Design-by-Analogy (DbA) is a design methodology, wherein new solutions are generated in a target domain based on inspiration drawn from a source domain through cross-domain analogical reasoning [1, 2, 3]. DbA is an active research area in engineering design and various methods and tools have been proposed to support the implement of its process [4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. Studies have shown that DbA can help designers mitigate design fixation [9] and improve design ideation outcomes [10]. Fig.1 presents an example of DbA applications [11]. This case aims to solve an engineering design problem: How might we rectify the loud sonic boom generated when trains travel at high speeds through tunnels in atmospheric conditions [11, 12]? For potential design solutions to this problem, engineers explored structures in other design fields than trains or in the nature that effectively "break" the sonic-boom effect. When looking into the nature, engineers discovered that kingfisher birds could slice through the air and dive into the water at extremely high speeds to catch prey while barely making a splash. By analogy, engineers re-designed the train's front-end nose to mimic the geometry of the kingfisher's beak. This analogical design reduced noise and eliminated tunnel booms.

A sememe is defined as the minimum semantic unit in linguistics. Sememe knowledge bases (SKBs), which comprise words annotated with sememes, enable sememes to be applied to natural language processing. So far a large body of research has showcased the unique advantages and effectiveness of SKBs in various tasks. However, most languages have no SKBs, and manual construction of SKBs is time-consuming and labor-intensive. To tackle this challenge, we propose a simple and fully automatic method of building an SKB via an existing dictionary. We use this method to build an English SKB and a French SKB, and conduct comprehensive evaluations from both intrinsic and extrinsic perspectives. Experimental results demonstrate that the automatically built English SKB is even superior to HowNet, the most widely used SKB that takes decades to build manually. And both the English and French SKBs can bring obvious performance enhancement in multiple downstream tasks. All the code and data of this paper (except the copyrighted dictionaries) can be obtained at https://github.com/thunlp/DictSKB.

Over the past decades, numerous practical applications of machine learning techniques have shown the potential of data-driven approaches in a large number of computing fields. Machine learning is increasingly included in computing curricula in higher education, and a quickly growing number of initiatives are expanding it in K-12 computing education, too. As machine learning enters K-12 computing education, understanding how intuition and agency in the context of such systems is developed becomes a key research area. But as schools and teachers are already struggling with integrating traditional computational thinking and traditional artificial intelligence into school curricula, understanding the challenges behind teaching machine learning in K-12 is an even more daunting challenge for computing education research. Despite the central position of machine learning in the field of modern computing, the computing education research body of literature contains remarkably few studies of how people learn to train, test, improve, and deploy machine learning systems. This is especially true of the K-12 curriculum space. This article charts the emerging trajectories in educational practice, theory, and technology related to teaching machine learning in K-12 education. The article situates the existing work in the context of computing education in general, and describes some differences that K-12 computing educators should take into account when facing this challenge. The article focuses on key aspects of the paradigm shift that will be required in order to successfully integrate machine learning into the broader K-12 computing curricula. A crucial step is abandoning the belief that rule-based "traditional" programming is a central aspect and building block in developing next generation computational thinking.

Providing meaningful and actionable explanations to end-users is a fundamental prerequisite for implementing explainable intelligent systems in the real world. Explainability is a situated interaction between a user and the AI system rather than being static design principles. The content of explanations is context-dependent and must be defined by evidence about the user and its context. This paper seeks to operationalize this concept by proposing a formative architecture that defines the explanation space from a user-inspired perspective. The architecture comprises five intertwined components to outline explanation requirements for a task: (1) the end-users mental models, (2) the end-users cognitive process, (3) the user interface, (4) the human-explainer agent, and the (5) agent process. We first define each component of the architecture. Then we present the Abstracted Explanation Space, a modeling tool that aggregates the architecture's components to support designers in systematically aligning explanations with the end-users work practices, needs, and goals. It guides the specifications of what needs to be explained (content - end-users mental model), why this explanation is necessary (context - end-users cognitive process), to delimit how to explain it (format - human-explainer agent and user interface), and when should the explanations be given. We then exemplify the tool's use in an ongoing case study in the aircraft maintenance domain. Finally, we discuss possible contributions of the tool, known limitations/areas for improvement, and future work to be done.

We focus on a type of linguistic formal reasoning where the goal is to reason over explicit knowledge in the form of natural language facts and rules (Clark et al., 2020). A recent work, named PRover (Saha et al., 2020), performs such reasoning by answering a question and also generating a proof graph that explains the answer. However, compositional reasoning is not always unique and there may be multiple ways of reaching the correct answer. Thus, in our work, we address a new and challenging problem of generating multiple proof graphs for reasoning over natural language rule-bases. Each proof provides a different rationale for the answer, thereby improving the interpretability of such reasoning systems. In order to jointly learn from all proof graphs and exploit the correlations between multiple proofs for a question, we pose this task as a set generation problem over structured output spaces where each proof is represented as a directed graph. We propose two variants of a proof-set generation model, multiPRover. Our first model, Multilabel-multiPRover, generates a set of proofs via multi-label classification and implicit conditioning between the proofs; while the second model, Iterative-multiPRover, generates proofs iteratively by explicitly conditioning on the previously generated proofs. Experiments on multiple synthetic, zero-shot, and human-paraphrased datasets reveal that both multiPRover models significantly outperform PRover on datasets containing multiple gold proofs. Iterative-multiPRover obtains state-of-the-art proof F1 in zero-shot scenarios where all examples have single correct proofs. It also generalizes better to questions requiring higher depths of reasoning where multiple proofs are more frequent. Our code and models are publicly available at https://github.com/swarnaHub/multiPRover

Question answering (QA) systems provide a way of querying the information available in various formats including, but not limited to, unstructured and structured data in natural languages. It constitutes a considerable part of conversational artificial intelligence (AI) which has led to the introduction of a special research topic on Conversational Question Answering (CQA), wherein a system is required to understand the given context and then engages in multi-turn QA to satisfy the user's information needs. Whilst the focus of most of the existing research work is subjected to single-turn QA, the field of multi-turn QA has recently grasped attention and prominence owing to the availability of large-scale, multi-turn QA datasets and the development of pre-trained language models. With a good amount of models and research papers adding to the literature every year recently, there is a dire need of arranging and presenting the related work in a unified manner to streamline future research. This survey, therefore, is an effort to present a comprehensive review of the state-of-the-art research trends of CQA primarily based on reviewed papers from 2016-2021. Our findings show that there has been a trend shift from single-turn to multi-turn QA which empowers the field of Conversational AI from different perspectives. This survey is intended to provide an epitome for the research community with the hope of laying a strong foundation for the field of CQA.

The main objective of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is to provide effective explanations for black-box classifiers. The existing literature lists many desirable properties for explanations to be useful, but there is no consensus on how to quantitatively evaluate explanations in practice. Moreover, explanations are typically used only to inspect black-box models, and the proactive use of explanations as a decision support is generally overlooked. Among the many approaches to XAI, a widely adopted paradigm is Local Linear Explanations - with LIME and SHAP emerging as state-of-the-art methods. We show that these methods are plagued by many defects including unstable explanations, divergence of actual implementations from the promised theoretical properties, and explanations for the wrong label. This highlights the need to have standard and unbiased evaluation procedures for Local Linear Explanations in the XAI field. In this paper we address the problem of identifying a clear and unambiguous set of metrics for the evaluation of Local Linear Explanations. This set includes both existing and novel metrics defined specifically for this class of explanations. All metrics have been included in an open Python framework, named LEAF. The purpose of LEAF is to provide a reference for end users to evaluate explanations in a standardised and unbiased way, and to guide researchers towards developing improved explainable techniques.

In this course, we are going to show you how to SUPERCHARGE your Power BI skills, and learn to create INTERACTIVE Dashboards and INCREDIBLE reports. Microsoft Power BI is the easiest to use reporting, data analysis, and interactive dashboard tool available today! Microsoft Power BI is available for free – all you need to do is sign up! There is no coding required! Power BI allows you to do that but it's not necessary.

Following work on joint object-action representations, the functional object-oriented network (FOON) was introduced as a knowledge graph representation for robots. Taking the form of a bipartite graph, a FOON contains symbolic or high-level information that would be pertinent to a robot's understanding of its environment and tasks in a way that mirrors human understanding of actions. In this work, we outline a road-map for future development of FOON and its application in robotic systems for task planning as well as knowledge acquisition from demonstration. We propose preliminary ideas to show how a FOON can be created in a real-world scenario with a robot and human teacher in a way that can jointly augment existing knowledge in a FOON and teach a robot the skills it needs to replicate the demonstrated actions and solve a given manipulation problem.

Over the last few months, I've noticed a significant reduction in the heady optimism of articles and opinion pieces in the press on the subject of artificial intelligence. In fact, many are now questioning the timescales given by manufacturers for the introduction of high-profile applications such as autonomous vehicles based on AI. If you are of a certain age, you might feel we've been here before… Unlike most other new technologies, artificial intelligence and robotics have gone through more than one'hype cycle' – overexcitement at the possibilities, with rapid development followed by a reality-check and a period of disappointment (the so-called AI Winter) before the next'breakthrough'. A new technology introduction, the invention of the airplane for example, normally works from the outset. The Wright brothers' first effort actually flew; not very far it's true, but it did achieve what its designers wanted and impressed the general public. Sure, visionaries saw the potential and I've no doubt there was much talk about a future of mass travel over large distances – early 20th century newspaper hype – long before it became a reality. Aircraft development has been an almost continuous process since then, with dreams becoming reality at a breathless pace culminating in the supersonic Concorde and vertical take-off/landing (VTOL) military jets. Communication is another example: we've gone from a basic voice telephone network in the 1950s to the Smartphone and the Internet in less than 50 years.