Consider the finite state graph that results from a simple, discrete, dynamical system in which an agent moves in a rectangular grid picking up and dropping packages. Can the state variables of the problem, namely, the agent location and the package locations, be recovered from the structure of the state graph alone without having access to information about the objects, the structure of the states, or any background knowledge? We show that this is possible provided that the dynamics is learned over a suitable domain-independent first-order causal language that makes room for objects and relations that are not assumed to be known. The preference for the most compact representation in the language that is compatible with the data provides a strong and meaningful learning bias that makes this possible. The language of structured causal models (SCMs) is the standard language for representing (static) causal models but in dynamic worlds populated by objects, first-order causal languages such as those used in "classical AI planning" are required. While "classical AI" requires handcrafted representations, similar representations can be learned from unstructured data over the same languages. Indeed, it is the languages and the preference for compact representations in those languages that provide structure to the world, uncovering objects, relations, and causes.

We introduce a theorem proving approach to the specification and generation of temporal logical constraints for training neural networks. We formalise a deep embedding of linear temporal logic over finite traces (LTL$_f$) and an associated evaluation function characterising its semantics within the higher-order logic of the Isabelle theorem prover. We then proceed to formalise a loss function $\mathcal{L}$ that we formally prove to be sound, and differentiable to a function $d\mathcal{L}$. We subsequently use Isabelle's automatic code generation mechanism to produce OCaml versions of LTL$_f$, $\mathcal{L}$ and $d\mathcal{L}$ that we integrate with PyTorch via OCaml bindings for Python. We show that, when used for training in an existing deep learning framework for dynamic movement, our approach produces expected results for common movement specification patterns such as obstacle avoidance and patrolling. The distinctive benefit of our approach is the fully rigorous method for constrained training, eliminating many of the risks inherent to ad-hoc implementations of logical aspects directly in an "unsafe" programming language such as Python.

A declarative action model is a compact representation of the state transitions of dynamic systems that generalizes over world objects. The specification of declarative action models is often a complex hand-crafted task. In this paper we formulate declarative action models via state constraints, and present the learning of such models as a combinatorial search. The comprehensive framework presented here allows us to connect the learning of declarative action models to well-known problem solving tasks. In addition, our framework allows us to characterize the existing work in the literature according to four dimensions: (1) the target action models, in terms of the state transitions they define; (2) the available learning examples; (3) the functions used to guide the learning process, and to evaluate the quality of the learned action models; (4) the learning algorithm. Last, the paper lists relevant successful applications of the learning of declarative actions models and discusses some open challenges with the aim of encouraging future research work.

Rational verification refers to the problem of checking which temporal logic properties hold of a concurrent multiagent system, under the assumption that agents in the system choose strategies that form a game-theoretic equilibrium. Rational verification can be understood as a counterpart to model checking for multiagent systems, but while classical model checking can be done in polynomial time for some temporal logic specification languages such as CTL, and polynomial space with LTL specifications, rational verification is much harder: the key decision problems for rational verification are 2EXPTIME-complete with LTL specifications, even when using explicit-state system representations. Against this background, our contributions in this paper are threefold. First, we show that the complexity of rational verification can be greatly reduced by restricting specifications to GR(1), a fragment of LTL that can represent a broad and practically useful class of response properties of reactive systems. In particular, we show that for a number of relevant settings, rational verification can be done in polynomial space and even in polynomial time. Second, we provide improved complexity results for rational verification when considering players' goals given by mean-payoff utility functions; arguably the most widely used approach for quantitative objectives in concurrent and multiagent systems. Finally, we consider the problem of computing outcomes that satisfy social welfare constraints. To this end, we consider both utilitarian and egalitarian social welfare and show that computing such outcomes is either PSPACE-complete or NP-complete.

Plotkin, M. Binary codes with specified minimum distance.

Techniques for automatically generating abstractions of systems have been the linchpins of formal methods, playing crucial roles in extending the reach of formal methods to large hardware and software systems. To address the challenges of very high-dimensional hybrid-state spaces and input spaces for ML-based systems, we need to develop effective techniques to abstract ML models into simpler models that are more amenable to formal analysis. Some promising directions include using abstract interpretation to analyze DNNs (for example, Gehr et al.12), developing abstractions for falsifying cyber-physical systems with ML components,5 and devising novel representations for verification (for instance, star sets and other examples36).

We consider the problem of reaching a propositional goal condition in fully-observable nondeterministic (FOND) planning under a general class of fairness assumptions that are given explicitly. The fairness assumptions are of the form A/B and say that state trajectories that contain infinite occurrences of an action a from A in a state s and finite occurrence of actions from B, must also contain infinite occurrences of action a in s followed by each one of its possible outcomes. The infinite trajectories that violate this condition are deemed as unfair, and the solutions are policies for which all the fair trajectories reach a goal state. We show that strong and strong-cyclic FOND planning, as well as QNP planning, a planning model introduced recently for generalized planning, are all special cases of FOND planning with fairness assumptions of this form which can also be combined. FOND+ planning, as this form of planning is called, combines the syntax of FOND planning with some of the versatility of LTL for expressing fairness constraints. A sound and complete FOND+ planner is implemented by reducing FOND+ planning to answer set programs, and its performance is evaluated in comparison with FOND and QNP planners, and LTL synthesis tools. Two other FOND+ planners are introduced as well which are more scalable but are not complete.  

Inductive logic programming (ILP) is a form of machine learning. The goal of ILP is to induce a hypothesis (a set of logical rules) that generalises training examples. As ILP turns 30, we provide a new introduction to the field. We introduce the necessary logical notation and the main learning settings; describe the building blocks of an ILP system; compare several systems on several dimensions; describe four systems (Aleph, TILDE, ASPAL, and Metagol); highlight key application areas; and, finally, summarise current limitations and directions for future research.

We study finite first-order satisfiability (FSAT) in the constructive setting of dependent type theory. Employing synthetic accounts of enumerability and decidability, we give a full classification of FSAT depending on the first-order signature of non-logical symbols. On the one hand, our development focuses on Trakhtenbrot's theorem, stating that FSAT is undecidable as soon as the signature contains an at least binary relation symbol. Our proof proceeds by a many-one reduction chain starting from the Post correspondence problem. On the other hand, we establish the decidability of FSAT for monadic first-order logic, i.e. where the signature only contains at most unary function and relation symbols, as well as the enumerability of FSAT for arbitrary enumerable signatures. To showcase an application of Trakhtenbrot's theorem, we continue our reduction chain with a many-one reduction from FSAT to separation logic. All our results are mechanised in the framework of a growing Coq library of synthetic undecidability proofs.

We study orbit-finite systems of linear equations, in the setting of sets with atoms. Our principal contribution is a decision procedure for solvability of such systems. The procedure works for every field (and even commutative ring) under mild effectiveness assumptions, and reduces a given orbit-finite system to a number of finite ones: exponentially many in general, but polynomially many when atom dimension of input systems is fixed. Towards obtaining the procedure we push further the theory of vector spaces generated by orbit-finite sets, and show that each such vector space admits an orbit-finite basis. This fundamental property is a key tool in our development, but should be also of wider interest.