If you are looking for an answer to the question What is Artificial Intelligence? and you only have a minute, then here's the definition the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence offers on its home page: "the scientific understanding of the mechanisms underlying thought and intelligent behavior and their embodiment in machines."
However, if you are fortunate enough to have more than a minute, then please get ready to embark upon an exciting journey exploring AI (but beware, it could last a lifetime) …
To apply eyeshadow without a brush, should I use a cotton swab or a toothpick? Questions requiring this kind of physical commonsense pose a challenge to today's natural language understanding systems. While recent pretrained models (such as BERT) have made progress on question answering over more abstract domains - such as news articles and encyclopedia entries, where text is plentiful - in more physical domains, text is inherently limited due to reporting bias. Can AI systems learn to reliably answer physical common-sense questions without experiencing the physical world? In this paper, we introduce the task of physical commonsense reasoning and a corresponding benchmark dataset Physical Interaction: Question Answering or PIQA. Though humans find the dataset easy (95% accuracy), large pretrained models struggle (77%). We provide analysis about the dimensions of knowledge that existing models lack, which offers significant opportunities for future research.
The ability to persist in the spacial environment is, not only in the robotic context, an essential feature. Positional knowledge is one of the most important aspects of space and a number of methods to represent these information have been developed in the in the research area of spatial cognition. The basic qualitative spatial representation and reasoning techniques are presented in this thesis and several calculi are briefly reviewed. Features and applications of qualitative calculi are summarized. A new calculus for representing and reasoning about qualitative spatial orientation and distances is being designed. It supports an arbitrary level of granularity over ternary relations of points. Ways of improving the complexity of the composition are shown and an implementation of the calculus demonstrates its capabilities. Existing qualitative spatial calculi of positional information are compared to the new approach and possibilities for future research are outlined.
In this thesis, we introduce a novel formal framework to represent and reason about qualitative direction and distance relations between extended objects using Answer Set Programming (ASP). We take Cardinal Directional Calculus (CDC) as a starting point and extend CDC with new sorts of constraints which involve defaults, preferences and negation. We call this extended version as nCDC. Then we further extend nCDC by augmenting qualitative distance relation and name this extension as nCDC+. For CDC, nCDC, nCDC+, we introduce an ASP-based general framework to solve consistency checking problems, address composition and inversion of qualitative spatial relations, infer unknown or missing relations between objects, and find a suitable configuration of objects which fulfills a given inquiry.
We introduce WIQA, the first large-scale dataset of "What if..." questions over procedural text. WIQA contains three parts: a collection of paragraphs each describing a process, e.g., beach erosion; a set of crowdsourced influence graphs for each paragraph, describing how one change a ffects another; and a large (40k) collection of "What if...?" multiple-choice questions derived from the graphs. For example, given a paragraph about beach erosion, would stormy weather result in more or less erosion (or have no e ff ect)? The task is to answer the questions, given their associated paragraph. WIQA contains three kinds of questions: perturbations to steps mentioned in the paragraph; external (out-of-paragraph) perturbations requiring commonsense knowledge; and irrelevant (no e ff ect) perturbations. We find that state-of-the-art models achieve 73.8% accuracy, well below the human performance of 96.3%. We analyze the challenges, in particular tracking chains of influences, and present the dataset as an open challenge to the community.
We introduce the first open-domain dataset, called QuaRTz, for reasoning about textual qualitative relationships. QuaRTz contains general qualitative statements, e.g., "A sunscreen with a higher SPF protects the skin longer.", twinned with 3864 crowdsourced situated questions, e.g., "Billy is wearing sunscreen with a lower SPF than Lucy. Who will be best protected from the sun?", plus annotations of the properties being compared. Unlike previous datasets, the general knowledge is textual and not tied to a fixed set of relationships, and tests a system's ability to comprehend and apply textual qualitative knowledge in a novel setting. We find state-of-the-art results are substantially (20%) below human performance, presenting an open challenge to the NLP community.
Cognitive scientists of the embodied cognition tradition have been providing evidence that a large part of our creative reasoning and problemsolving processes are carried out by means of conceptual metaphor and blending, grounded on our bodily experience with the world. In this talk I shall aim at fleshing out a mathematical model that has been proposed in the last decades for expressing and exploring conceptual metaphor and blending with greater precision than has previously been done. In particular, I shall focus on the notion of aptness of a metaphor or blend and on the validity of metaphorical entailment. Towards this end, I shall use a generalisation of the category-theoretic notion of colimit for modelling conceptual metaphor and blending in combination with the idea of reasoning at a distance as modelled in the Barwise-Seligman theory of information flow. I shall illustrate the adequacy of the proposed model with an example of creative reasoning about space and time for solving a classical brainteaser. Furthermore, I shall argue for the potential applicability of such mathematical model for ontology engineering, computational creativity, and problem-solving in general.
A group of researchers from the Allen Institute of Artificial Intelligence has proposed the Aristo challenge that requires answering science questions. The goal of the challenge is to aid in the development of machines that can understand natural language, use knowledge and reason. In this work, we take a subset of those questions, namely the questions from the chapters of food web. We model a consequence operator for the food webs that given a food web and a perturbation to some of the populations aims to compute possible effects on the other populations in the food web. We then use this operator to answers questions of the kind, ‘Explain why the population of rabbits might decrease if the population of mice decreased.’ or ‘Explain why the population of rabbits might change if the population of mice decreased.’ Unlike the previous works which deal with only direct predator-prey situations, here we aim to characterize the effect(s) even when the two populations in the question are indirectly related.
The capability of making explainable inferences regarding physical processes has long been desired. One fundamental physical process is object motion. Inferring what causes the motion of a group of objects can even be a challenging task for experts, e.g., in forensic science. Most of the work in the literature rely on physics simulation to draw such inferences. The simulation requires a precise model of the underlying domain to work well and is essentially a black-box from which one can hardly obtain any useful explanation. By contrast, qualitative reasoning methods have the advantage in making transparent inferences with ambiguous information, which makes it suitable for this task. However, there has been no suitable qualitative theory proposed for object motion in three-dimensional space. We take this challenge and develop a qualitative theory for the motion of rigid objects. Based on this theory, we develop a reasoning method to solve a very interesting problem: Assuming there are several objects that were initially at rest and now have started to move. We want to infer what action causes the movement of these objects.
The capability of making explainable inferences regarding physical processes has long been desired. One fundamental physical process is object motion. Inferring what causes the motion of a group of objects can even be a challenging task for experts, e.g., in forensics science. Most of the work in the literature relies on physics simulation to draw such infer- ences. The simulation requires a precise model of the under- lying domain to work well and is essentially a black-box from which one can hardly obtain any useful explanation. By contrast, qualitative reasoning methods have the advan- tage in making transparent inferences with ambiguous infor- mation, which makes it suitable for this task. However, there has been no suitable qualitative theory proposed for object motion in three-dimensional space. In this paper, we take this challenge and develop a qualitative theory for the motion of rigid objects. Based on this theory, we develop a reasoning method to solve a very interesting problem: Assuming there are several objects that were initially at rest and now have started to move. We want to infer what action causes the movement of these objects.
This paper describes a system that combines qualitative and quantitative reasoning to solve kinematics word problems that are expressed in a simplified form of English. Such an integrated approach is useful in identifying the equations required to solve the problem and to infer certain implicit details in the problem scenario. The system also generates self-explanatory solutions that can assist a student in mastering the concept involved. We created a dataset of 30 problems from this domain. Such word problems have not been addressed in recent times.