arXiv daily

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Thu, 13 Jul 2023

Other arXiv digests in this category:Thu, 14 Sep 2023; Wed, 13 Sep 2023; Tue, 12 Sep 2023; Mon, 11 Sep 2023; Fri, 08 Sep 2023; Tue, 05 Sep 2023; Fri, 01 Sep 2023; Thu, 31 Aug 2023; Wed, 30 Aug 2023; Tue, 29 Aug 2023; Mon, 28 Aug 2023; Fri, 25 Aug 2023; Thu, 24 Aug 2023; Wed, 23 Aug 2023; Tue, 22 Aug 2023; Mon, 21 Aug 2023; Fri, 18 Aug 2023; Thu, 17 Aug 2023; Wed, 16 Aug 2023; Tue, 15 Aug 2023; Mon, 14 Aug 2023; Fri, 11 Aug 2023; Thu, 10 Aug 2023; Wed, 09 Aug 2023; Tue, 08 Aug 2023; Mon, 07 Aug 2023; Fri, 04 Aug 2023; Thu, 03 Aug 2023; Wed, 02 Aug 2023; Tue, 01 Aug 2023; Mon, 31 Jul 2023; Fri, 28 Jul 2023; Thu, 27 Jul 2023; Wed, 26 Jul 2023; Tue, 25 Jul 2023; Mon, 24 Jul 2023; Fri, 21 Jul 2023; Thu, 20 Jul 2023; Wed, 19 Jul 2023; Tue, 18 Jul 2023; Mon, 17 Jul 2023; Wed, 12 Jul 2023; Tue, 11 Jul 2023; Mon, 10 Jul 2023; Fri, 07 Jul 2023; Thu, 06 Jul 2023; Wed, 05 Jul 2023; Tue, 04 Jul 2023; Mon, 03 Jul 2023; Fri, 30 Jun 2023; Thu, 29 Jun 2023; Wed, 28 Jun 2023; Tue, 27 Jun 2023; Mon, 26 Jun 2023; Fri, 23 Jun 2023; Thu, 22 Jun 2023; Tue, 20 Jun 2023; Fri, 16 Jun 2023; Thu, 15 Jun 2023; Tue, 13 Jun 2023; Mon, 12 Jun 2023; Fri, 09 Jun 2023; Thu, 08 Jun 2023; Wed, 07 Jun 2023; Tue, 06 Jun 2023; Mon, 05 Jun 2023; Fri, 02 Jun 2023; Thu, 01 Jun 2023; Wed, 31 May 2023; Tue, 30 May 2023; Mon, 29 May 2023; Fri, 26 May 2023; Thu, 25 May 2023; Wed, 24 May 2023; Tue, 23 May 2023; Mon, 22 May 2023; Fri, 19 May 2023; Thu, 18 May 2023; Wed, 17 May 2023; Tue, 16 May 2023; Mon, 15 May 2023; Fri, 12 May 2023; Thu, 11 May 2023; Wed, 10 May 2023; Tue, 09 May 2023; Mon, 08 May 2023; Fri, 05 May 2023; Thu, 04 May 2023; Wed, 03 May 2023; Tue, 02 May 2023; Mon, 01 May 2023; Fri, 28 Apr 2023; Thu, 27 Apr 2023; Wed, 26 Apr 2023; Tue, 25 Apr 2023; Mon, 24 Apr 2023; Fri, 21 Apr 2023; Thu, 20 Apr 2023; Wed, 19 Apr 2023; Tue, 18 Apr 2023; Mon, 17 Apr 2023; Fri, 14 Apr 2023; Thu, 13 Apr 2023; Wed, 12 Apr 2023; Tue, 11 Apr 2023; Mon, 10 Apr 2023; Thu, 06 Apr 2023; Wed, 05 Apr 2023; Tue, 04 Apr 2023
1.Prescriptive Process Monitoring Under Resource Constraints: A Reinforcement Learning Approach

Authors:Mahmoud Shoush, Marlon Dumas

Abstract: Prescriptive process monitoring methods seek to optimize the performance of business processes by triggering interventions at runtime, thereby increasing the probability of positive case outcomes. These interventions are triggered according to an intervention policy. Reinforcement learning has been put forward as an approach to learning intervention policies through trial and error. Existing approaches in this space assume that the number of resources available to perform interventions in a process is unlimited, an unrealistic assumption in practice. This paper argues that, in the presence of resource constraints, a key dilemma in the field of prescriptive process monitoring is to trigger interventions based not only on predictions of their necessity, timeliness, or effect but also on the uncertainty of these predictions and the level of resource utilization. Indeed, committing scarce resources to an intervention when the necessity or effects of this intervention are highly uncertain may intuitively lead to suboptimal intervention effects. Accordingly, the paper proposes a reinforcement learning approach for prescriptive process monitoring that leverages conformal prediction techniques to consider the uncertainty of the predictions upon which an intervention decision is based. An evaluation using real-life datasets demonstrates that explicitly modeling uncertainty using conformal predictions helps reinforcement learning agents converge towards policies with higher net intervention gain

2.IntelliGraphs: Datasets for Benchmarking Knowledge Graph Generation

Authors:Thiviyan Thanapalasingam, Emile van Krieken, Peter Bloem, Paul Groth

Abstract: Knowledge Graph Embedding (KGE) models are used to learn continuous representations of entities and relations. A key task in the literature is predicting missing links between entities. However, Knowledge Graphs are not just sets of links but also have semantics underlying their structure. Semantics is crucial in several downstream tasks, such as query answering or reasoning. We introduce the subgraph inference task, where a model has to generate likely and semantically valid subgraphs. We propose IntelliGraphs, a set of five new Knowledge Graph datasets. The IntelliGraphs datasets contain subgraphs with semantics expressed in logical rules for evaluating subgraph inference. We also present the dataset generator that produced the synthetic datasets. We designed four novel baseline models, which include three models based on traditional KGEs. We evaluate their expressiveness and show that these models cannot capture the semantics. We believe this benchmark will encourage the development of machine learning models that emphasize semantic understanding.

3.Layered controller synthesis for dynamic multi-agent systems

Authors:Emily Clement, Nicolas Perrin-Gilbert, Philipp Schlehuber-Caissier

Abstract: In this paper we present a layered approach for multi-agent control problem, decomposed into three stages, each building upon the results of the previous one. First, a high-level plan for a coarse abstraction of the system is computed, relying on parametric timed automata augmented with stopwatches as they allow to efficiently model simplified dynamics of such systems. In the second stage, the high-level plan, based on SMT-formulation, mainly handles the combinatorial aspects of the problem, provides a more dynamically accurate solution. These stages are collectively referred to as the SWA-SMT solver. They are correct by construction but lack a crucial feature: they cannot be executed in real time. To overcome this, we use SWA-SMT solutions as the initial training dataset for our last stage, which aims at obtaining a neural network control policy. We use reinforcement learning to train the policy, and show that the initial dataset is crucial for the overall success of the method.

4.LLM-assisted Knowledge Graph Engineering: Experiments with ChatGPT

Authors:Lars-Peter Meyer, Claus Stadler, Johannes Frey, Norman Radtke, Kurt Junghanns, Roy Meissner, Gordian Dziwis, Kirill Bulert, Michael Martin

Abstract: Knowledge Graphs (KG) provide us with a structured, flexible, transparent, cross-system, and collaborative way of organizing our knowledge and data across various domains in society and industrial as well as scientific disciplines. KGs surpass any other form of representation in terms of effectiveness. However, Knowledge Graph Engineering (KGE) requires in-depth experiences of graph structures, web technologies, existing models and vocabularies, rule sets, logic, as well as best practices. It also demands a significant amount of work. Considering the advancements in large language models (LLMs) and their interfaces and applications in recent years, we have conducted comprehensive experiments with ChatGPT to explore its potential in supporting KGE. In this paper, we present a selection of these experiments and their results to demonstrate how ChatGPT can assist us in the development and management of KGs.

5.On the Connection between Game-Theoretic Feature Attributions and Counterfactual Explanations

Authors:Emanuele Albini, Shubham Sharma, Saumitra Mishra, Danial Dervovic, Daniele Magazzeni

Abstract: Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has received widespread interest in recent years, and two of the most popular types of explanations are feature attributions, and counterfactual explanations. These classes of approaches have been largely studied independently and the few attempts at reconciling them have been primarily empirical. This work establishes a clear theoretical connection between game-theoretic feature attributions, focusing on but not limited to SHAP, and counterfactuals explanations. After motivating operative changes to Shapley values based feature attributions and counterfactual explanations, we prove that, under conditions, they are in fact equivalent. We then extend the equivalency result to game-theoretic solution concepts beyond Shapley values. Moreover, through the analysis of the conditions of such equivalence, we shed light on the limitations of naively using counterfactual explanations to provide feature importances. Experiments on three datasets quantitatively show the difference in explanations at every stage of the connection between the two approaches and corroborate the theoretical findings.