A traditional assurance case employs a positive argument in which reasoning steps, grounded on evidence and assumptions, sustain a top claim that has external significance. Human judgement is required to check the evidence, the assumptions, and the narrative justifications for the reasoning steps; if all are assessed good, then the top claim can be accepted. A valid concern about this process is that human judgement is fallible and prone to confirmation bias. The best defense against this concern is vigorous and skeptical debate and discussion in the manner of a dialectic or Socratic dialog. There is merit in recording aspects of this discussion for the benefit of subsequent developers and assessors. Defeaters are a means doing this: they express doubts about aspects of the argument and can be developed into subcases that confirm or refute the doubts, and can record them as documentation to assist future consideration. This report describes how defeaters, and multiple levels of defeaters, should be represented and assessed in Assurance 2.0 and its Clarissa/ASCE tool support. These mechanisms also support eliminative argumentation, which is a contrary approach to assurance, favored by some, that uses a negative argument to refute all reasons why the top claim could be false.

Reasoning in the real world is not divorced from situations. How to capture the present knowledge from surrounding situations and perform reasoning accordingly is crucial and challenging for machine intelligence. This paper introduces a new benchmark that evaluates the situated reasoning ability via situation abstraction and logic-grounded question answering for real-world videos, called Situated Reasoning in Real-World Videos (STAR Benchmark). This benchmark is built upon the real-world videos associated with human actions or interactions, which are naturally dynamic, compositional, and logical. The dataset includes four types of questions, including interaction, sequence, prediction, and feasibility. We represent the situations in real-world videos by hyper-graphs connecting extracted atomic entities and relations (e.g., actions, persons, objects, and relationships). Besides visual perception, situated reasoning also requires structured situation comprehension and logical reasoning. Questions and answers are procedurally generated. The answering logic of each question is represented by a functional program based on a situation hyper-graph. We compare various existing video reasoning models and find that they all struggle on this challenging situated reasoning task. We further propose a diagnostic neuro-symbolic model that can disentangle visual perception, situation abstraction, language understanding, and functional reasoning to understand the challenges of this benchmark.

Decision diagrams (DDs) are powerful tools to represent effectively propositional formulas, which are largely used in many domains, in particular in formal verification and in knowledge compilation. Some forms of DDs (e.g., OBDDs, SDDs) are canonical, that is, (under given conditions on the atom list) they univocally represent equivalence classes of formulas. Given the limited expressiveness of propositional logic, a few attempts to leverage DDs to SMT level have been presented in the literature. Unfortunately, these techniques still suffer from some limitations: most procedures are theory-specific; some produce theory DDs (T-DDs) which do not univocally represent T-valid formulas or T-inconsistent formulas; none of these techniques provably produces theory-canonical T-DDs, which (under given conditions on the T-atom list) univocally represent T-equivalence classes of formulas. Also, these procedures are not easy to implement, and very few implementations are actually available. In this paper, we present a novel very-general technique to leverage DDs to SMT level, which has several advantages: it is very easy to implement on top of an AllSMT solver and a DD package, which are used as blackboxes; it works for every form of DDs and every theory, or combination thereof, supported by the AllSMT solver; it produces theory-canonical T-DDs if the propositional DD is canonical. We have implemented a prototype tool for both T-OBDDs and T-SDDs on top of OBDD and SDD packages and the MathSAT SMT solver. Some preliminary empirical evaluation supports the effectiveness of the approach.

One hallmark of human language is its combinatoriality -- reusing a relatively small inventory of building blocks to create a far larger inventory of increasingly complex structures. In this paper, we explore the idea that combinatoriality in language reflects a human inductive bias toward representational efficiency in symbol systems. We develop a computational framework for discovering structure in a writing system. Built on top of state-of-the-art library learning and program synthesis techniques, our computational framework discovers known linguistic structures in the Chinese writing system and reveals how the system evolves towards simplification under pressures for representational efficiency. We demonstrate how a library learning approach, utilizing learned abstractions and compression, may help reveal the fundamental computational principles that underlie the creation of combinatorial structures in human cognition, and offer broader insights into the evolution of efficient communication systems.

Automatic static cost analysis infers information about the resources used by programs without actually running them with concrete data, and presents such information as functions of input data sizes. Most of the analysis tools for logic programs (and many for other languages), as CiaoPP, are based on setting up recurrence relations representing (bounds on) the computational cost of predicates, and solving them to find closed-form functions. Such recurrence solving is a bottleneck in current tools: many of the recurrences that arise during the analysis cannot be solved with state-of-the-art solvers, including Computer Algebra Systems (CASs), so that specific methods for different classes of recurrences need to be developed. We address such a challenge by developing a novel, general approach for solving arbitrary, constrained recurrence relations, that uses machine-learning (sparse-linear and symbolic) regression techniques to guess a candidate closed-form function, and a combination of an SMT-solver and a CAS to check if it is actually a solution of the recurrence. Our prototype implementation and its experimental evaluation within the context of the CiaoPP system show quite promising results. Overall, for the considered benchmarks, our approach outperforms state-of-the-art cost analyzers and recurrence solvers, and solves recurrences that cannot be solved by them.

This paper considers KLM-style preferential non-monotonic reasoning in the setting of propositional team semantics. We show that team-based propositional logics naturally give rise to cumulative non-monotonic entailment relations. Motivated by the non-classical interpretation of disjunction in team semantics, we give a precise characterization for preferential models for propositional dependence logic satisfying all of System P postulates. Furthermore, we show how classical entailment and dependence logic entailment can be expressed in terms of non-trivial preferential models.

The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) is a general artificial intelligence benchmark that is currently unsolvable by any Machine Learning method, including Large Language Models (LLMs). It demands strong generalization and reasoning capabilities which are known to be weaknesses of Neural Network based systems. In this work, we propose a Program Synthesis system that uses Inductive Logic Programming (ILP), a branch of Symbolic AI, to solve ARC. We have manually defined a simple Domain Specific Language (DSL) that corresponds to a small set of object-centric abstractions relevant to ARC. This is the Background Knowledge used by ILP to create Logic Programs that provide reasoning capabilities to our system. The full system is capable of generalize to unseen tasks, since ILP can create Logic Program(s) from few examples, in the case of ARC: pairs of Input-Output grids examples for each task. These Logic Programs are able to generate Objects present in the Output grid and the combination of these can form a complete program that transforms an Input grid into an Output grid. We randomly chose some tasks from ARC that dont require more than the small number of the Object primitives we implemented and show that given only these, our system can solve tasks that require each, such different reasoning.

The quantified Boolean formula (QBF) problem is an important decision problem generally viewed as the archetype for PSPACE-completeness. Many problems of central interest in AI are in general not included in NP, e.g., planning, model checking, and non-monotonic reasoning, and for such problems QBF has successfully been used as a modelling tool. However, solvers for QBF are not as advanced as state of the art SAT solvers, which has prevented QBF from becoming a universal modelling language for PSPACE-complete problems. A theoretical explanation is that QBF (as well as many other PSPACE-complete problems) lacks natural parameters} guaranteeing fixed-parameter tractability (FPT). In this paper we tackle this problem and consider a simple but overlooked parameter: the number of existentially quantified variables. This natural parameter is virtually unexplored in the literature which one might find surprising given the general scarcity of FPT algorithms for QBF. Via this parameterization we then develop a novel FPT algorithm applicable to QBF instances in conjunctive normal form (CNF) of bounded clause length. We complement this by a W[1]-hardness result for QBF in CNF of unbounded clause length as well as sharper lower bounds for the bounded arity case under the (strong) exponential-time hypothesis.

The increase in academic dishonesty cases among college students has raised concern, particularly due to the shift towards online learning caused by the pandemic. We aim to develop and implement a method capable of generating tailored questions for each student. The use of Automatic Question Generation (AQG) is a possible solution. Previous studies have investigated AQG frameworks in education, which include validity, user-defined difficulty, and personalized problem generation. Our new AQG approach produces logical equivalence problems for Discrete Mathematics, which is a core course for year-one computer science students. This approach utilizes a syntactic grammar and a semantic attribute system through top-down parsing and syntax tree transformations. Our experiments show that the difficulty level of questions generated by our AQG approach is similar to the questions presented to students in the textbook [1]. These results confirm the practicality of our AQG approach for automated question generation in education, with the potential to significantly enhance learning experiences.

Answer set programming (ASP) is a logic programming formalism used in various areas of artificial intelligence like combinatorial problem solving and knowledge representation and reasoning. It is known that enhancing ASP with function symbols makes basic reasoning problems highly undecidable. However, even in simple cases, state of the art reasoners, specifically those relying on a ground-and-solve approach, fail to produce a result. Therefore, we reconsider consistency as a basic reasoning problem for ASP. We show reductions that give an intuition for the high level of undecidability. These insights allow for a more fine-grained analysis where we characterize ASP programs as "frugal" and "non-proliferous". For such programs, we are not only able to semi-decide consistency but we also propose a grounding procedure that yields finite groundings on more ASP programs with the concept of "forbidden" facts.