Joaquín Arias

Ondřej Vašíček, Joaquín Arias, Jan Fiedor et al.

Event Calculus (EC) implemented in answer set programming (ASP) has proven suitable for specifying requirements on safety-critical systems thanks to its elegant representation of both discrete and continuous changes and its semantic closeness to semi-formal natural language. However, continuous changes and the size of value domains of time and system properties (fluents) pose significant challenges. Grounding-based ASP solvers, e.g., clingo, which implement Discrete EC (DEC), lead to combinatorial explosion in program size and inaccurate representation. The grounding-free s(CASP) does not discretize but struggles with non-termination due to its top-down execution. This paper introduces Hybrid EC, an extended axiomatization of DEC, that tackles the challenges via functional fluents and a mapping of time to abstract steps. We implement it using clingcon and clingo-lpx (Hybrid ASP systems over integers and rationals, respectively) where the value (dense) domains of fluents and time are represented as linear constraints and evaluated by external solvers, while ensuring termination whenever solutions exist. We validate both implementations on a number of examples and observe that they are unaffected by the size of the domains and that handling rationals does not impact scalability. Most importantly, the ability of clingo-lpx to handle dense domains enables accurate modeling of continuous change.

Yankai Zeng, Abhiramon Rajasekharan, Parth Padalkar et al.

Achieving human-like communication with machines remains a classic, challenging topic in the field of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning and Natural Language Processing. These Large Language Models (LLMs) rely on pattern-matching rather than a true understanding of the semantic meaning of a sentence. As a result, they may generate incorrect responses. To generate an assuredly correct response, one has to "understand" the semantics of a sentence. To achieve this "understanding", logic-based (commonsense) reasoning methods such as Answer Set Programming (ASP) are arguably needed. In this paper, we describe the AutoConcierge system that leverages LLMs and ASP to develop a conversational agent that can truly "understand" human dialogs in restricted domains. AutoConcierge is focused on a specific domain-advising users about restaurants in their local area based on their preferences. AutoConcierge will interactively understand a user's utterances, identify the missing information in them, and request the user via a natural language sentence to provide it. Once AutoConcierge has determined that all the information has been received, it computes a restaurant recommendation based on the user-preferences it has acquired from the human user. AutoConcierge is based on our STAR framework developed earlier, which uses GPT-3 to convert human dialogs into predicates that capture the deep structure of the dialog's sentence. These predicates are then input into the goal-directed s(CASP) ASP system for performing commonsense reasoning. To the best of our knowledge, AutoConcierge is the first automated conversational agent that can realistically converse like a human and provide help to humans based on truly understanding human utterances.

Yankai Zeng, Abhiramon Rajashekharan, Kinjal Basu et al.

The development of large language models (LLMs), such as GPT, has enabled the construction of several socialbots, like ChatGPT, that are receiving a lot of attention for their ability to simulate a human conversation. However, the conversation is not guided by a goal and is hard to control. In addition, because LLMs rely more on pattern recognition than deductive reasoning, they can give confusing answers and have difficulty integrating multiple topics into a cohesive response. These limitations often lead the LLM to deviate from the main topic to keep the conversation interesting. We propose AutoCompanion, a socialbot that uses an LLM model to translate natural language into predicates (and vice versa) and employs commonsense reasoning based on Answer Set Programming (ASP) to hold a social conversation with a human. In particular, we rely on s(CASP), a goal-directed implementation of ASP as the backend. This paper presents the framework design and how an LLM is used to parse user messages and generate a response from the s(CASP) engine output. To validate our proposal, we describe (real) conversations in which the chatbot's goal is to keep the user entertained by talking about movies and books, and s(CASP) ensures (i) correctness of answers, (ii) coherence (and precision) during the conversation, which it dynamically regulates to achieve its specific purpose, and (iii) no deviation from the main topic.

Sopam Dasgupta, Joaquín Arias, Elmer Salazar et al.

Machine learning models are increasingly used in areas such as loan approvals and hiring, yet they often function as black boxes, obscuring their decision-making processes. Transparency is crucial, and individuals need explanations to understand decisions, especially for the ones not desired by the user. Ethical and legal considerations require informing individuals of changes in input attribute values (features) that could lead to a desired outcome for the user. Our work aims to generate counterfactual explanations by considering causal dependencies between features. We present the CoGS (Counterfactual Generation with s(CASP)) framework that utilizes the goal-directed Answer Set Programming system s(CASP) to generate counterfactuals from rule-based machine learning models, specifically the FOLD-SE algorithm. CoGS computes realistic and causally consistent changes to attribute values taking causal dependencies between them into account. It finds a path from an undesired outcome to a desired one using counterfactuals. We present details of the CoGS framework along with its evaluation.

Gopal Gupta, Abhiramon Rajasekharan, Alexis R. Tudor et al.

We consider the problem of implementing deontic modal logic. We show how (deontic) modal operators can be elegantly and directly expressed using default negation (negation-as-failure) and strong negation present in answer set programming (ASP). We propose using global constraints of ASP to represent obligations, prohibitions, and permissions in deontic modal logic. We show that our proposed representation results in the various decades-old paradoxes of deontic modal logic being simply and elegantly resolved. Our method also serves as a means for modeling conditional obligations and conditional prohibitions in knowledge representation.

Sopam Dasgupta, Farhad Shakerin, Joaquín Arias et al.

Machine learning models that automate decision-making are increasingly being used in consequential areas such as loan approvals, pretrial bail, hiring, and many more. Unfortunately, most of these models are black-boxes, i.e., they are unable to reveal how they reach these prediction decisions. A need for transparency demands justification for such predictions. An affected individual might desire explanations to understand why a decision was made. Ethical and legal considerations may further require informing the individual of changes in the input attribute that could be made to produce a desirable outcome. This paper focuses on the latter problem of automatically generating counterfactual explanations. Our approach utilizes answer set programming and the s(CASP) goal-directed ASP system. Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-known knowledge representation and reasoning paradigm. s(CASP) is a goal-directed ASP system that executes answer-set programs top-down without grounding them. The query-driven nature of s(CASP) allows us to provide justifications as proof trees, which makes it possible to analyze the generated counterfactual explanations. We show how counterfactual explanations are computed and justified by imagining multiple possible worlds where some or all factual assumptions are untrue and, more importantly, how we can navigate between these worlds. We also show how our algorithm can be used to find the Craig Interpolant for a class of answer set programs for a failing query.

Sopam Dasgupta, Sadaf MD Halim, Joaquín Arias et al.

Machine learning models increasingly influence decisions in high-stakes settings such as finance, law and hiring, driving the need for transparent, interpretable outcomes. However, while explainable approaches can help understand the decisions being made, they may inadvertently reveal the underlying proprietary algorithm: an undesirable outcome for many practitioners. Consequently, it is crucial to balance meaningful transparency with a form of recourse that clarifies why a decision was made and offers actionable steps following which a favorable outcome can be obtained. Counterfactual explanations offer a powerful mechanism to address this need by showing how specific input changes lead to a more favorable prediction. We propose Model-Agnostic Causally Constrained Counterfactual Generation (MC3G), a novel framework that tackles limitations in the existing counterfactual methods. First, MC3G is model-agnostic: it approximates any black-box model using an explainable rule-based surrogate model. Second, this surrogate is used to generate counterfactuals that produce a favourable outcome for the original underlying black box model. Third, MC3G refines cost computation by excluding the ``effort" associated with feature changes that occur automatically due to causal dependencies. By focusing only on user-initiated changes, MC3G provides a more realistic and fair representation of the effort needed to achieve a favourable outcome. We show that MC3G delivers more interpretable and actionable counterfactual recommendations compared to existing techniques all while having a lower cost. Our findings highlight MC3G's potential to enhance transparency, accountability, and practical utility in decision-making processes that incorporate machine-learning approaches.

Sopam Dasgupta, Farhad Shakerin, Joaquín Arias et al.

Machine learning models that automate decision-making are increasingly being used in consequential areas such as loan approvals, pretrial bail approval, hiring, and many more. Unfortunately, most of these models are black-boxes, i.e., they are unable to reveal how they reach these prediction decisions. A need for transparency demands justification for such predictions. An affected individual might also desire explanations to understand why a decision was made. Ethical and legal considerations may further require informing the individual of changes in the input attribute that could be made to produce a desirable outcome. This paper focuses on the latter problem of automatically generating counterfactual explanations. We propose a framework Counterfactual Generation with s(CASP) (CFGS) that utilizes answer set programming (ASP) and the s(CASP) goal-directed ASP system to automatically generate counterfactual explanations from rules generated by rule-based machine learning (RBML) algorithms. In our framework, we show how counterfactual explanations are computed and justified by imagining worlds where some or all factual assumptions are altered/changed. More importantly, we show how we can navigate between these worlds, namely, go from our original world/scenario where we obtain an undesired outcome to the imagined world/scenario where we obtain a desired/favourable outcome.

Sopam Dasgupta, Sadaf MD Halim, Joaquín Arias et al.

Machine-learning models are increasingly driving decisions in high-stakes settings, such as finance, law, and hiring, thus, highlighting the need for transparency. However, the key challenge is to balance transparency -- clarifying `why' a decision was made -- with recourse: providing actionable steps on `how' to achieve a favourable outcome from an unfavourable outcome. Counterfactual explanations reveal `why' an undesired outcome occurred and `how' to reverse it through targeted feature changes (interventions). Current counterfactual approaches have limitations: 1) they often ignore causal dependencies between features, and 2) they typically assume all interventions can happen simultaneously, an unrealistic assumption in practical scenarios where actions are typically taken in a sequence. As a result, these counterfactuals are often not achievable in the real world. We present P2C (Path-to-Counterfactuals), a model-agnostic framework that produces a plan (ordered sequence of actions) converting an unfavourable outcome to a causally consistent favourable outcome. P2C addresses both limitations by 1) Explicitly modelling causal relationships between features and 2) Ensuring that each intermediate state in the plan is feasible and causally valid. P2C uses the goal-directed Answer Set Programming system s(CASP) to generate the plan accounting for feature changes that happen automatically due to causal dependencies. Furthermore, P2C refines cost (effort) computation by only counting changes actively made by the user, resulting in realistic cost estimates. Finally, P2C highlights how its causal planner outperforms standard planners, which lack causal knowledge and thus can generate illegal actions.

Gopal Gupta, Abhiramon Rajasekharan, Alexis R. Tudor et al.

We consider the problem of implementing deontic modal logic. We show how (deontic) modal operators can be expressed elegantly using default negation (negation-as-failure) and strong negation present in answer set programming (ASP). We propose using global constraints of ASP to represent obligations and impermissibilities of deontic modal logic. We show that our proposed representation results in the various paradoxes of deontic modal logic being elegantly resolved.

Sopam Dasgupta, Joaquín Arias, Elmer Salazar et al.

Machine learning models are increasingly used in critical areas such as loan approvals and hiring, yet they often function as black boxes, obscuring their decision-making processes. Transparency is crucial, as individuals need explanations to understand decisions, primarily if the decisions result in an undesired outcome. Our work introduces CoGS (Counterfactual Generation with s(CASP)), a model-agnostic framework capable of generating counterfactual explanations for classification models. CoGS leverages the goal-directed Answer Set Programming system s(CASP) to compute realistic and causally consistent modifications to feature values, accounting for causal dependencies between them. By using rule-based machine learning algorithms (RBML), notably the FOLD-SE algorithm, CoGS extracts the underlying logic of a statistical model to generate counterfactual solutions. By tracing a step-by-step path from an undesired outcome to a desired one, CoGS offers interpretable and actionable explanations of the changes required to achieve the desired outcome. We present details of the CoGS framework along with its evaluation.

Sopam Dasgupta, Joaquín Arias, Elmer Salazar et al.

Machine learning models that automate decision-making are increasingly used in consequential areas such as loan approvals, pretrial bail approval, and hiring. Unfortunately, most of these models are black boxes, i.e., they are unable to reveal how they reach these prediction decisions. A need for transparency demands justification for such predictions. An affected individual might also desire explanations to understand why a decision was made. Ethical and legal considerations require informing the individual of changes in the input attribute (s) that could be made to produce a desirable outcome. Our work focuses on the latter problem of generating counterfactual explanations by considering the causal dependencies between features. In this paper, we present the framework CFGs, CounterFactual Generation with s(CASP), which utilizes the goal-directed Answer Set Programming (ASP) system s(CASP) to automatically generate counterfactual explanations from models generated by rule-based machine learning algorithms in particular. We benchmark CFGs with the FOLD-SE model. Reaching the counterfactual state from the initial state is planned and achieved using a series of interventions. To validate our proposal, we show how counterfactual explanations are computed and justified by imagining worlds where some or all factual assumptions are altered/changed. More importantly, we show how CFGs navigates between these worlds, namely, go from our initial state where we obtain an undesired outcome to the imagined goal state where we obtain the desired decision, taking into account the causal relationships among features.

Andrés Holgado-Sánchez, Joaquín Arias, Holger Billhardt et al.

The emerging field of \emph{value awareness engineering} claims that software agents and systems should be value-aware, i.e. they must make decisions in accordance with human values. In this context, such agents must be capable of explicitly reasoning as to how far different courses of action are aligned with these values. For this purpose, values are often modelled as preferences over states or actions, which are then aggregated to determine the sequences of actions that are maximally aligned with a certain value. Recently, additional value admissibility constraints at this level have been considered as well. However, often relaxed versions of these constraints are needed, and this increases considerably the complexity of computing value-aligned policies. To obtain efficient algorithms that make value-aligned decisions considering admissibility relaxation, we propose the use of learning techniques, in particular, we have used constrained reinforcement learning algorithms. In this paper, we present two algorithms, $ε\text{-}ADQL$ for strategies based on local alignment and its extension $ε\text{-}CADQL$ for a sequence of decisions. We have validated their efficiency in a water distribution problem in a drought scenario.

Joaquín Arias, Mar Moreno-Rebato, José A. Rodríguez-García et al.

Automated legal reasoning and its application in smart contracts and automated decisions are increasingly attracting interest. In this context, ethical and legal concerns make it necessary for automated reasoners to justify in human-understandable terms the advice given. Logic Programming, specially Answer Set Programming, has a rich semantics and has been used to very concisely express complex knowledge. However, modelling discretionality to act and other vague concepts such as ambiguity cannot be expressed in top-down execution models based on Prolog, and in bottom-up execution models based on ASP the justifications are incomplete and/or not scalable. We propose to use s(CASP), a top-down execution model for predicate ASP, to model vague concepts following a set of patterns. We have implemented a framework, called s(LAW), to model, reason, and justify the applicable legislation and validate it by translating (and benchmarking) a representative use case, the criteria for the admission of students in the "Comunidad de Madrid".

Joaquín Arias, Manuel Carro, Gopal Gupta

Goal-directed evaluation of Answer Set Programs is gaining traction thanks to its amenability to create AI systems that can, due to the evaluation mechanism used, generate explanations and justifications. s(CASP) is one of these systems and has been already used to write reasoning systems in several fields. It provides enhanced expressiveness w.r.t. other ASP systems due to its ability to use constraints, data structures, and unbound variables natively. However, the performance of existing s(CASP) implementations is not on par with other ASP systems: model consistency is checked once models have been generated, in keeping with the generate-and-test paradigm. In this work, we present a variation of the top-down evaluation strategy, termed Dynamic Consistency Checking, which interleaves model generation and consistency checking. This makes it possible to determine when a literal is not compatible with the denials associated to the global constraints in the program, prune the current execution branch, and choose a different alternative. This strategy is specially (but not exclusively) relevant in problems with a high combinatorial component. We have experimentally observed speedups of up to 90x w.r.t. the standard versions of s(CASP).

Brendan Hall, Sarat Chandra Varanasi, Jan Fiedor et al.

We consider requirements for cyber-physical systems represented in constrained natural language. We present novel automated techniques for aiding in the development of these requirements so that they are consistent and can withstand perceived failures. We show how cyber-physical systems' requirements can be modeled using the event calculus (EC), a formalism used in AI for representing actions and change. We also show how answer set programming (ASP) and its query-driven implementation s(CASP) can be used to directly realize the event calculus model of the requirements. This event calculus model can be used to automatically validate the requirements. Since ASP is an expressive knowledge representation language, it can also be used to represent contextual knowledge about cyber-physical systems, which, in turn, can be used to find gaps in their requirements specifications. We illustrate our approach through an altitude alerting system from the avionics domain.

Joaquín Arias, Manuel Carro, Zhuo Chen et al.

Automated commonsense reasoning is essential for building human-like AI systems featuring, for example, explainable AI. Event Calculus (EC) is a family of formalisms that model commonsense reasoning with a sound, logical basis. Previous attempts to mechanize reasoning using EC faced difficulties in the treatment of the continuous change in dense domains (e.g., time and other physical quantities), constraints among variables, default negation, and the uniform application of different inference methods, among others. We propose the use of s(CASP), a query-driven, top-down execution model for Predicate Answer Set Programming with Constraints, to model and reason using EC. We show how EC scenarios can be naturally and directly encoded in s(CASP) and how it enables deductive and abductive reasoning tasks in domains featuring constraints involving both dense time and dense fluents.