This paper contributes to the area of inductive logic programming by presenting a new learning framework that allows the learning of weak constraints in Answer Set Programming (ASP). The framework, called Learning from Ordered Answer Sets, generalises our previous work on learning ASP programs without weak constraints, by considering a new notion of examples as ordered pairs of partial answer sets that exemplify which answer sets of a learned hypothesis (together with a given background knowledge) are preferred to others. In this new learning task inductive solutions are searched within a hypothesis space of normal rules, choice rules, and hard and weak constraints. We propose a new algorithm, ILASP2, which is sound and complete with respect to our new learning framework. We investigate its applicability to learning preferences in an interview scheduling problem and also demonstrate that when restricted to the task of learning ASP programs without weak constraints, ILASP2 can be much more efficient than our previously proposed system.

The supertree construction problem is about combining several phylogenetic trees with possibly conflicting information into a single tree that has all the leaves of the source trees as its leaves and the relationships between the leaves are as consistent with the source trees as possible. This leads to an optimization problem that is computationally challenging and typically heuristic methods, such as matrix representation with parsimony (MRP), are used. In this paper we consider the use of answer set programming to solve the supertree construction problem in terms of two alternative encodings. The first is based on an existing encoding of trees using substructures known as quartets, while the other novel encoding captures the relationships present in trees through direct projections. We use these encodings to compute a genus-level supertree for the family of cats (Felidae). Furthermore, we compare our results to recent supertrees obtained by the MRP method.

The paper introduces a new modular action language, ALM, and illustrates the methodology of its use. It is based on the approach of Gelfond and Lifschitz (1993; 1998) in which a high-level action language is used as a front end for a logic programming system description. The resulting logic programming representation is used to perform various computational tasks. The methodology based on existing action languages works well for small and even medium size systems, but is not meant to deal with larger systems that require structuring of knowledge. ALM is meant to remedy this problem. Structuring of knowledge in ALM is supported by the concepts of module (a formal description of a specific piece of knowledge packaged as a unit), module hierarchy, and library, and by the division of a system description of ALM into two parts: theory and structure. A theory consists of one or more modules with a common theme, possibly organized into a module hierarchy based on a dependency relation. It contains declarations of sorts, attributes, and properties of the domain together with axioms describing them. Structures are used to describe the domain's objects. These features, together with the means for defining classes of a domain as special cases of previously defined ones, facilitate the stepwise development, testing, and readability of a knowledge base, as well as the creation of knowledge representation libraries. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

The idea of only knowing is a natural and intuitive notion to precisely capture the beliefs of a knowledge base. However, an extension to the many agent case, as would be needed in many applications, has been shown to be far from straightforward. For example, previous Kripke frame-based accounts appeal to proof-theoretic constructions like canonical models, while more recent works in the area abandoned Kripke semantics entirely. We propose a new account based on Moss’ characteristic formulas, formulated for the usual Kripke semantics. This is shown to come with other benefits: the logic admits a group version of only knowing, and an operator for assessing the epistemic entrenchment of what an agent or a group only knows is definable. Finally, the multi-agent only knowing operator is shown to be expressible with the cover modality of classical modal logic, which then allows us to obtain a completeness result for a fragment of the logic.

Static analysis is a core task in query optimization and knowledge base verification. We study static analysis techniques for SPARQL, the standard language for querying Semantic Web data. Specifically, we investigate the query containment problem and query-update independence analysis. We are interested in developing techniques through reductions to the validity problem in logic.

Most logic-based machine learning algorithms rely on an Occamist bias where textual simplicity of hypotheses is optimised. This approach, however, fails to distinguish between the efficiencies of hypothesised programs, such as quick sort (O(n log n)) and bubble sort (O(n^2)). We address this issue by considering techniques to minimise both the resource complexity and textual complexity of hypothesised programs. We describe an algorithm proven to learn optimal resource complexity robot strategies, and we propose future work to generalise this approach to a broader class of logic programs.

We introduce kLog, a novel language for kernel-based learning on expressive logical and relational representations. kLog allows users to specify logical and relational learning problems declaratively. It builds on simple but powerful concepts: learning from interpretations, entity/relationship data modeling, and logic programming. Access by the kernel to the rich representation is mediated by a technique we call graphicalization: the relational representation is first transformed into a graph — in particular, a grounded entity/relationship diagram. Subsequently, a choice of graph kernel defines the feature space. The kLog framework can be applied to tackle the same range of tasks that has made statistical relational learning so popular, including classification, regression, multitask learning, and collective classification. An empirical evaluation shows that kLog can be either more accurate, or much faster at the same level of accuracy, than Tilde and Alchemy.

Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) provide the basis for various reasoning problems in the area of Artificial Intelligence. Efficient evaluation of AFs has thus been identified as an important research challenge. So far, implemented systems for evaluating AFs have either followed a straight-forward reduction-based approach or been limited to certain tractable classes of AFs. In this work, we present a generic approach for reasoning over AFs, based on the novel concept of complexity-sensitivity. Establishing the theoretical foundations of this approach, we derive several new complexity results for preferred, semi-stable and stage semantics which complement the current complexity landscape for abstract argumentation, providing further understanding on the sources of intractability of AF reasoning problems. The introduced generic framework exploits decision procedures for problems of lower complexity whenever possible. This allows, in particular, instantiations of the generic framework via harnessing in an iterative way current sophisticated Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solver technology for solving the considered AF reasoning problems. First experimental results show that the SAT-based instantiation of our novel approach outperforms existing systems.

In predicate invention (PI), new predicates are introduced into a logical theory, usually by rewriting a group of closely-related rules to use a common invented predicate as a "subroutine". PI is difficult, since a poorly-chosen invented predicate may lead to error cascades. Here we suggest a "soft" version of predicate invention: instead of explicitly creating new predicates, we implicitly group closely-related rules by using structured sparsity to regularize their parameters together. We show that soft PI, unlike hard PI, consistently improves over previous strong baselines for structure-learning on two large-scale tasks.

This paper revisits the problem of learning a k-CNF Boolean function from examples, for fixed k, in the context of online learning under the logarithmic loss. We give a Bayesian interpretation to one of Valiant’s classic PAC learning algorithms, which we then build upon to derive three efficient, online, probabilistic, supervised learning algorithms for predicting the output of an unknown k-CNF Boolean function. We analyze the loss of our methods, and show that the cumulative log-loss can be upper bounded by a polynomial function of the size of each example.