Michael Cashmore

Kyle Mana, Fernando Acero, Stephen Mak et al.

Discrete optimization belongs to the set of $\mathcal{NP}$-hard problems, spanning fields such as mixed-integer programming and combinatorial optimization. A current standard approach to solving convex discrete optimization problems is the use of cutting-plane algorithms, which reach optimal solutions by iteratively adding inequalities known as \textit{cuts} to refine a feasible set. Despite the existence of a number of general-purpose cut-generating algorithms, large-scale discrete optimization problems continue to suffer from intractability. In this work, we propose a method for accelerating cutting-plane algorithms via reinforcement learning. Our approach uses learned policies as surrogates for $\mathcal{NP}$-hard elements of the cut generating procedure in a way that (i) accelerates convergence, and (ii) retains guarantees of optimality. We apply our method on two types of problems where cutting-plane algorithms are commonly used: stochastic optimization, and mixed-integer quadratic programming. We observe the benefits of our method when applied to Benders decomposition (stochastic optimization) and iterative loss approximation (quadratic programming), achieving up to $45\%$ faster average convergence when compared to modern alternative algorithms.

Manuel R. Torres, Parisa Zehtabi, Michael Cashmore et al.

In this work we consider a new interpretation of fairness in decision making problems. Building upon existing fairness formulations, we focus on how to reason over fairness from a temporal perspective, taking into account the fairness of a history of past decisions. After introducing the concept of temporal fairness, we propose three approaches that incorporate temporal fairness in decision making problems formulated as optimization problems. We present a qualitative evaluation of our approach in four different domains and compare the solutions against a baseline approach that does not consider the temporal aspect of fairness.

Anton Ipsen, Michael Cashmore, Kirsty Fielding et al.

We introduce the Hierarchical Seating Allocation Problem (HSAP) which addresses the optimal assignment of hierarchically structured organizational teams to physical seating arrangements on a floor plan. This problem is driven by the necessity for large organizations with large hierarchies to ensure that teams with close hierarchical relationships are seated in proximity to one another, such as ensuring a research group occupies a contiguous area. Currently, this problem is managed manually leading to infrequent and suboptimal replanning efforts. To alleviate this manual process, we propose an end-to-end framework to solve the HSAP. A scalable approach to calculate the distance between any pair of seats using a probabilistic road map (PRM) and rapidly-exploring random trees (RRT) which is combined with heuristic search and dynamic programming approach to solve the HSAP using integer programming. We demonstrate our approach under different sized instances by evaluating the PRM framework and subsequent allocations both quantitatively and qualitatively.

Andrew Murray, Danial Dervovic, Alberto Pozanco et al.

We present GenePlan (GENeralized Evolutionary Planner), a novel framework that leverages large language model (LLM) assisted evolutionary algorithms to generate domain-dependent generalized planners for classical planning tasks described in PDDL. By casting generalized planning as an optimization problem, GenePlan iteratively evolves interpretable Python planners that minimize plan length across diverse problem instances. In empirical evaluation across six existing benchmark domains and two new domains, GenePlan achieved an average SAT score of 0.91, closely matching the performance of the state-of-the-art planners (SAT score 0.93), and significantly outperforming other LLM-based baselines such as chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting (average SAT score 0.64). The generated planners solve new instances rapidly (average 0.49 seconds per task) and at low cost (average $1.82 per domain using GPT-4o).

Fernando Acero, Parisa Zehtabi, Nicolas Marchesotti et al.

Portfolio optimization involves determining the optimal allocation of portfolio assets in order to maximize a given investment objective. Traditionally, some form of mean-variance optimization is used with the aim of maximizing returns while minimizing risk, however, more recently, deep reinforcement learning formulations have been explored. Increasingly, investors have demonstrated an interest in incorporating ESG objectives when making investment decisions, and modifications to the classical mean-variance optimization framework have been developed. In this work, we study the use of deep reinforcement learning for responsible portfolio optimization, by incorporating ESG states and objectives, and provide comparisons against modified mean-variance approaches. Our results show that deep reinforcement learning policies can provide competitive performance against mean-variance approaches for responsible portfolio allocation across additive and multiplicative utility functions of financial and ESG responsibility objectives.

Uljad Berdica, Fernando Acero, Anton Ipsen et al.

We study Contextual Multi-Armed Bandits (CMABs) for non-episodic sequential decision making problems where the context includes both textual and numerical information (e.g., recommendation systems, dynamic portfolio adjustments, offer selection; all frequent problems in finance). While Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to these settings, utilizing LLMs for reasoning at every decision step is computationally expensive and uncertainty estimates are difficult to obtain. To address this, we introduce LLMP-UCB, a bandit algorithm that derives uncertainty estimates from LLMs via repeated inference. However, our experiments demonstrate that lightweight numerical bandits operating on text embeddings (dense or Matryoshka) match or exceed the accuracy of LLM-based solutions at a fraction of their cost. We further show that embedding dimensionality is a practical lever on the exploration-exploitation balance, enabling cost--performance tradeoffs without prompt complexity. Finally, to guide practitioners, we propose a geometric diagnostic based on the arms' embedding to decide when to use LLM-driven reasoning versus a lightweight numerical bandit. Our results provide a principled deployment framework for cost-effective, uncertainty-aware decision systems with broad applicability across AI use cases in financial services.

Yufei Wu, Manuel R. Torres, Parisa Zehtabi et al.

This paper presents a new combinatorial optimisation task, the Subset Sum Matching Problem (SSMP), which is an abstraction of common financial applications such as trades reconciliation. We present three algorithms, two suboptimal and one optimal, to solve this problem. We also generate a benchmark to cover different instances of SSMP varying in complexity, and carry out an experimental evaluation to assess the performance of the approaches.

Andrew Murray, Danial Dervovic, Michael Cashmore

Time-series prediction involves forecasting future values using machine learning models. Feature engineering, whereby existing features are transformed to make new ones, is critical for enhancing model performance, but is often manual and time-intensive. Existing automation attempts rely on exhaustive enumeration, which can be computationally costly and lacks domain-specific insights. We introduce ELATE (Evolutionary Language model for Automated Time-series Engineering), which leverages a language model within an evolutionary framework to automate feature engineering for time-series data. ELATE employs time-series statistical measures and feature importance metrics to guide and prune features, while the language model proposes new, contextually relevant feature transformations. Our experiments demonstrate that ELATE improves forecasting accuracy by an average of 8.4% across various domains.

Danial Dervovic, Michael Cashmore

Missing data in supervised learning is well-studied, but the specific issue of missing labels during model evaluation has been overlooked. Ignoring samples with missing values, a common solution, can introduce bias, especially when data is Missing Not At Random (MNAR). We propose a multiple imputation technique for evaluating classifiers using metrics such as precision, recall, and ROC-AUC. This method not only offers point estimates but also a predictive distribution for these quantities when labels are missing. We empirically show that the predictive distribution's location and shape are generally correct, even in the MNAR regime. Moreover, we establish that this distribution is approximately Gaussian and provide finite-sample convergence bounds. Additionally, a robustness proof is presented, confirming the validity of the approximation under a realistic error model.

Saeid Amiri, Parisa Zehtabi, Danial Dervovic et al.

Industries frequently adjust their facilities network by opening new branches in promising areas and closing branches in areas where they expect low profits. In this paper, we examine a particular class of facility location problems. Our objective is to minimize the loss of sales resulting from the removal of several retail stores. However, estimating sales accurately is expensive and time-consuming. To overcome this challenge, we leverage Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) assisted by a surrogate model that computes evaluations faster. Results suggest that MCTS supported by a fast surrogate function can generate solutions faster while maintaining a consistent solution compared to MCTS that does not benefit from the surrogate function.

Benjamin Krarup, Senka Krivic, Daniele Magazzeni et al.

In automated planning, the need for explanations arises when there is a mismatch between a proposed plan and the user's expectation. We frame Explainable AI Planning in the context of the plan negotiation problem, in which a succession of hypothetical planning problems are generated and solved. The object of the negotiation is for the user to understand and ultimately arrive at a satisfactory plan. We present the results of a user study that demonstrates that when users ask questions about plans, those questions are contrastive, i.e. "why A rather than B?". We use the data from this study to construct a taxonomy of user questions that often arise during plan negotiation. We formally define our approach to plan negotiation through model restriction as an iterative process. This approach generates hypothetical problems and contrastive plans by restricting the model through constraints implied by user questions. We formally define model-based compilations in PDDL2.1 of each constraint derived from a user question in the taxonomy, and empirically evaluate the compilations in terms of computational complexity. The compilations were implemented as part of an explanation framework that employs iterative model restriction. We demonstrate its benefits in a second user study.

Oscar Lima, Michael Cashmore, Daniele Magazzeni et al.

In order to ensure the robust actuation of a plan, execution must be adaptable to unexpected situations in the world and to exogenous events. This is critical in domains in which committing to a wrong ordering of actions can cause the plan failure, even when all the actions succeed. We propose an approach to the execution of a task plan that permits some adaptability to unexpected observations of the state while maintaining the validity of the plan through online reasoning. Our approach computes an adaptable, partially-ordered plan from a given totally-ordered plan. The partially-ordered plan is adaptable in that it can exploit beneficial differences between the world and what was expected. The approach is general in that it can be used with any task planner that produces either a totally or a partially-ordered plan. We propose a plan execution algorithm that computes online the complete set of valid totally-ordered plans described by an adaptable partially-ordered plan together with the probability of success for each of them. This set is then used to choose the next action to execute.

Michael Cashmore, Alessandro Cimatti, Daniele Magazzeni et al.

One of the major limitations for the employment of model-based planning and scheduling in practical applications is the need of costly re-planning when an incongruence between the observed reality and the formal model is encountered during execution. Robustness Envelopes characterize the set of possible contingencies that a plan is able to address without re-planning, but their exact computation is extremely expensive; furthermore, general robustness envelopes are not amenable for efficient execution. In this paper, we present a novel, anytime algorithm to approximate Robustness Envelopes, making them scalable and executable. This is proven by an experimental analysis showing the efficiency of the algorithm, and by a concrete case study where the execution of robustness envelopes significantly reduces the number of re-plannings.

Michael Cashmore, Anna Collins, Benjamin Krarup et al.

Explainable AI is an important area of research within which Explainable Planning is an emerging topic. In this paper, we argue that Explainable Planning can be designed as a service -- that is, as a wrapper around an existing planning system that utilises the existing planner to assist in answering contrastive questions. We introduce a prototype framework to facilitate this, along with some examples of how a planner can be used to address certain types of contrastive questions. We discuss the main advantages and limitations of such an approach and we identify open questions for Explainable Planning as a service that identify several possible research directions.

Rita Borgo, Michael Cashmore, Daniele Magazzeni

In order to engender trust in AI, humans must understand what an AI system is trying to achieve, and why. To overcome this problem, the underlying AI process must produce justifications and explanations that are both transparent and comprehensible to the user. AI Planning is well placed to be able to address this challenge. In this paper we present a methodology to provide initial explanations for the decisions made by the planner. Explanations are created by allowing the user to suggest alternative actions in plans and then compare the resulting plans with the one found by the planner. The methodology is implemented in the new XAI-Plan framework.