History eXplanation based on Predicates (HXP), studies the behavior of a Reinforcement Learning (RL) agent in a sequence of agent's interactions with the environment (a history), through the prism of an arbitrary predicate. To this end, an action importance score is computed for each action in the history. The explanation consists in displaying the most important actions to the user. As the calculation of an action's importance is #W[1]-hard, it is necessary for long histories to approximate the scores, at the expense of their quality. We therefore propose a new HXP method, called Backward-HXP, to provide explanations for these histories without having to approximate scores. Experiments show the ability of B-HXP to summarise long histories.

In this work, we investigate the problems of semantic parsing in a few-shot learning setting. In this setting, we are provided with utterance-logical form pairs per new predicate. The state-of-the-art neural semantic parsers achieve less than 25% accuracy on benchmark datasets when k= 1. To tackle this problem, we proposed to i) apply a designated meta-learning method to train the model; ii) regularize attention scores with alignment statistics; iii) apply a smoothing technique in pre-training. As a result, our method consistently outperforms all the baselines in both one and two-shot settings.

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.