Real-world tasks consist of multiple inter-dependent subtasks (e.g., a dirty pan needs to be washed before it can be used for cooking). In this work, we aim to model the causal dependencies between such subtasks from instructional videos describing the task. This is a challenging problem since complete information about the world is often inaccessible from videos, which demands robust learning mechanisms to understand the causal structure of events. We present Multimodal Subtask Graph Generation (MSG2), an approach that constructs a Subtask Graph defining the dependency between a task's subtasks relevant to a task from noisy web videos. Graphs generated by our multimodal approach are closer to human-annotated graphs compared to prior approaches. MSG2 further performs the downstream task of next subtask prediction 85% and 30% more accurately than recent video transformer models in the ProceL and CrossTask datasets, respectively.

Neurosymbolic AI is an increasingly active area of research which aims to combine symbolic reasoning methods with deep learning to generate models with both high predictive performance and some degree of human-level comprehensibility. As knowledge graphs are becoming a popular way to represent heterogeneous and multi-relational data, methods for reasoning on graph structures have attempted to follow this neurosymbolic paradigm. Traditionally, such approaches have utilized either rule-based inference or generated representative numerical embeddings from which patterns could be extracted. However, several recent studies have attempted to bridge this dichotomy in ways that facilitate interpretability, maintain performance, and integrate expert knowledge. Within this article, we survey a breadth of methods that perform neurosymbolic reasoning tasks on graph structures. To better compare the various methods, we propose a novel taxonomy by which we can classify them. Specifically, we propose three major categories: (1) logically-informed embedding approaches, (2) embedding approaches with logical constraints, and (3) rule-learning approaches. Alongside the taxonomy, we provide a tabular overview of the approaches and links to their source code, if available, for more direct comparison. Finally, we discuss the applications on which these methods were primarily used and propose several prospective directions toward which this new field of research could evolve.

This thesis focuses on advancing probabilistic logic programming (PLP), which combines probability theory for uncertainty and logic programming for relations. The thesis aims to extend PLP to support both discrete and continuous random variables, which is necessary for applications with numeric data. The first contribution is the introduction of context-specific likelihood weighting (CS-LW), a new sampling algorithm that exploits context-specific independencies for computational gains. Next, a new hybrid PLP, DC#, is introduced, which integrates the syntax of Distributional Clauses with Bayesian logic programs and represents three types of independencies: i) conditional independencies (CIs) modeled in Bayesian networks; ii) context-specific independencies (CSIs) represented by logical rules, and iii) independencies amongst attributes of related objects in relational models expressed by combining rules. The scalable inference algorithm FO-CS-LW is introduced for DC#. Finally, the thesis addresses the lack of approaches for learning hybrid PLP from relational data with missing values and (probabilistic) background knowledge with the introduction of DiceML, which learns the structure and parameters of hybrid PLP and tackles the relational autocompletion problem. The conclusion discusses future directions and open challenges for hybrid PLP.

Why should moral philosophers, moral psychologists, and machine ethicists care about computational complexity? Debates on whether artificial intelligence (AI) can or should be used to solve problems in ethical domains have mainly been driven by what AI can or cannot do in terms of human capacities. In this paper, we tackle the problem from the other end by exploring what kind of moral machines are possible based on what computational systems can or cannot do. To do so, we analyze normative ethics through the lens of computational complexity. First, we introduce computational complexity for the uninitiated reader and discuss how the complexity of ethical problems can be framed within Marr's three levels of analysis. We then study a range of ethical problems based on consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, with the aim of elucidating the complexity associated with the problems themselves (e.g., due to combinatorics, uncertainty, strategic dynamics), the computational methods employed (e.g., probability, logic, learning), and the available resources (e.g., time, knowledge, learning). The results indicate that most problems the normative frameworks pose lead to tractability issues in every category analyzed. Our investigation also provides several insights about the computational nature of normative ethics, including the differences between rule- and outcome-based moral strategies, and the implementation-variance with regard to moral resources. We then discuss the consequences complexity results have for the prospect of moral machines in virtue of the trade-off between optimality and efficiency. Finally, we elucidate how computational complexity can be used to inform both philosophical and cognitive-psychological research on human morality by advancing the Moral Tractability Thesis (MTT).

Most of the synthesis literature has focused on studying how to synthesize a strategy to fulfill a task. This task is a duty for the agent. In this paper, we argue that intelligent agents should also be equipped with rights, that is, tasks that the agent itself can choose to fulfill (e.g., the right of recharging the battery). The agent should be able to maintain these rights while acting for its duties. We study this issue in the context of LTLf synthesis: we give duties and rights in terms of LTLf specifications, and synthesize a suitable strategy to achieve the duties that can be modified on-the-fly to achieve also the rights, if the agent chooses to do so. We show that handling rights does not make synthesis substantially more difficult, although it requires a more sophisticated solution concept than standard LTLf synthesis. We also extend our results to the case in which further duties and rights are given to the agent while already executing.

Given a machine learning (ML) model and a prediction, explanations can be defined as sets of features which are sufficient for the prediction. In some applications, and besides asking for an explanation, it is also critical to understand whether sensitive features can occur in some explanation, or whether a non-interesting feature must occur in all explanations. This paper starts by relating such queries respectively with the problems of relevancy and necessity in logic-based abduction. The paper then proves membership and hardness results for several families of ML classifiers. Afterwards the paper proposes concrete algorithms for two classes of classifiers. The experimental results confirm the scalability of the proposed algorithms.

In this paper, we study two problems: determining action model equivalence and minimizing the event space of an action model under certain structural relationships. The Kripke model equivalence is perfectly caught by the structural relationship called bisimulation. In this paper, we propose the generalized action emulation perfectly catching the action model equivalence. Previous structural relationships sufficient for the action model equivalence, i.e. the bisimulation, the propositional action emulation, the action emulation, and the action emulation of canonical action models, can be described by various restricted versions of the generalized action emulation. We summarize four critical properties of the atom set over preconditions, and prove that any formula set satisfying these properties can be used to restrict the generalized action emulation to determine the action model equivalence by an iteration algorithm. We also construct a new formula set with these four properties, which is generally more efficient than the atom set. The technique of the partition refinement has been used to minimize the world space of a Kripke model under the bisimulation. Applying the partition refinement to action models allows one to minimize their event spaces under the bisimulation. The propositional action emulation is weaker than bismulation but still sufficient for the action model equivalence. We prove that it is PSPACE-complete to minimize the event space of an action model under the propositional action emulation, and provide a PSPACE algorithm for it. Finally, we prove that minimize the event space under the action model equivalence is PSPACE-hard, and propose a computable method based on the canonical formulas of modal logics to solve this problem.

The last decade witnessed an ever-increasing stream of successes in Machine Learning (ML). These successes offer clear evidence that ML is bound to become pervasive in a wide range of practical uses, including many that directly affect humans. Unfortunately, the operation of the most successful ML models is incomprehensible for human decision makers. As a result, the use of ML models, especially in high-risk and safety-critical settings is not without concern. In recent years, there have been efforts on devising approaches for explaining ML models. Most of these efforts have focused on so-called model-agnostic approaches. However, all model-agnostic and related approaches offer no guarantees of rigor, hence being referred to as non-formal. For example, such non-formal explanations can be consistent with different predictions, which renders them useless in practice. This paper overviews the ongoing research efforts on computing rigorous model-based explanations of ML models; these being referred to as formal explanations. These efforts encompass a variety of topics, that include the actual definitions of explanations, the characterization of the complexity of computing explanations, the currently best logical encodings for reasoning about different ML models, and also how to make explanations interpretable for human decision makers, among others.

DatalogMTL is an extension of Datalog with metric temporal operators that has recently found applications in stream reasoning and temporal ontology-based data access. In contrast to plain Datalog, where materialisation (a.k.a. forward chaining) naturally terminates in finitely many steps, reaching a fixpoint in DatalogMTL may require infinitely many rounds of rule applications. As a result, existing reasoning systems resort to other approaches, such as constructing large Büchi automata, whose implementations turn out to be highly inefficient in practice. In this paper, we propose and study finitely materialisable DatalogMTL programs, for which forward chaining reasoning is guaranteed to terminate. We consider a data-dependent notion of finite materialisability of a program, where termination is guaranteed for a given dataset, as well as a data-independent notion, where termination is guaranteed regardless of the dataset. We show that, for bounded programs (a natural DatalogMTL fragment for which reasoning is as hard as in the full language), checking data-dependent finite materialisability is ExpSpace-complete in combined complexity and PSpace-complete in data complexity; furthermore, we propose a practical materialisation-based decision procedure that works in doubly exponential time. We show that checking data-independent finite materialisability for bounded progams is computationally easier, namely ExpTime-complete; moreover, we propose sufficient conditions for data-indenpendent finite materialisability that can be efficiently checked. We provide also the complexity landscape of fact entailment for different classes of finitely materialisable programs; surprisingly, we could identify a large class of finitely materialisable programs, called MTL-acyclic programs, for which fact entailment has exactly the same data and combined complexity as in plain Datalog, which makes this fragment especially well suited for big-scale applications.

Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBF) extend propositional logic with quantification $\forall, \exists$. In QBF, an existentially quantified variable is allowed to depend on all universally quantified variables in its scope. Dependency Quantified Boolean Formulas (DQBF) restrict the dependencies of existentially quantified variables. In DQBF, existentially quantified variables have explicit dependencies on a subset of universally quantified variables called Henkin dependencies. Given a Boolean specification between the set of inputs and outputs, the problem of Henkin synthesis is to synthesize each output variable as a function of its Henkin dependencies such that the specification is met. Henkin synthesis has wide-ranging applications, including verification of partial circuits, controller synthesis, and circuit realizability. This work proposes a data-driven approach for Henkin synthesis called Manthan3. On an extensive evaluation of over 563 instances arising from past DQBF solving competitions, we demonstrate that Manthan3 is competitive with state-of-the-art tools. Furthermore, Manthan3 could synthesize Henkin functions for 26 benchmarks for which none of the state-of-the-art techniques could synthesize.