In this paper we introduce a simple modal logic framework to reason about the expertise of an information source. In the framework, a source is an expert on a proposition $p$ if they are able to correctly determine the truth value of $p$ in any possible world. We also consider how information may be false, but true after accounting for the lack of expertise of the source. This is relevant for modelling situations in which information sources make claims beyond their domain of expertise. We use non-standard semantics for the language based on an expertise set with certain closure properties. It turns out there is a close connection between our semantics and S5 epistemic logic, so that expertise can be expressed in terms of knowledge at all possible states. We use this connection to obtain a sound and complete axiomatisation.

We describe how answer-set programs can be used to declaratively specify counterfactual interventions on entities under classification, and reason about them. In particular, they can be used to define and compute responsibility scores as attribution-based explanations for outcomes from classification models. The approach allows for the inclusion of domain knowledge and supports query answering. A detailed example with a naive-Bayes classifier is presented.

Saturation-style automated theorem provers (ATPs) based on the given clause procedure are today the strongest general reasoners for classical first-order logic. The clause selection heuristics in such systems are, however, often evaluating clauses in isolation, ignoring other clauses. This has changed recently by equipping the E/ENIGMA system with a graph neural network (GNN) that chooses the next given clause based on its evaluation in the context of previously selected clauses. In this work, we describe several algorithms and experiments with ENIGMA, advancing the idea of contextual evaluation based on learning important components of the graph of clauses.

We propose an approach based on Answer Set Programming for reasoning about actions with domain descriptions including ontological knowledge, expressed in the lightweight description logic EL^\bot. We consider a temporal action theory, which allows for non-deterministic actions and causal rules to deal with ramifications, and whose extensions are defined by temporal answer sets. We provide conditions under which action consistency can be guaranteed with respect to an ontology, by a polynomial encoding of an action theory extended with an EL^\bot knowledge base (in normal form) into a temporal action theory.

Constraint answer set programming or CASP, for short, is a hybrid approach in automated reasoning putting together the advances of distinct research areas such as answer set programming, constraint processing, and satisfiability modulo theories. Constraint answer set programming demonstrates promising results, including the development of a multitude of solvers: acsolver, clingcon, ezcsp, idp, inca, dingo, mingo, aspmt, clingo[l,dl], and ezsmt. It opens new horizons for declarative programming applications such as solving complex train scheduling problems. Systems designed to find solutions to constraint answer set programs can be grouped according to their construction into, what we call, integrational or translational approaches. The focus of this paper is an overview of the key ingredients of the design of constraint answer set solvers drawing distinctions and parallels between integrational and translational approaches. The paper also provides a glimpse at the kind of programs its users develop by utilizing a CASP encoding of Travelling Salesman problem for illustration. In addition, we place the CASP technology on the map among its automated reasoning peers as well as discuss future possibilities for the development of CASP.

We convert the DeepMind Mathematics Dataset into a reinforcement learning environment by interpreting it as a program synthesis problem. Each action taken in the environment adds an operator or an input into a discrete compute graph. Graphs which compute correct answers yield positive reward, enabling the optimization of a policy to construct compute graphs conditioned on problem statements. Baseline models are trained using Double DQN on various subsets of problem types, demonstrating the capability to learn to correctly construct graphs despite the challenges of combinatorial explosion and noisy rewards.

Forgetting - or variable elimination - is an operation that allows the removal, from a knowledge base, of middle variables no longer deemed relevant. In recent years, many different approaches for forgetting in Answer Set Programming have been proposed, in the form of specific operators, or classes of such operators, commonly following different principles and obeying different properties. Each such approach was developed to somehow address some particular view on forgetting, aimed at obeying a specific set of properties deemed desirable in such view, but a comprehensive and uniform overview of all the existing operators and properties is missing. In this paper, we thoroughly examine existing properties and (classes of) operators for forgetting in Answer Set Programming, drawing a complete picture of the landscape of these classes of forgetting operators, which includes many novel results on relations between properties and operators, including considerations on concrete operators to compute results of forgetting and computational complexity. Our goal is to provide guidance to help users in choosing the operator most adequate for their application requirements.

We describe several additions to the ENIGMA system that guides clause selection in the E automated theorem prover. First, we significantly speed up its neural guidance by adding server-based GPU evaluation. The second addition is motivated by fast weight-based rejection filters that are currently used in systems like E and Prover9. Such systems can be made more intelligent by instead training fast versions of ENIGMA that implement more intelligent pre-filtering. This results in combinations of trainable fast and slow thinking that improves over both the fast-only and slow-only methods. The third addition is based on "judging the children by their parents", i.e., possibly rejecting an inference before it produces a clause. This is motivated by standard evolutionary mechanisms, where there is always a cost to producing all possible offsprings in the current population. This saves time by not evaluating all clauses by more expensive methods and provides a complementary view of the generated clauses. The methods are evaluated on a large benchmark coming from the Mizar Mathematical Library, showing good improvements over the state of the art.

This chapter provides an overview of the different Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems that are being used in contemporary digital tools for Mathematics Education (ME). It is aimed at researchers in AI and Machine Learning (ML), for whom we shed some light on the specific technologies that are being used in educational applications; and at researchers in ME, for whom we clarify: i) what the possibilities of the current AI technologies are, ii) what is still out of reach and iii) what is to be expected in the near future. We start our analysis by establishing a high-level taxonomy of AI tools that are found as components in digital ME applications. Then, we describe in detail how these AI tools, and in particular ML, are being used in two key applications, specifically AI-based calculators and intelligent tutoring systems. We finish the chapter with a discussion about student modeling systems and their relationship to artificial general intelligence.

Property graphs constitute data models for representing knowledge graphs. They allow for the convenient representation of facts, including facts about facts, represented by triples in subject or object position of other triples. Knowledge graphs such as Wikidata are created by a diversity of contributors and a range of sources leaving them prone to two types of errors. The first type of error, falsity of facts, is addressed by property graphs through the representation of provenance and validity, making triples occur as first-order objects in subject position of metadata triples. The second type of error, violation of domain constraints, has not been addressed with regard to property graphs so far. In RDF representations, this error can be addressed by shape languages such as SHACL or ShEx, which allow for checking whether graphs are valid with respect to a set of domain constraints. Borrowing ideas from the syntax and semantics definitions of SHACL, we design a shape language for property graphs, ProGS, which allows for formulating shape constraints on property graphs including their specific constructs, such as edges with identities and key-value annotations to both nodes and edges. We define a formal semantics of ProGS, investigate the resulting complexity of validating property graphs against sets of ProGS shapes, compare with corresponding results for SHACL, and implement a prototypical validator that utilizes answer set programming.