Goto

Collaborating Authors

 Logic & Formal Reasoning


General Game Playing: Overview of the AAAI Competition

AI Magazine

A general game playing system is one that can accept a formal description of a game and play the game effectively without human intervention. Unlike specialized game players, such as Deep Blue, general game players do not rely on algorithms designed in advance for specific games; and, unlike Deep Blue, they are able to play different kinds of games. In order to promote work in this area, the AAAI is sponsoring an open competition at this summer's Twentieth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. This article is an overview of the technical issues and logistics associated with this summer's competition, as well as the relevance of general game playing to the long range-goals of artificial intelligence.


Keys, Nominals, and Concrete Domains

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Many description logics (DLs) combine knowledge representation on an abstract, logical level with an interface to 'concrete' domains like numbers and strings with built-in predicates such as >, +, and prefix-of. These hybrid DLs have turned out to be useful in several application areas, such as reasoning about conceptual database models. We propose to further extend such DLs with key constraints that allow the expression of statements like 'US citizens are uniquely identified by their social security number'. Based on this idea, we introduce a number of natural description logics and perform a detailed analysis of their decidability and computational complexity. It turns out that naive extensions with key constraints easily lead to undecidability, whereas more careful extensions yield NExpTime-complete DLs for a variety of useful concrete domains.


Generalizing Boolean Satisfiability III: Implementation

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

This is the third of three papers describing ZAP, a satisfiability engine that substantially generalizes existing tools while retaining the performance characteristics of modern high-performance solvers. The fundamental idea underlying ZAP is that many problems passed to such engines contain rich internal structure that is obscured by the Boolean representation used; our goal has been to define a representation in which this structure is apparent and can be exploited to improve computational performance. The first paper surveyed existing work that (knowingly or not) exploited problem structure to improve the performance of satisfiability engines, and the second paper showed that this structure could be understood in terms of groups of permutations acting on individual clauses in any particular Boolean theory. We conclude the series by discussing the techniques needed to implement our ideas, and by reporting on their performance on a variety of problem instances.


Combining Spatial and Temporal Logics: Expressiveness vs. Complexity

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

In this paper, we construct and investigate a hierarchy of spatio-temporal formalisms that result from various combinations of propositional spatial and temporal logics such as the propositional temporal logic PTL, the spatial logics RCC-8, BRCC-8, S4u and their fragments. The obtained results give a clear picture of the trade-off between expressiveness and `computational realisability' within the hierarchy. We demonstrate how different combining principles as well as spatial and temporal primitives can produce NP-, PSPACE-, EXPSPACE-, 2EXPSPACE-complete, and even undecidable spatio-temporal logics out of components that are at most NP- or PSPACE-complete.


Reasoning about Time and Knowledge in Neural Symbolic Learning Systems

Neural Information Processing Systems

Typically, translation algorithms from a symbolic to a connectionist representation and vice-versa are employed to provide either (i) a neural implementation of a logic, (ii) a logical characterisation of a neural system, or (iii) a hybrid learning system that brings together features from connectionism and symbolic artificial intelligence (Holldobler, 1993). Until recently, neural-symbolic systems were not able to fully represent, reason and learn expressive languages other than propositional and fragments of first-order logic (Cloete & Zurada, 2000). However, in (d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002b; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002c; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2003), a new approach to knowledge representation and reasoning in neural-symbolic systems based on neural networks ensembles has been introduced. This new approach shows that modal logics can be effectively represented in artificial neural networks. In this paper, following the approach introduced in (d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002b; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002c; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2003), we move one step further and show that temporal logics can be effectively represented in artificial neural o Artur Garcez is partly supported by the Nuffield Foundation. Luis Lamb is partly supported by CNPq. The authors would like to thank the referees for their comments.


Reasoning about Time and Knowledge in Neural Symbolic Learning Systems

Neural Information Processing Systems

Typically, translation algorithms from a symbolic to a connectionist representation and vice-versa are employed to provide either (i) a neural implementation of a logic, (ii) a logical characterisation of a neural system, or (iii) a hybrid learning system that brings together features from connectionism and symbolic artificial intelligence (Holldobler, 1993). Until recently, neural-symbolic systems were not able to fully represent, reason and learn expressive languages other than propositional and fragments of first-order logic (Cloete & Zurada, 2000). However, in (d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002b; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002c; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2003), a new approach to knowledge representation and reasoning in neural-symbolic systems based on neural networks ensembles has been introduced. This new approach shows that modal logics can be effectively represented in artificial neural networks. In this paper, following the approach introduced in (d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002b; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002c; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2003), we move one step further and show that temporal logics can be effectively represented in artificial neural o Artur Garcez is partly supported by the Nuffield Foundation. Luis Lamb is partly supported by CNPq. The authors would like to thank the referees for their comments.


Reasoning about Time and Knowledge in Neural Symbolic Learning Systems

Neural Information Processing Systems

Typically, translation algorithms from a symbolic to a connectionist representation and vice-versa are employed to provide either (i) a neural implementation of a logic, (ii) a logical characterisation of a neural system, or (iii) a hybrid learning system that brings together features from connectionism and symbolic artificial intelligence (Holldobler, 1993). Until recently, neural-symbolic systems were not able to fully represent, reason and learn expressive languages other than propositional and fragments of first-order logic (Cloete & Zurada, 2000). However, in (d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002b; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002c; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2003), a new approach to knowledge representation and reasoning in neural-symbolic systems based on neural networks ensembles has been introduced. This new approach shows that modal logics can be effectively represented in artificial neural networks. In this paper, following the approach introduced in (d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002b; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2002c; d'Avila Garcez et al., 2003), we move one step further and show that temporal logics can be effectively represented in artificial neural o Artur Garcez is partly supported by the Nuffield Foundation. Luis Lamb is partly supported by CNPq. The authors would like to thank the referees for their comments.


Formalizations of Commonsense Psychology

AI Magazine

(Niles and Pease 2001). Considering that tremendous scheduling that are robust in the face of realworld progress has been made in commonsense reasoning concerns like time zones, daylight savings in specialized topics such as thermodynamics time, and international calendar variations. in physical systems (Collins and Forbus 1989), it is surprising that our best content theories Given the importance of an ontology of of people are still struggling to get past time across so many different commonsense simple notions of belief and intentionality (van der Hoek and Wooldridge 2003). However, search is the generation of competency theories systems that can successfully reason about that have a degree of depth necessary to solve people are likely to be substantially more valuable inferential problems that people are easily able than those that reason about thermodynamics to handle. in most future applications. Yet competency in content theories is only Content theories for reasoning about people half of the challenge. Commonsense reasoning are best characterized collectively as a theory of in AI theories will require that computers not commonsense psychology, in contrast to those only make deep humanlike inferences but also that are associated with commonsense (naïve) ensure that the scope of these inferences is as physics. The scope of commonsense physics, broad as humans can handle, as well. That is, best outlined in Patrick Hayes's first and second in addition to competency, content theories will "Naïve Physics Manifestos" (Hayes 1979, need adequate coverage over the full breadth of 1984), includes content theories of time, space, concepts that are manipulated in human-level physical entities, and their dynamics. It is only by achieving psychology, in contrast, concerns all some adequate level of coverage that we of the aspects of the way that people think they can begin to construct reasoning systems that think. It should include notions of plans and integrate fully into real-world AI applications, goals, opportunities and threats, decisions and where pragmatic considerations and expressive preferences, emotions and memories, along user interfaces raise the bar significantly.


Generalizing Boolean Satisfiability II: Theory

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

This is the second of three planned papers describing ZAP, a satisfiability engine that substantially generalizes existing tools while retaining the performance characteristics of modern high performance solvers. The fundamental idea underlying ZAP is that many problems passed to such engines contain rich internal structure that is obscured by the Boolean representation used; our goal is to define a representation in which this structure is apparent and can easily be exploited to improve computational performance. This paper presents the theoretical basis for the ideas underlying ZAP, arguing that existing ideas in this area exploit a single, recurring structure in that multiple database axioms can be obtained by operating on a single axiom using a subgroup of the group of permutations on the literals in the problem. We argue that the group structure precisely captures the general structure at which earlier approaches hinted, and give numerous examples of its use. We go on to extend the Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland inference procedure to this broader setting, and show that earlier computational improvements are either subsumed or left intact by the new method. The third paper in this series discusses ZAP's implementation and presents experimental performance results.


Towards Understanding and Harnessing the Potential of Clause Learning

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Efficient implementations of DPLL with the addition of clause learning are the fastest complete Boolean satisfiability solvers and can handle many significant real-world problems, such as verification, planning and design. Despite its importance, little is known of the ultimate strengths and limitations of the technique. This paper presents the first precise characterization of clause learning as a proof system (CL), and begins the task of understanding its power by relating it to the well-studied resolution proof system. In particular, we show that with a new learning scheme, CL can provide exponentially shorter proofs than many proper refinements of general resolution (RES) satisfying a natural property. These include regular and Davis-Putnam resolution, which are already known to be much stronger than ordinary DPLL. We also show that a slight variant of CL with unlimited restarts is as powerful as RES itself. Translating these analytical results to practice, however, presents a challenge because of the nondeterministic nature of clause learning algorithms. We propose a novel way of exploiting the underlying problem structure, in the form of a high level problem description such as a graph or PDDL specification, to guide clause learning algorithms toward faster solutions. We show that this leads to exponential speed-ups on grid and randomized pebbling problems, as well as substantial improvements on certain ordering formulas.