arXiv daily

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Mon, 31 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; 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; Thu, 13 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.Causal Inference for Banking Finance and Insurance A Survey

Authors:Satyam Kumar, Yelleti Vivek, Vadlamani Ravi, Indranil Bose

Abstract: Causal Inference plays an significant role in explaining the decisions taken by statistical models and artificial intelligence models. Of late, this field started attracting the attention of researchers and practitioners alike. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of 37 papers published during 1992-2023 and concerning the application of causal inference to banking, finance, and insurance. The papers are categorized according to the following families of domains: (i) Banking, (ii) Finance and its subdomains such as corporate finance, governance finance including financial risk and financial policy, financial economics, and Behavioral finance, and (iii) Insurance. Further, the paper covers the primary ingredients of causal inference namely, statistical methods such as Bayesian Causal Network, Granger Causality and jargon used thereof such as counterfactuals. The review also recommends some important directions for future research. In conclusion, we observed that the application of causal inference in the banking and insurance sectors is still in its infancy, and thus more research is possible to turn it into a viable method.

2.Every Mistake Counts in Assembly

Authors:Guodong Ding, Fadime Sener, Shugao Ma, Angela Yao

Abstract: One promising use case of AI assistants is to help with complex procedures like cooking, home repair, and assembly tasks. Can we teach the assistant to interject after the user makes a mistake? This paper targets the problem of identifying ordering mistakes in assembly procedures. We propose a system that can detect ordering mistakes by utilizing a learned knowledge base. Our framework constructs a knowledge base with spatial and temporal beliefs based on observed mistakes. Spatial beliefs depict the topological relationship of the assembling components, while temporal beliefs aggregate prerequisite actions as ordering constraints. With an episodic memory design, our algorithm can dynamically update and construct the belief sets as more actions are observed, all in an online fashion. We demonstrate experimentally that our inferred spatial and temporal beliefs are capable of identifying incorrect orderings in real-world action sequences. To construct the spatial beliefs, we collect a new set of coarse-level action annotations for Assembly101 based on the positioning of the toy parts. Finally, we demonstrate the superior performance of our belief inference algorithm in detecting ordering mistakes on the Assembly101 dataset.

3.Tracking mulitple targets with multiple radars using Distributed Auctions

Authors:Pierre Larrenie LABISEN-KLAIM, Cédric Buron LABISEN-KLAIM, Frédéric Barbaresco

Abstract: Coordination of radars can be performed in various ways. To be more resilient radar networks can be coordinated in a decentralized way. In this paper, we introduce a highly resilient algorithm for radar coordination based on decentralized and collaborative bundle auctions. We first formalize our problem as a constrained optimization problem and apply a market-based algorithm to provide an approximate solution. Our approach allows to track simultaneously multiple targets, and to use up to two radars tracking the same target to improve accuracy. We show that our approach performs sensibly as well as a centralized approach relying on a MIP solver, and depending on the situations, may outperform it or be outperformed.

4.LLMs4OL: Large Language Models for Ontology Learning

Authors:Hamed Babaei Giglou, Jennifer D'Souza, Sören Auer

Abstract: We propose the LLMs4OL approach, which utilizes Large Language Models (LLMs) for Ontology Learning (OL). LLMs have shown significant advancements in natural language processing, demonstrating their ability to capture complex language patterns in different knowledge domains. Our LLMs4OL paradigm investigates the following hypothesis: \textit{Can LLMs effectively apply their language pattern capturing capability to OL, which involves automatically extracting and structuring knowledge from natural language text?} To test this hypothesis, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation using the zero-shot prompting method. We evaluate nine different LLM model families for three main OL tasks: term typing, taxonomy discovery, and extraction of non-taxonomic relations. Additionally, the evaluations encompass diverse genres of ontological knowledge, including lexicosemantic knowledge in WordNet, geographical knowledge in GeoNames, and medical knowledge in UMLS.

5.Anticipating Responsibility in Multiagent Planning

Authors:Timothy Parker, Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini

Abstract: Responsibility anticipation is the process of determining if the actions of an individual agent may cause it to be responsible for a particular outcome. This can be used in a multi-agent planning setting to allow agents to anticipate responsibility in the plans they consider. The planning setting in this paper includes partial information regarding the initial state and considers formulas in linear temporal logic as positive or negative outcomes to be attained or avoided. We firstly define attribution for notions of active, passive and contributive responsibility, and consider their agentive variants. We then use these to define the notion of responsibility anticipation. We prove that our notions of anticipated responsibility can be used to coordinate agents in a planning setting and give complexity results for our model, discussing equivalence with classical planning. We also present an outline for solving some of our attribution and anticipation problems using PDDL solvers.

6.Ontology engineering with Large Language Models

Authors:Patricia Mateiu, Adrian Groza

Abstract: We tackle the task of enriching ontologies by automatically translating natural language sentences into Description Logic. Since Large Language Models (LLMs) are the best tools for translations, we fine-tuned a GPT-3 model to convert Natural Language sentences into OWL Functional Syntax. We employ objective and concise examples to fine-tune the model regarding: instances, class subsumption, domain and range of relations, object properties relationships, disjoint classes, complements, cardinality restrictions. The resulted axioms are used to enrich an ontology, in a human supervised manner. The developed tool is publicly provided as a Protge plugin.

7.AsdKB: A Chinese Knowledge Base for the Early Screening and Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder

Authors:Tianxing Wu, Xudong Cao, Yipeng Zhu, Feiyue Wu, Tianling Gong, Yuxiang Wang, Shenqi Jing

Abstract: To easily obtain the knowledge about autism spectrum disorder and help its early screening and diagnosis, we create AsdKB, a Chinese knowledge base on autism spectrum disorder. The knowledge base is built on top of various sources, including 1) the disease knowledge from SNOMED CT and ICD-10 clinical descriptions on mental and behavioural disorders, 2) the diagnostic knowledge from DSM-5 and different screening tools recommended by social organizations and medical institutes, and 3) the expert knowledge on professional physicians and hospitals from the Web. AsdKB contains both ontological and factual knowledge, and is accessible as Linked Data at https://w3id.org/asdkb/. The potential applications of AsdKB are question answering, auxiliary diagnosis, and expert recommendation, and we illustrate them with a prototype which can be accessed at http://asdkb.org.cn/.

8.Ranking-based Argumentation Semantics Applied to Logical Argumentation (full version)

Authors:Jesse Heyninck, Badran Raddaoui, Christian Straßer

Abstract: In formal argumentation, a distinction can be made between extension-based semantics, where sets of arguments are either (jointly) accepted or not, and ranking-based semantics, where grades of acceptability are assigned to arguments. Another important distinction is that between abstract approaches, that abstract away from the content of arguments, and structured approaches, that specify a method of constructing argument graphs on the basis of a knowledge base. While ranking-based semantics have been extensively applied to abstract argumentation, few work has been done on ranking-based semantics for structured argumentation. In this paper, we make a systematic investigation into the behaviour of ranking-based semantics applied to existing formalisms for structured argumentation. We show that a wide class of ranking-based semantics gives rise to so-called culpability measures, and are relatively robust to specific choices in argument construction methods.

9.ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs

Authors:Yujia Qin, Shihao Liang, Yining Ye, Kunlun Zhu, Lan Yan, Yaxi Lu, Yankai Lin, Xin Cong, Xiangru Tang, Bill Qian, Sihan Zhao, Runchu Tian, Ruobing Xie, Jie Zhou, Mark Gerstein, Dahai Li, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun

Abstract: Despite the advancements of open-source large language models (LLMs) and their variants, e.g., LLaMA and Vicuna, they remain significantly limited in performing higher-level tasks, such as following human instructions to use external tools (APIs). This is because current instruction tuning largely focuses on basic language tasks instead of the tool-use domain. This is in contrast to state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs, e.g., ChatGPT, which have demonstrated excellent tool-use capabilities but are unfortunately closed source. To facilitate tool-use capabilities within open-source LLMs, we introduce ToolLLM, a general tool-use framework of data construction, model training and evaluation. We first present ToolBench, an instruction-tuning dataset for tool use, which is created automatically using ChatGPT. Specifically, we collect 16,464 real-world RESTful APIs spanning 49 categories from RapidAPI Hub, then prompt ChatGPT to generate diverse human instructions involving these APIs, covering both single-tool and multi-tool scenarios. Finally, we use ChatGPT to search for a valid solution path (chain of API calls) for each instruction. To make the searching process more efficient, we develop a novel depth-first search-based decision tree (DFSDT), enabling LLMs to evaluate multiple reasoning traces and expand the search space. We show that DFSDT significantly enhances the planning and reasoning capabilities of LLMs. For efficient tool-use assessment, we develop an automatic evaluator: ToolEval. We fine-tune LLaMA on ToolBench and obtain ToolLLaMA. Our ToolEval reveals that ToolLLaMA demonstrates a remarkable ability to execute complex instructions and generalize to unseen APIs, and exhibits comparable performance to ChatGPT. To make the pipeline more practical, we devise a neural API retriever to recommend appropriate APIs for each instruction, negating the need for manual API selection.

10.Decidable Fragments of LTLf Modulo Theories (Extended Version)

Authors:Luca Geatti, Alessandro Gianola, Nicola Gigante, Sarah Winkler

Abstract: We study Linear Temporal Logic Modulo Theories over Finite Traces (LTLfMT), a recently introduced extension of LTL over finite traces (LTLf) where propositions are replaced by first-order formulas and where first-order variables referring to different time points can be compared. In general, LTLfMT was shown to be semi-decidable for any decidable first-order theory (e.g., linear arithmetics), with a tableau-based semi-decision procedure. In this paper we present a sound and complete pruning rule for the LTLfMT tableau. We show that for any LTLfMT formula that satisfies an abstract, semantic condition, that we call finite memory, the tableau augmented with the new rule is also guaranteed to terminate. Last but not least, this technique allows us to establish novel decidability results for the satisfiability of several fragments of LTLfMT, as well as to give new decidability proofs for classes that are already known.