Classical semantics assumes that one can model reference, predication and quantification with respect to a fixed domain of precise referent objects. Non-logical terms and quantification are then interpreted directly in terms of elements and subsets of this domain. We explore ways to generalise this classical picture of precise predicates and objects to account for variability of meaning due to factors such as vagueness, context and diversity of definitions or opinions. Both names and predicative expressions can be given either multiple semantic referents or be associated with semantic referents that incorporate some model of variability. We present a semantic framework, Variable Reference Semantics, that can accommodate several modes of variability in relation to both predicates and objects.

Advancements in simulation and formal methods-guided environment sampling have enabled the rigorous evaluation of machine learning models in a number of safety-critical scenarios, such as autonomous driving. Application of these environment sampling techniques towards improving the learned models themselves has yet to be fully exploited. In this work, we introduce a novel method for improving imitation-learned models in a semantically aware fashion by leveraging specification-guided sampling techniques as a means of aggregating expert data in new environments. Specifically, we create a set of formal specifications as a means of partitioning the space of possible environments into semantically similar regions, and identify elements of this partition where our learned imitation behaves most differently from the expert. We then aggregate expert data on environments in these identified regions, leading to more accurate imitation of the expert's behavior semantics. We instantiate our approach in a series of experiments in the CARLA driving simulator, and demonstrate that our approach leads to models that are more accurate than those learned with other environment sampling methods.

Answer set programming is a declarative logic programming paradigm geared towards solving difficult combinatorial search problems. While different logic programs can encode the same problem, their performance may vary significantly. It is not always easy to identify which version of the program performs the best. We present the system Predictor (and its algorithmic backend) for estimating the grounding size of programs, a metric that can influence a performance of a system processing a program. We evaluate the impact of Predictor when used as a guide for rewritings produced by the answer set programming rewriting tools Projector and Lpopt. The results demonstrate potential to this approach.

Weighted knowledge bases for description logics with typicality under a "concept-wise" multi-preferential semantics provide a logical interpretation of MultiLayer Perceptrons. In this context, Answer Set Programming (ASP) has been shown to be suitable for addressing defeasible reasoning in the finitely many-valued case, providing a $\Pi^p_2$ upper bound on the complexity of the problem, nonetheless leaving unknown the exact complexity and only providing a proof-of-concept implementation. This paper fulfils the lack by providing a $P^{NP[log]}$-completeness result and new ASP encodings that deal with weighted knowledge bases with large search spaces.

The topic of comprehensibility of machine-learned theories has recently drawn increasing attention. Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) uses logic programming to derive logic theories from small data based on abduction and induction techniques. Learned theories are represented in the form of rules as declarative descriptions of obtained knowledge. In earlier work, the authors provided the first evidence of a measurable increase in human comprehension based on machine-learned logic rules for simple classification tasks. In a later study, it was found that the presentation of machine-learned explanations to humans can produce both beneficial and harmful effects in the context of game learning. We continue our investigation of comprehensibility by examining the effects of the ordering of concept presentations on human comprehension. In this work, we examine the explanatory effects of curriculum order and the presence of machine-learned explanations for sequential problem-solving. We show that 1) there exist tasks A and B such that learning A before B has a better human comprehension with respect to learning B before A and 2) there exist tasks A and B such that the presence of explanations when learning A contributes to improved human comprehension when subsequently learning B. We propose a framework for the effects of sequential teaching on comprehension based on an existing definition of comprehensibility and provide evidence for support from data collected in human trials. Empirical results show that sequential teaching of concepts with increasing complexity a) has a beneficial effect on human comprehension and b) leads to human re-discovery of divide-and-conquer problem-solving strategies, and c) studying machine-learned explanations allows adaptations of human problem-solving strategy with better performance.

Non-additive uncertainty theories, typically possibility theory, belief functions and imprecise probabilities share a common feature with modal logic: the duality properties between possibility and necessity measures, belief and plausibility functions as well as between upper and lower probabilities extend the duality between possibility and necessity modalities to the graded environment. It has been shown that the all-or-nothing version of possibility theory can be exactly captured by a minimal epistemic logic (MEL) that uses a very small fragment of the KD modal logic, without resorting to relational semantics. Besides, the case of belief functions has been studied independently, and a belief function logic has been obtained by extending the modal logic S5 to graded modalities using {\L}ukasiewicz logic, albeit using relational semantics. This paper shows that a simpler belief function logic can be devised by adding {\L}ukasiewicz logic on top of MEL. It allows for a more natural semantics in terms of Shafer basic probability assignments.

Detecting sets of relevant patterns from a given dataset is an important challenge in data mining. The relevance of a pattern, also called utility in the literature, is a subjective measure and can be actually assessed from very different points of view. Rule-based languages like Answer Set Programming (ASP) seem well suited for specifying user-provided criteria to assess pattern utility in a form of constraints; moreover, declarativity of ASP allows for a very easy switch between several criteria in order to analyze the dataset from different points of view. In this paper, we make steps toward extending the notion of High Utility Pattern Mining (HUPM); in particular we introduce a new framework that allows for new classes of utility criteria not considered in the previous literature. We also show how recent extensions of ASP with external functions can support a fast and effective encoding and testing of the new framework. To demonstrate the potential of the proposed framework, we exploit it as a building block for the definition of an innovative method for predicting ICU admission for COVID-19 patients. Finally, an extensive experimental activity demonstrates both from a quantitative and a qualitative point of view the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Explaining why a database query result is obtained is an essential task towards the goal of Explainable AI, especially nowadays where expressive database query languages such as Datalog play a critical role in the development of ontology-based applications. A standard way of explaining a query result is the so-called why-provenance, which essentially provides information about the witnesses to a query result in the form of subsets of the input database that are sufficient to derive that result. To our surprise, despite the fact that the notion of why-provenance for Datalog queries has been around for decades and intensively studied, its computational complexity remains unexplored. The goal of this work is to fill this apparent gap in the why-provenance literature. Towards this end, we pinpoint the data complexity of why-provenance for Datalog queries and key subclasses thereof. The takeaway of our work is that why-provenance for recursive queries, even if the recursion is limited to be linear, is an intractable problem, whereas for non-recursive queries is highly tractable. Having said that, we experimentally confirm, by exploiting SAT solvers, that making why-provenance for (recursive) Datalog queries work in practice is not an unrealistic goal.

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have been recently introduced to learn from knowledge graph (KG) and achieved state-of-the-art performance in KG reasoning. However, a theoretical certification for their good empirical performance is still absent. Besides, while logic in KG is important for inductive and interpretable inference, existing GNN-based methods are just designed to fit data distributions with limited knowledge of their logical expressiveness. We propose to fill the above gap in this paper. Specifically, we theoretically analyze GNN from logical expressiveness and find out what kind of logical rules can be captured from KG. Our results first show that GNN can capture logical rules from graded modal logic, providing a new theoretical tool for analyzing the expressiveness of GNN for KG reasoning; and a query labeling trick makes it easier for GNN to capture logical rules, explaining why SOTA methods are mainly based on labeling trick. Finally, insights from our theory motivate the development of an entity labeling method for capturing difficult logical rules. Experimental results are consistent with our theoretical results and verify the effectiveness of our proposed method.

In this expository article we highlight the relevance of explanations for artificial intelligence, in general, and for the newer developments in {\em explainable AI}, referring to origins and connections of and among different approaches. We describe in simple terms, explanations in data management and machine learning that are based on attribution-scores, and counterfactuals as found in the area of causality. We elaborate on the importance of logical reasoning when dealing with counterfactuals, and their use for score computation.