In this paper we present a hybrid active sampling strategy for pairwise preference aggregation, which aims at recovering the underlying rating of the test candidates from sparse and noisy pairwise labeling. Our method employs Bayesian optimization framework and Bradley-Terry model to construct the utility function, then to obtain the Expected Information Gain (EIG) of each pair. For computational efficiency, Gaussian-Hermite quadrature is used for estimation of EIG. In this work, a hybrid active sampling strategy is proposed, either using Global Maximum (GM) EIG sampling or Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) sampling in each trial, which is determined by the test budget. The proposed method has been validated on both simulated and real-world datasets, where it shows higher preference aggregation ability than the state-of-the-art methods.

We present a new algorithm to generate minimal, stable, and symbolic corrections to an input that will cause a neural network with ReLU activations to change its output. We argue that such a correction is a useful way to provide feedback to a user when the network's output is different from a desired output. Our algorithm generates such a correction by solving a series of linear constraint satisfaction problems. The technique is evaluated on three neural network models: one predicting whether an applicant will pay a mortgage, one predicting whether a first-order theorem can be proved efficiently by a solver using certain heuristics, and the final one judging whether a drawing is an accurate rendition of a canonical drawing of a cat.

Several algorithms for solving constraint satisfaction problems are based on survey propagation, a variational inference scheme used to obtain approximate marginal probability estimates for variable assignments. These marginals correspond to how frequently each variable is set to true among satisfying assignments, and are used to inform branching decisions during search; however, marginal estimates obtained via survey propagation are approximate and can be self-contradictory. We introduce a more general branching strategy based on streamlining constraints, which sidestep hard assignments to variables. We show that streamlined solvers consistently outperform decimation-based solvers on random k-SAT instances for several problem sizes, shrinking the gap between empirical performance and theoretical limits of satisfiability by 16.3% on average for k = 3, 4, 5, 6.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Crucially, the neural model uses miniKanren's

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

With such a representation, we can design branching strategies by inferring the marginal probabilities of each variable assignment.

Hardware synthesis from high-level descriptions remains fundamentally limited by the sequential optimization of interdependent design decisions. Current methodologies, including state-of-the-art high-level synthesis (HLS) tools, artificially separate implementation selection from scheduling, leading to suboptimal designs that cannot fully exploit modern FPGA heterogeneous architectures. Implementation selection is typically performed by ad-hoc pattern matching on operations, a process that does not consider the impact on scheduling. Subsequently, scheduling algorithms operate on fixed selection solutions with inaccurate delay estimates, which misses critical optimization opportunities from appropriately configured FPGA blocks like DSP slices. We present SkyEgg, a novel hardware synthesis framework that jointly optimizes implementation selection and scheduling using the e-graph data structure. Our key insight is that both algebraic transformations and hardware implementation choices can be uniformly represented as rewrite rules within an e-graph, modeling the complete design space of implementation candidates to be selected and scheduled together. First, SkyEgg constructs an e-graph from the input program. It then applies both algebraic and implementation rewrites through equality saturation. Finally, it formulates the joint optimization as a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) problem on the saturated e-graph. We provide both exact MILP solving and an efficient ASAP heuristic for scalable synthesis. Our evaluation on benchmarks from diverse applications targeting Xilinx Kintex UltraScale+ FPGAs demonstrates that SkyEgg achieves an average speedup of 3.01x over Vitis HLS, with improvements up to 5.22x for complex expressions.

One of the long-standing goals in optimisation and constraint programming is to describe a problem in natural language and automatically obtain an executable, efficient model. Large language models appear to bring this vision closer, showing impressive results in automatically generating models for classical benchmarks. However, much of this apparent success may derive from data contamination rather than genuine reasoning: many standard CP problems are likely included in the training data of these models. To examine this hypothesis, we systematically rephrased and perturbed a set of well-known CSPLib problems to preserve their structure while modifying their context and introducing misleading elements. We then compared the models produced by three representative LLMs across original and modified descriptions. Our qualitative analysis shows that while LLMs can produce syntactically valid and semantically plausible models, their performance drops sharply under contextual and linguistic variation, revealing shallow understanding and sensitivity to wording.

Deployed, autonomous AI systems must often evaluate multiple plausible courses of action (extended sequences of behavior) in novel or under-specified contexts. Despite extensive training, these systems will inevitably encounter scenarios where no available course of action fully satisfies all operational constraints (e.g., operating procedures, rules, laws, norms, and goals). To achieve goals in accordance with human expectations and values, agents must go beyond their trained policies and instead construct, evaluate, and justify candidate courses of action. These processes require contextual "knowledge" that may lie outside prior (policy) training. This paper characterizes requirements for agent decision making in these contexts. It also identifies the types of knowledge agents require to make decisions robust to agent goals and aligned with human expectations. Drawing on both analysis and empirical case studies, we examine how agents need to integrate normative, pragmatic, and situational understanding to select and then to pursue more aligned courses of action in complex, real-world environments.