We propose an extension of the reinforcement learning architecture that enables moral decision-making of reinforcement learning agents based on normative reasons. Central to this approach is a reason-based shield generator yielding a moral shield that binds the agent to actions that conform with recognized normative reasons so that our overall architecture restricts the agent to actions that are (internally) morally justified. In addition, we describe an algorithm that allows to iteratively improve the reason-based shield generator through case-based feedback from a moral judge.

Argument mining is natural language processing technology aimed at identifying arguments in text. Furthermore, the approach is being developed to identify the premises and claims of those arguments, and to identify the relationships between arguments including support and attack relationships. In this paper, we assume that an argument map contains the premises and claims of arguments, and support and attack relationships between them, that have been identified by argument mining. So from a piece of text, we assume an argument map is obtained automatically by natural language processing. However, to understand and to automatically analyse that argument map, it would be desirable to instantiate that argument map with logical arguments. Once we have the logical representation of the arguments in an argument map, we can use automated reasoning to analyze the argumentation (e.g. check consistency of premises, check validity of claims, and check the labelling on each arc corresponds with thw logical arguments). We address this need by using classical logic for representing the explicit information in the text, and using default logic for representing the implicit information in the text. In order to investigate our proposal, we consider some specific options for instantiation.

Abductive forgetting is removing variables from a logical formula while maintaining its abductive explanations. It is defined in either of two ways, depending on its intended application. Both differ from the usual forgetting, which maintains consequences rather than explanations. Differently from that, abductive forgetting from a propositional formula may not be expressed by any propositional formula. A necessary and sufficient condition tells when it is. Checking this condition is \P{3}-complete, and is in \P{4} if minimality of explanations is required. A way to guarantee expressibility of abductive forgetting is to switch from propositional to default logic. Another is to introduce new variables.

Reiter's original proposal for default logic is unsatisfactory for open default theories because of Skolemization and grounding. In this paper, we reconsider this long-standing problem and propose a new world view semantics for first-order default logic. Roughly speaking, a world view of a first-order default theory is a maximal collection of structures satisfying the default theory where the default part is fixed by the world view itself. We show how this semantics generalizes classical first-order logic and first-order answer set programming, and we discuss its connections to Reiter's semantics and other related semantics. We also argue that first-order default logic under the world view semantics provides a rich framework for integrating classical logic based and rule based formalisms in the first-order case.

We present a fast and scalable algorithm to induce non-monotonic logic programs from statistical learning models. We reduce the problem of search for best clauses to instances of the High-Utility Itemset Mining (HUIM) problem. In the HUIM problem, feature values and their importance are treated as transactions and utilities respectively. We make use of TreeExplainer, a fast and scalable implementation of the Explainable AI tool SHAP, to extract locally important features and their weights from ensemble tree models. Our experiments with UCI standard benchmarks suggest a significant improvement in terms of classification evaluation metrics and running time of the training algorithm compared to ALEPH, a state-of-the-art Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) system.

In this article we present an implementation of non-monotonic reasoning in an embedded system. As a part of an autonomous motor-glider, it simulates piloting decisions of an airplane. A real pilot must take care not only about the information arising from the cockpit (airspeed, altitude, variometer, compass...) but also from outside the cabin. Throughout a flight, a pilot is constantly in communication with the control tower to follow orders, because there is an airspace regulation to respect. In addition, if the control tower sends orders while the pilot has an emergency, he may have to violate these orders and airspace regulations to solve his problem (e.g. emergency landing). On the other hand, climate changes constantly (wind, snow, hail...) and can affect the sensors. All these cases easily lead to contradictions. Switching to reasoning under uncertainty, a pilot must make decisions to carry out a flight. The objective of this implementation is to validate a non-monotonic model which allows to solve the question of incomplete and contradictory information. We formalize the problem using default logic, a non-monotonic logic which allows to find fixed-points in the face of contradictions. For the implementation, the Prolog language is used in an embedded computer running at 1 GHz single core with 512 Mb of RAM and 0.8 watts of energy consumption.

We present a fast and scalable algorithm to induce non-monotonic logic programs from statistical learning models. We reduce the problem of search for best clauses to instances of the High-Utility Itemset Mining (HUIM) problem. In the HUIM problem, feature values and their importance are treated as transactions and utilities respectively. We make use of TreeExplainer, a fast and scalable implementation of the Explainable AI tool SHAP, to extract locally important features and their weights from ensemble tree models. Our experiments with UCI standard benchmarks suggest a significant improvement in terms of classification evaluation metrics and running time of the training algorithm compared to ALEPH, a state-of-the-art Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) system.

In this paper, we study Reiter's propositional default logic when the treewidth of a certain graph representation (semi-primal graph) of the input theory is bounded. We establish a dynamic programming algorithm on tree decompositions that decides whether a theory has a consistent stable extension (Ext). Our algorithm can even be used to enumerate all generating defaults (ExtEnum) that lead to stable extensions. We show that our algorithm decides Ext in linear time in the input theory and triple exponential time in the treewidth (so-called fixed-parameter linear algorithm). Further, our algorithm solves ExtEnum with a pre-computation step that is linear in the input theory and triple exponential in the treewidth followed by a linear delay to output solutions.

Clearly, the second approach is more cautious. Intuitively, it demands that there is a specific argument for τ that is contained in each rational stance a reasoner can take given Γ, DRules, and SRules. The first option doesn't bind the acceptability of τ to a specific argument: it is sufficient if according to each rational stance there is some argument for τ. In Default Logic, the main representational tool is that of a default rule, or simply a default.

This paper describes a natural framework for rules, based on belief functions, which includes a repre- sentation of numerical rules, default rules and rules allowing and rules not allowing contraposition. In particular it justifies the use of the Dempster-Shafer Theory for representing a particular class of rules, Belief calculated being a lower probability given certain independence assumptions on an underlying space. It shows how a belief function framework can be generalised to other logics, including a general Monte-Carlo algorithm for calculating belief, and how a version of Reiter's Default Logic can be seen as a limiting case of a belief function formalism.