Representing defeasibility is an important issue in common sense reasoning. In reasoning about action and change, this issue becomes more difficult because domain and action related defeasible information may conflict with general inertia rules. Furthermore, different types of defeasible information may also interfere with each other during the reasoning. In this paper, we develop a prioritized logic programming approach to handle defeasibilities in reasoning about action. In particular, we propose three action languages AT ^ 0 , AT ^ 1 and AT ^ 2 which handle three types of defeasibilities in action domains named defeasible constraints, defeasible observations and actions with defeasible and abnormal effects respectively. Each language with a higher superscript can be viewed as an extension of the language with a lower superscript. These action languages inherit the simple syntax of A language but their semantics is developed in terms of transition systems where transition functions are defined based on prioritized logic programs. By illustrating various examples, we show that our approach eventually provides a powerful mechanism to handle various defeasibilities in temporal prediction and postdiction. We also investigate semantic properties of these three action languages and characterize classes of action domains that present more desirable solutions in reasoning about action within the underlying action languages.
An early effort on handling defeasible causal rules in reasoning about action was due to the author's previous work @cite_2 , in which the author identified the restriction of McCain and Turner's causal theory of actions @cite_11 and claimed that in general a causal rule should be treated as a defeasible rule in order to solve the ramification problem properly. In @cite_2 , constraints ) and ) simply correspond to defaults @math and @math respectively. By combining Reiter's default theory @cite_10 and Winslett's PMA @cite_21 the author developed a causality-based minimal change principle for reasoning about action and change which subsumes McCain and Turner's causal theory.
@cite_11 @cite_10 @cite_21 @cite_2
2155322595 175258934 2017479918
Recent research on reasoning about action has shown that the traditional logic form of domain constraints is problematic to represent ramifications of actions that are related to causality of domains. To handle this problem properly, as proposed by some researchers, it is necessary to describe causal relations of domains explicitly in action theories. In this paper, we address this problem from a new point of view. Specifically, unlike other researchers viewing causal relations as some kind of inference rules, we distinguish causal relations between defeasible and non-defeasible cases. It turns out that a causal theory in our formalism can be specified by using Reiter's default logic. Based on this idea, we propose a causality-based minimal change approach for representing effects of actions, and argue that our approach provides more plausible solutions for the ramification and qualification problems compared with other related work. We also describe a logic programming approximation to compute causal theories of actions which provides an implementational basis for our approach. In a document network such as a citation network of scientific documents, web-logs, etc., the content produced by authors exhibits their interest in certain topics. In addition some authors influence other authors' interests. In this work, we propose to model the influence of cited authors along with the interests of citing authors. Moreover, we hypothesize that apart from the citations present in documents, the context surrounding the citation mention provides extra topical information about the cited authors. However, associating terms in the context to the cited authors remains an open problem. We propose novel document generation schemes that incorporate the context while simultaneously modeling the interests of citing authors and influence of the cited authors. Our experiments show significant improvements over baseline models for various evaluation criteria such as link prediction between document and cited author, and quantitatively explaining unseen text. We present a formal framework that combines high-level representation and causality-based reasoning with low-level geometric reasoning and motion planning. The frame-work features bilateral interaction between task and motion planning, and embeds geometric reasoning in causal reasoning, thanks to several advantages inherited from its underlying components. In particular, our choice of using a causality-based high-level formalism for describing action domains allows us to represent ramifications and state transition constraints, and embed in such formal domain descriptions externally defined functions implemented in some programming language (e.g., C++). Moreover, given such a domain description, the causal reasoner based on this formalism (i.e., the Causal Calculator) allows us to compute optimal solutions (e.g., shortest plans) for elaborate planning prediction problems with temporal constraints. Utilizing these features of high-level representation and reasoning, we can combine causal reasoning, motion planning and geometric planning to find feasible kinematic solutions to task-level problems. In our framework, the causal reasoner guides the motion planner by finding an optimal task-plan; if there is no feasible kinematic solution for that task-plan then the motion planner guides the causal reasoner by modifying the planning problem with new temporal constraints. Furthermore, while computing a task-plan, the causal reasoner takes into account geometric models and kinematic relations by means of external predicates implemented for geometric reasoning (e.g., to check some collisions); in that sense the geometric reasoner guides the causal reasoner to find feasible kinematic solutions. We illustrate an application of this framework to robotic manipulation, with two pantograph robots on a complex assembly task that requires concurrent execution of actions. A short video of this application accompanies the paper. The nonmonotonic causal logic defined in this paper can be used to represent properties of actions, including actions with conditional and indirect effects, nondeterministic actions, and concurrently executed actions. It has been applied to several challenge problems in the theory of commonsense knowledge. We study the relationship between this formalism and other work on nonmonotonic reasoning and knowledge representation, and discuss its implementation, called the Causal Calculator. Causal reasoning plays an essential role in both informal and formal human decision-making. Causality itself as well as human understanding of causality is imprecise, sometimes necessarily so. A common sense understanding of the world tells us that we have to deal with imprecision, uncertainty and imperfect knowledge. A difficulty is striking a good balance between precise formalism and commonsense imprecise reality. An algorithmic method of accommodating imprecision in causality is needed. Today, data mining holds the promise of extracting unsuspected information from very large databases. However, the most common data mining rule forms do not express a causal relationship. Without understanding the underlying causality, a naive use of data mining rules can lead to undesirable actions. Discovering causal relationships is the ultimate goal of many scientific explorations. Causal relationships can be identified with controlled experiments, but such experiments are often very expensive and sometimes impossible to conduct. On the other hand, the collection of observational data has increased dramatically in recent decades. Therefore it is desirable to find causal relationships from the data directly. Significant progress has been made in the field of discovering causal relationships using the Causal Bayesian Network (CBN) theory. The applications of CBNs, however, are greatly limited due to the high computational complexity. In another direction, association rule mining has been shown to be an efficient data mining means for relationship discovery. However, although causal relationships imply associations, the reverse does not always hold. In this paper we study how to use an efficient association mining approach to discover potential causal rules in observational data. We make use of the idea of retrospective cohort studies, a widely used approach in medical and social research, to detect causal association rules. In comparison with the constraint-based methods within the CBN paradigm, the proposed approach is faster and is capable of finding a cause consisting of combined variables. Discovering causal relationships in large databases of observational data is challenging. The pioneering work in this area was rooted in the theory of Bayesian network (BN) learning, which however, is a NP-complete problem. Hence several constraint-based algorithms have been developed to efficiently discover causations in large databases. These methods usually use the idea of BN learning, directly or indirectly, and are focused on causal relationships with single cause variables. In this paper, we propose an approach to mine causal rules in large databases of binary variables. Our method expands the scope of causality discovery to causal relationships with multiple cause variables, and we utilise partial association tests to exclude noncausal associations, to ensure the high reliability of discovered causal rules. Furthermore an efficient algorithm is designed for the tests in large databases. We assess the method with a set of real-world diagnostic data. The results show that our method can effectively discover interesting causal rules in large databases. A key feature of modern optimal planners such as graphplan and blackbox is their ability to prune large parts of the search space. Previous Partial Order Causal Link (POCL) planners provide an alternative branching scheme but lacking comparable pruning mechanisms do not perform as well. In this paper, a domain-independent formulation of temporal planning based on Constraint Programming is introduced that successfully combines a POCL branching scheme with powerful and sound pruning rules. The key novelty in the formulation is the ability to reason about supports, precedences, and causal links involving actions that are not in the plan. Experiments over a wide range of benchmarks show that the resulting optimal temporal planner is much faster than current ones and is competitive with the best parallel planners in the special case in which actions have all the same duration. Modelling is becoming a necessity in studying biological signalling pathways, because the combinatorial complexity of such systems rapidly overwhelms intuitive and qualitative forms of reasoning. Yet, this same combinatorial explosion makes the traditional modelling paradigm based on systems of differential equations impractical. In contrast, agentbased or concurrent languages, such as ? [1,2,3] or the closely related BioNetGen language [4,5,6,7,8,9,10], describe biological interactions in terms of rules, thereby avoiding the combinatorial explosion besetting differential equations. Rules are expressed in an intuitive graphical form that transparently represents biological knowledge. In this way, rules become a natural unit of model building, modification, and discussion. We illustrate this with a sizeable example obtained from refactoring two models of EGF receptor signalling that are based on differential equations [11,12]. An exciting aspect of the agent-based approach is that it naturally lends itself to the identification and analysis of the causal structures that deeply shape the dynamical, and perhaps even evolutionary, characteristics of complex distributed biological systems. In particular, one can adapt the notions of causality and conflict, familiar from concurrency theory, to ?, our representation language of choice. Using the EGF receptor model as an example, we show how causality enables the formalization of the colloquial concept of pathway and, perhaps more surprisingly, how conflict can be used to dissect the signalling dynamics to obtain a qualitative handle on the range of system behaviours. By taming the combinatorial explosion, and exposing the causal structures and key kinetic junctures in a model, agent- and rule-based representations hold promise for making modelling more powerful, more perspicuous, and of appeal to a wider audience. Michotte's theory of ampliation suggests that causal relationships are perceived by objects animated under appropriate spatiotemporal conditions. We extend the theory of ampliation and propose that the immediate perception of complex causal relations is also dependent on a set of structural and temporal rules. We designed animated representations, based on Michotte's rules, for showing complex causal relationships or causal semantics. In this paper we describe a set of animations for showing semantics such as causal amplification, causal strength, causal dampening, and causal multiplicity. In a two part study we compared the effectiveness of both the static and animated representations. The first study (N=44) asked participants to recall passages that were previously displayed using both types of representations. Participants were 8 more accurate in recalling causal semantics when they were presented using animations instead of static graphs. In the second study (N=112) we evaluated the intuitiveness of the representations. Our results showed that while users were as accurate with the static graphs as with the animations, they were 9 faster in matching the correct causal statements in the animated condition. Overall our results show that animated diagrams that are designed based on perceptual rules such as those proposed by Michotte have the potential to facilitate comprehension of complex causal relations. Inferring the causal structure that links n observables is usually based upon detecting statistical dependences and choosing simple graphs that make the joint measure Markovian. Here we argue why causal inference is also possible when the sample size is one. We develop a theory how to generate causal graphs explaining similarities between single objects. To this end, we replace the notion of conditional stochastic independence in the causal Markov condition with the vanishing of conditional algorithmic mutual information and describe the corresponding causal inference rules. We explain why a consistent reformulation of causal inference in terms of algorithmic complexity implies a new inference principle that takes into account also the complexity of conditional probability densities, making it possible to select among Markov equivalent causal graphs. This insight provides a theoretical foundation of a heuristic principle proposed in earlier work. We also sketch some ideas on how to replace Kolmogorov complexity with decidable complexity criteria. This can be seen as an algorithmic analog of replacing the empirically undecidable question of statistical independence with practical independence tests that are based on implicit or explicit assumptions on the underlying distribution. Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60] 1. Introduction to probabilities, graphs, and causal models 2. A theory of inferred causation 3. Causal diagrams and the identification of causal effects 4. Actions, plans, and direct effects 5. Causality and structural models in the social sciences 6. Simpson's paradox, confounding, and collapsibility 7. Structural and counterfactual models 8. Imperfect experiments: bounds and counterfactuals 9. Probability of causation: interpretation and identification Epilogue: the art and science of cause and effect. Abstract Newcomb's problem and similar cases show the need to incorporate causal distinctions into the theory of rational decision; the usual noncausal decision theory, though simpler, does not always give the right answers. I give my own version of causal decision theory, compare it with versions offered by several other authors, and suggest that the versions have more in common than meets the eye. App developers would like to understand the impact of their own and their competitors’ software releases. To address this we introduce Causal Impact Release Analysis for app stores, and our tool, CIRA, that implements this analysis. We mined 38,858 popular Google Play apps, over a period of 12 months. For these apps, we identified 26,339 releases for which there was adequate prior and posterior time series data to facilitate causal impact analysis. We found that 33 of these releases caused a statistically significant change in user ratings. We use our approach to reveal important characteristics that distinguish causal significance in Google Play. To explore the actionability of causal impact analysis, we elicited the opinions of app developers: 56 companies responded, 78 concurred with the causal assessment, of which 33 claimed that their company would consider changing its app release strategy as a result of our findings. We examine the meaning of causality in calculi for mobile processes like the π-calculus, and we investigate the relationship between interleaving and causal semantics for such calculi. We separate two forms of causal dependencies on actions of π-calculus processes, called subject and object dependencies: The former originate from the nesting of prefixes and are propagated through interactions among processes (they are the only form of causal dependencies present in CCS-like languages); the latter originate from the binding mechanisms on names. We propose a notion of causal bisimulation which distinguishes processes which differ for the subject or for the object dependencies. We show that this causal equivalence can be reconducted to, or implemented into, the ordinary interleaving observation equivalence. We prove that our encoding is fully abstract w.r.t. the two behavioural equivalences. This allows us to exploit the simpler theory of the interleaving semantics to reason about the causal one. In [San94b] a similar programme is carried out for location bisimulation [BCHK91], a non-interleaving spatial-sensitive (as opposed to causal-sensitive) behavioural equivalence. The comparison between the encodings of causal bisimulation in this paper, and of location bisimulation in [San94b], evidences the similarities and the differences between these two equivalences. We investigate the minimization of Newton's functional for the problem of the body of minimal resistance with maximal height @math cite butt in the class of convex developable functions defined in a disc. This class is a natural candidate to find a (non-radial) minimizer in accordance with the results of cite lrp2. We prove that the minimizer in this class has a minimal set in the form of a regular polygon with @math sides centered in the disc, and numerical experiments indicate that the natural number @math is a non-decreasing function of @math . The corresponding functions all achieve a lower value of the functional than the optimal radially symmetric function with the same height @math . Abstract There are two distinct formalizations for reasoning from observations to explanations, as in diagnostic tasks. The consistency based approach treats the task as a deductive one, in which the explanation is deduced from a background theory and a minimal set of abnormalities. The abductive method, on the other hand, treats explanations as sentences that, when added to the background theory, derive the observations. We show that there is a close connection between these two formalizations in the context of simple causal theories: domain theories in which a set of sentences are singled out as the explanatorily relevant causes of observations. There are two main results, which show that (with certain caveats) the consistency based approach can emulate abductive reasoning by adding closure axioms to a causal theory; and that abductive techniques can be used in place of the consistency based method in the domain of logic based diagnosis. It is especially interesting that in the latter case, the abductive techniques generate only relevant explanations, while diagnoses may have irrelevant elements. This chapter reviews techniques for learning causal relationships from data, in application to the problem of feature selection. Most feature selection methods do not attempt to uncover causal relationships between feature and target and focus instead on making best predictions. We examine situations in which the knowledge of causal relationships benefits feature selection. Such benefits may include: explaining relevance in terms of causal mechanisms, distinguishing between actual features and experimental artifacts, predicting the consequences of actions performed by external agents, and making predictions in non-stationary environments. Conversely, we highlight the benefits that causal discovery may draw from recent developments in feature selection theory and algorithms. Mining for association rules in market basket data has proved a fruitful area of research. Measures such as conditional probability (confidence) and correlation have been used to infer rules of the form “the existence of item A implies the existence of item B.” However, such rules indicate only a statistical relationship between A and B. They do not specify the nature of the relationship: whether the presence of A causes the presence of B, or the converse, or some other attribute or phenomenon causes both to appear together. In applications, knowing such causal relationships is extremely useful for enhancing understanding and effecting change. While distinguishing causality from correlation is a truly difficult problem, recent work in statistics and Bayesian learning provide some avenues of attack. In these fields, the goal has generally been to learn complete causal models, which are essentially impossible to learn in large-scale data mining applications with a large number of variables. In this paper, we consider the problem of determining casual relationships, instead of mere associations, when mining market basket data. We identify some problems with the direct application of Bayesian learning ideas to mining large databases, concerning both the scalability of algorithms and the appropriateness of the statistical techniques, and introduce some initial ideas for dealing with these problems. We present experimental results from applying our algorithms on several large, real-world data sets. The results indicate that the approach proposed here is both computationally feasible and successful in identifying interesting causal structures. An interesting outcome is that it is perhaps easier to infer the lack of causality than to infer causality, information that is useful in preventing erroneous decision making.