipulations of the game-structure model checking tool (TLV), which can be used to efficiently implement the orchestrator synthesis procedure.

Conformant planning is the problem of finding a sequence of actions for achieving a goal in the presence of uncertainty in the initial state or action effects. The problem has been approached as a path-finding problem in belief space where good belief representations and heuristics are critical for scaling up. In this work, a different formulation is introduced for conformant problems with deterministic actions where they are automatically converted into classical ones and solved by an off-the-shelf classical planner. The translation maps literals L and sets of assumptions t about the initial situation, into new literals KL/t that represent that L must be true if t is initially true. We lay out a general translation scheme that is sound and establish the conditions under which the translation is also complete. We show that the complexity of the complete translation is exponential in a parameter of the problem called the conformant width, which for most benchmarks is bounded. The planner based on this translation exhibits good performance in comparison with existing planners, and is the basis for T0, the best performing planner in the Conformant Track of the 2006 International Planning Competition.

The problem of revising an ontology consistently is closely related to the problem of belief revision which has been widely discussed in the literature. Some syntax-based belief revision operators have been adapted to revise ontologies in Description Logics (DLs). However, these operators remove the whole axioms to resolve logical contradictions and thus are not fine-grained. In this paper, we propose three model-based revision operators to revise terminologies in DLs. We show that one of them is more rational than others by comparing their logical properties. Therefore, we focus on this revision operator. We also consider the problem of computing the result of revision by our operator with the help of the notion of concept forgetting. Finally, we analyze the computational complexity of our revision operator.

Standard belief contraction assumes an underlying logic containing full classical propositional logic, but there are good reasons for considering contraction in less expressive logics. In this paper we focus on Horn logic. In addition to being of interest in its own right, our choice is motivated by the use of Horn logic in several areas, including ontology reasoning in description logics. We consider three versions of contraction: entailment-based and inconsistency-basedcontraction (e-contraction and i-contraction, resp.), introduced by Delgrande for Horn logic, and package contraction (p-contraction), studied by Fuhrmann and Hansson for the classical case. We show that the standard basic form of contraction, partial meet, is too strong in the Horn case. We define more appropriate notions of basic contraction for all three types above, and provide associated representation results in terms of postulates. Our results stand in contrast to Delgrande's conjectures that orderly maxichoice is the appropriate contraction for both e- and i-contraction. Our interest in p-contraction stems from its relationship with an important reasoning task in ontological reasoning:repairing the subsumption hierarchy in EL. This is closely related to p-contraction with sets of basic Horn clauses (Horn clauses of the form p -> q). We show that this restricted version of p-contraction can also be represented as i-contraction.

Thanks to recent advances, AI Planning has become the underlying technique for several applications. Figuring prominently among these is automated Web Service Composition (WSC) at the "capability" level, where services are described in terms of preconditions and effects over ontological concepts. A key issue in addressing WSC as planning is that ontologies are not only formal vocabularies; they also axiomatize the possible relationships between concepts. Such axioms correspond to what has been termed "integrity constraints" in the actions and change literature, and applying a web service is essentially a belief update operation. The reasoning required for belief update is known to be harder than reasoning in the ontology itself. The support for belief update is severely limited in current planning tools. Our first contribution consists in identifying an interesting special case of WSC which is both significant and more tractable. The special case, which we term "forward effects", is characterized by the fact that every ramification of a web service application involves at least one new constant generated as output by the web service. We show that, in this setting, the reasoning required for belief update simplifies to standard reasoning in the ontology itself. This relates to, and extends, current notions of "message-based" WSC, where the need for belief update is removed by a strong (often implicit or informal) assumption of "locality" of the individual messages. We clarify the computational properties of the forward effects case, and point out a strong relation to standard notions of planning under uncertainty, suggesting that effective tools for the latter can be successfully adapted to address the former. Furthermore, we identify a significant sub-case, named "strictly forward effects", where an actual compilation into planning under uncertainty exists. This enables us to exploit off-the-shelf planning tools to solve message-based WSC in a general form that involves powerful ontologies, and requires reasoning about partial matches between concepts. We provide empirical evidence that this approach may be quite effective, using Conformant-FF as the underlying planner.