We present an approach towards the deep, pluralistic logical analysis of argumentative discourse that benefits from the application of state-of-the-art automated reasoning technology for classical higher-order logic. Thanks to its expressivity this logic can adopt the status of a uniform \textit{lingua franca} allowing the encoding of both formalized arguments (their deep logical structure) and dialectical interactions (their attack and support relations). We illustrate this by analyzing an excerpt from an argumentative debate on climate engineering. Another, novel contribution concerns the definition of abstract, language-theoretical foundations for the characterization and assessment of shallow semantical embeddings (SSEs) of non-classical logics in classical higher-order logic, which constitute a pillar stone of our approach. The novel perspective we draw enables more concise and more elegant characterizations of semantical embeddings of logics and logic combinations, which is demonstrated with several examples.

Many systems have been developed in recent years to mine logical rules from large-scale Knowledge Graphs (KGs), on the grounds that representing regularities as rules enables both the interpretable inference of new facts, and the explanation of known facts. Among these systems, the walk-based methods that generate the instantiated rules containing constants by abstracting sampled paths in KGs demonstrate strong predictive performance and expressivity. However, due to the large volume of possible rules, these systems do not scale well where computational resources are often wasted on generating and evaluating unpromising rules. In this work, we address such scalability issues by proposing new methods for pruning unpromising rules using rule hierarchies. The approach consists of two phases. Firstly, since rule hierarchies are not readily available in walk-based methods, we have built a Rule Hierarchy Framework (RHF), which leverages a collection of subsumption frameworks to build a proper rule hierarchy from a set of learned rules. And secondly, we adapt RHF to an existing rule learner where we design and implement two methods for Hierarchical Pruning (HPMs), which utilize the generated hierarchies to remove irrelevant and redundant rules. Through experiments over four public benchmark datasets, we show that the application of HPMs is effective in removing unpromising rules, which leads to significant reductions in the runtime as well as in the number of learned rules, without compromising the predictive performance.

A version of the situation calculus in which situations are represented as first-order terms is presented. Fluents can be computed from the term structure, and actions on the situations correspond to rewrite rules on the terms. Actions that only depend on or influence a subset of the fluents can be described as rewrite rules that operate on subterms of the terms in some cases. If actions are bidirectional then efficient completion methods can be used to solve planning problems. This representation for situations and actions is most similar to the fluent calculus of Thielscher \cite{Thielscher98}, except that this representation is more flexible and more use is made of the subterm structure. Some examples are given, and a few general methods for constructing such sets of rewrite rules are presented. This paper was submitted to FSCD 2020 on December 23, 2019.

Description logics (DLs) are standard knowledge representation languages for modelling ontologies, i.e. knowledge about concepts and the relations between them. Unfortunately, DL ontologies are difficult to learn from data and time-consuming to encode manually. As a result, ontologies for broad domains are almost inevitably incomplete. In recent years, several data-driven approaches have been proposed for automatically extending such ontologies. One family of methods rely on characterizations of concepts that are derived from text descriptions. While such characterizations do not capture ontological knowledge directly, they encode information about the similarity between different concepts, which can be exploited for filling in the gaps in existing ontologies. To this end, several inductive inference mechanisms have already been proposed, but these have been defined and used in a heuristic fashion. In this paper, we instead propose an inductive inference mechanism which is based on a clear model-theoretic semantics, and can thus be tightly integrated with standard deductive reasoning. We particularly focus on interpolation, a powerful commonsense reasoning mechanism which is closely related to cognitive models of category-based induction. Apart from the formalization of the underlying semantics, as our main technical contribution we provide computational complexity bounds for reasoning in EL with this interpolation mechanism.

Enabling machines to legal balancing is a non-trivial task challenged by a multitude of factors some of which are addressed and explored in this work. We propose a holistic approach to formal modeling at different abstraction layers supported by a pluralistic framework in which the encoding of an ethico-legal value and upper ontology is developed in combination with the exploration of a formalization logic, with legal domain knowledge and with exemplary use cases until a reflective equilibrium is reached. Our work is enabled by a meta-logical approach to universal logical reasoning and it applies the recently introduced \logikey\ methodology for designing normative theories for ethical and legal reasoning. The particular focus in this paper is on the formalization and encoding of a value ontology suitable e.g. for explaining and resolving legal conflicts in property law (wild animal cases).

We propose a novel framework seamlessly providing key properties of both neural nets (learning) and symbolic logic (knowledge and reasoning). Every neuron has a meaning as a component of a formula in a weighted real-valued logic, yielding a highly intepretable disentangled representation. Inference is omnidirectional rather than focused on predefined target variables, and corresponds to logical reasoning, including classical first-order logic theorem proving as a special case. The model is end-to-end differentiable, and learning minimizes a novel loss function capturing logical contradiction, yielding resilience to inconsistent knowledge. It also enables the open-world assumption by maintaining bounds on truth values which can have probabilistic semantics, yielding resilience to incomplete knowledge.

Programming-by-example technologies are being deployed in industrial products for real-time synthesis of various kinds of data transformations. These technologies rely on the user to provide few representative examples of the transformation task. Motivated by the need to find the most pertinent question to ask the user, in this paper, we introduce the {\em significant questions problem}, and show that it is hard in general. We then develop an information-theoretic greedy approach for solving the problem. We justify the greedy algorithm using the conditional entropy result, which informally says that the question that achieves the maximum information gain is the one that we know least about. In the context of interactive program synthesis, we use the above result to develop an {\em{active program learner}} that generates the significant inputs to pose as queries to the user in each iteration. The procedure requires extending a {\em{passive program learner}} to a {\em{sampling program learner}} that is able to sample candidate programs from the set of all consistent programs to enable estimation of information gain. It also uses clustering of inputs based on features in the inputs and the corresponding outputs to sample a small set of candidate significant inputs. Our active learner is able to tradeoff false negatives for false positives and converge in a small number of iterations on a real-world dataset of %around 800 string transformation tasks.

As artificial intelligence (AI) techniques advance, they are beginning to automate tasks that, until recently, only humans could perform--tasks such as translating text from one language to another or making medical diagnoses. It seems only logical to turn that computer power on computers themselves and use AI to automate programming. In fact, computer scientists are working on just that idea, using various AI techniques to develop new methods of automating the writing of code. "The ultimate goal of this is that you would have professional software engineers not actually write code anymore," says Chris Jermaine, a professor of computer science at Rice University in Houston, TX. Instead, the engineer would tell a computer what a piece of software should do, and the AI system would write the code, perhaps stopping along the way to pose questions to the engineer.

Forgetting variables from a propositional formula may increase its size. Introducing new variables is a way to shorten it. Both operations can be expressed in terms of common equivalence, a weakened version of equivalence. In turn, common equivalence can be expressed in terms of forgetting. An algorithm for forgetting and checking common equivalence in polynomial space is given for the Horn case; it is polynomial-time for the subclass of single-head formulae. Minimizing after forgetting is polynomial-time if the formula is also acyclic and variables cannot be introduced, NP-hard when they can.

In this work, we investigate the problem of revealing the functionality of a black-box agent. Notably, we are interested in the interpretable and formal description of the behavior of such an agent. Ideally, this description would take the form of a program written in a high-level language. This task is also known as reverse engineering and plays a pivotal role in software engineering, computer security, but also most recently in interpretability. In contrast to prior work, we do not rely on privileged information on the black box, but rather investigate the problem under a weaker assumption of having only access to inputs and outputs of the program. We approach this problem by iteratively refining a candidate set using a generative neural program synthesis approach until we arrive at a functionally equivalent program. We assess the performance of our approach on the Karel dataset. Our results show that the proposed approach outperforms the state-of-the-art on this challenge by finding a functional equivalent program in 78% of cases -- even exceeding prior work that had privileged information on the black-box.