Emiliano Lorini

Xinghan Liu, Emiliano Lorini, Antonino Rotolo et al.

This paper brings together two lines of research: factor-based models of case-based reasoning (CBR) and the logical specification of classifiers. Logical approaches to classifiers capture the connection between features and outcomes in classifier systems. Factor-based reasoning is a popular approach to reasoning by precedent in AI & Law. Horty (2011) has developed the factor-based models of precedent into a theory of precedential constraint. In this paper we combine the modal logic approach (binary-input classifier, BLC) to classifiers and their explanations given by Liu & Lorini (2021) with Horty's account of factor-based CBR, since both a classifier and CBR map sets of features to decisions or classifications. We reformulate case bases of Horty in the language of BCL, and give several representation results. Furthermore, we show how notions of CBR, e.g. reason, preference between reasons, can be analyzed by notions of classifier system.

Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini, Timothy Parker et al.

In this paper we propose a framework for ethical decision making in the context of planning, with intended application to robotics. We put forward a compact but highly expressive language for ethical planning that combines linear temporal logic with lexicographic preference modelling. This original combination allows us to assess plans both with respect to an agent's values and their desires, introducing the novel concept of the morality level of an agent and moving towards multigoal, multivalue planning. We initiate the study of computational complexity of planning tasks in our setting, and we discuss potential applications to robotics.

Timothy Parker, Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini

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.

Van-Duy Ngo, Stergos Afantenos, Emiliano Lorini et al.

In this paper, we adopt a relational view of analogies applied to Semantic Role Classification in FrameNet. We define analogies as formal relations over the Cartesian product of frame evoking lexical units (LUs) and frame element (FEs) pairs, which we use to construct a new dataset. Each element of this binary relation is labelled as a valid analogical instance if the frame elements share the same semantic role, or as invalid otherwise. This formulation allows us to transform Semantic Role Classification into binary classification and train a lightweight Artificial Neural Network (ANN) that exhibits rapid convergence with minimal parameters. Unconventionally, no Semantic Role information is introduced to the neural network during training. We recover semantic roles during inference by computing probability distributions over candidates of all semantic roles within a given frame through random sampling and analogical transfer. This approach allows us to surpass previous state-of-the-art results while maintaining computational efficiency and frugality.

Anushka Debnath, Stephen Cranefield, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu et al.

Trust plays a pivotal role in enabling effective cooperation, reducing uncertainty, and guiding decision-making in both human interactions and multi-agent systems. Although it is significant, there is limited understanding of how large language models (LLMs) internally conceptualize and reason about trust. This work presents a white-box analysis of trust representation in EleutherAI/gpt-j-6B, using contrastive prompting to generate embedding vectors within the activation space of the LLM for diadic trust and related interpersonal relationship attributes. We first identified trust-related concepts from five established human trust models. We then determined a threshold for significant conceptual alignment by computing pairwise cosine similarities across 60 general emotional concepts. Then we measured the cosine similarities between the LLM's internal representation of trust and the derived trust-related concepts. Our results show that the internal trust representation of EleutherAI/gpt-j-6B aligns most closely with the Castelfranchi socio-cognitive model, followed by the Marsh Model. These findings indicate that LLMs encode socio-cognitive constructs in their activation space in ways that support meaningful comparative analyses, inform theories of social cognition, and support the design of human-AI collaborative systems.

Tiago de Lima, Emiliano Lorini, François Schwarzentruber

We present a novel semantics for the language of multi-agent only believing exploiting belief bases, and show how to use it for automatically checking formulas of this language and of its dynamic extension with private belief expansion operators. We provide a PSPACE algorithm for model checking relying on a reduction to QBF and alternative dedicated algorithm relying on the exploration of the state space. We present an implementation of the QBF-based algorithm and some experimental results on computation time in a concrete example.

Aditya Kar, Emiliano Lorini, Timothée Masquelier

We provide a causal analysis of Binary Spiking Neural Networks (BSNNs) to explain their behavior. We formally define a BSNN and represent its spiking activity as a binary causal model. Thanks to this causal representation, we are able to explain the output of the network by leveraging logic-based methods. In particular, we show that we can successfully use a SAT as well as a SMT solver to compute abductive explanations from this binary causal model. To illustrate our approach, we trained the BSNN on the standard MNIST dataset and applied our SAT-based and SMT-based methods to finding abductive explanations of the network's classifications based on pixel-level features. We also compared the found explanations against SHAP, a popular method used in the area of explainable AI. We show that, unlike SHAP, our approach guarantees that a found explanation does not contain completely irrelevant features.

Emiliano Lorini, Dmitry Rozplokhas

We introduce a new logic of graded distributed belief that allows us to express the fact that a group of agents distributively believe that a certain fact holds with at least strength k. We interpret our logic by means of computationally grounded semantics relying on the concept of belief base. The strength of the group's distributed belief is directly computed from the group's belief base after having merged its members' individual belief bases. We illustrate our logic with an intuitive example, formalizing the notion of epistemic disagreement. We also provide a sound and complete Hilbert-style axiomatization, decidability result obtained via filtration, and a tableaux-based decision procedure that allows us to state PSPACE-completeness for our logic.

Anushka Debnath, Stephen Cranefield, Emiliano Lorini et al.

In human society, trust is an essential component of social attitude that helps build and maintain long-term, healthy relationships which creates a strong foundation for cooperation, enabling individuals to work together effectively and achieve shared goals. As many human interactions occur through electronic means such as using mobile apps, the potential arises for AI systems to assist users in understanding the social state of their relationships. In this paper we investigate the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to reason about trust between two individuals in an environment which requires fostering trust relationships. We also assess whether LLMs are capable of inducing trust by role-playing one party in a trust based interaction and planning actions which can instil trust.

Tiago de Lima, Emiliano Lorini, Elise Perrotin et al.

We introduce a novel language for reasoning about agents' cognitive attitudes of both epistemic and motivational type. We interpret it by means of a computationally grounded semantics using belief bases. Our language includes five types of modal operators for implicit belief, complete attraction, complete repulsion, realistic attraction and realistic repulsion. We give an axiomatization and show that our operators are not mutually expressible and that they can be combined to represent a large variety of psychological concepts including ambivalence, indifference, being motivated, being demotivated and preference. We present a dynamic extension of the language that supports reasoning about the effects of belief change operations. Finally, we provide a succinct formulation of model checking for our languages and a PSPACE model checking algorithm relying on a reduction into TQBF. We present some experimental results for the implemented algorithm on computation time in a concrete example.

Timothy Parker, Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini

Responsibility is a key notion in multi-agent systems and in creating safe, reliable and ethical AI. However, most previous work on responsibility has only considered responsibility for single outcomes. In this paper we present a model for responsibility attribution in a multi-agent, multi-value setting. We also expand our model to cover responsibility anticipation, demonstrating how considerations of responsibility can help an agent to select strategies that are in line with its values. In particular we show that non-dominated regret-minimising strategies reliably minimise an agent's expected degree of responsibility.

Giuseppe De Giacomo, Emiliano Lorini, Timothy Parker et al.

Responsibility is one of the key notions in machine ethics and in the area of autonomous systems. It is a multi-faceted notion involving counterfactual reasoning about actions and strategies. In this paper, we study different variants of responsibility in a strategic setting based on LTLf. We show a connection with notions in reactive synthesis, including synthesis of winning, dominant, and best-effort strategies. This connection provides the building blocks for a computational grounding of responsibility including complexity characterizations and sound, complete, and optimal algorithms for attributing and anticipating responsibility.

Xinghan Liu, Emiliano Lorini

Recent years have witnessed a renewed interest in Boolean function in explaining binary classifiers in the field of explainable AI (XAI). The standard approach of Boolean function is propositional logic. We present a modal language of a ceteris paribus nature which supports reasoning about binary input classifiers and their properties. We study a family of classifier models, axiomatize it as two proof systems regarding the cardinality of the language and show completeness of our axiomatics. Moreover, we prove that satisfiability checking problem for our modal language is NEXPTIME-complete in the infinite-variable case, while it becomes polynomial in the finite-variable case. We furthermore identify an interesting NP fragment of our language in the infinite-variable case. We leverage the language to formalize counterfactual conditional as well as a variety of notions of explanation including abductive, contrastive and counterfactual explanations, and biases. Finally, we present two extensions of our language: a dynamic extension by the notion of assignment enabling classifier change and an epistemic extension in which the classifier's uncertainty about the actual input can be represented.

Emiliano Lorini

We present a general logical framework for reasoning about agents' cognitive attitudes of both epistemic type and motivational type. We show that it allows us to express a variety of relevant concepts for qualitative decision theory including the concepts of knowledge, belief, strong belief, conditional belief, desire, conditional desire, strong desire and preference. We also present two extensions of the logic, one by the notion of choice and the other by dynamic operators for belief change and desire change, and we apply the former to the analysis of single-stage games under incomplete information. We provide sound and complete axiomatizations for the basic logic and for its two extensions. The paper is under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

Roberta Calegari, Andrea Loreggia, Emiliano Lorini et al.

In a ceteris-paribus semantics for deontic logic, a state of affairs where a larger set of prescriptions is respected is preferable to a state of affairs where some of them are violated. Conditional preference nets (CP-nets) are a compact formalism to express and analyse ceteris paribus preferences, which nice computational properties. This paper shows how deontic concepts can be captured through conditional preference models. A restricted deontic logic will be defined, and mapped into conditional preference nets. We shall also show how to model contrary to duties obligations in CP-nets and how to capture in this formalism the distinction between strong and weak permission.

Emiliano Lorini

We introduce a semantics for epistemic logic exploiting a belief base abstraction. Differently from existing Kripke-style semantics for epistemic logic in which the notions of possible world and epistemic alternative are primitive, in the proposed semantics they are non-primitive but are defined from the concept of belief base. We show that this semantics allows us to define the universal epistemic model in a simpler and more compact way than existing inductive constructions of it. We provide (i) a number of semantic equivalence results for both the basic epistemic language with "individual belief" operators and its extension by the notion of "only believing", and (ii) a lower bound complexity result for epistemic logic model checking relative to the universal epistemic model.

Emiliano Lorini

We introduce a new semantics for a logic of explicit and implicit beliefs based on the concept of multi-agent belief base. Differently from existing Kripke-style semantics for epistemic logic in which the notions of possible world and doxastic/epistemic alternative are primitive, in our semantics they are non-primitive but are defined from the concept of belief base. We provide a complete axiomatization and prove decidability for our logic via a finite model argument. We also provide a polynomial embedding of our logic into Fagin & Halpern's logic of general awareness and establish a complexity result for our logic via the embedding.

Francesco Belardinelli, Umberto Grandi, Andreas Herzig et al.

In the typical framework for boolean games (BG) each player can change the truth value of some propositional atoms, while attempting to make her goal true. In standard BG goals are propositional formulas, whereas in iterated BG goals are formulas of Linear Temporal Logic. Both notions of BG are characterised by the fact that agents have exclusive control over their set of atoms, meaning that no two agents can control the same atom. In the present contribution we drop the exclusivity assumption and explore structures where an atom can be controlled by multiple agents. We introduce Concurrent Game Structures with Shared Propositional Control (CGS-SPC) and show that they ac- count for several classes of repeated games, including iterated boolean games, influence games, and aggregation games. Our main result shows that, as far as verification is concerned, CGS-SPC can be reduced to concurrent game structures with exclusive control. This result provides a polynomial reduction for the model checking problem of specifications in Alternating-time Temporal Logic on CGS-SPC.

Philippe Balbiani, David Fernández-Duque, Emiliano Lorini

We present a family of logics for reasoning about agents' positions and motion in the plane which have several potential applications in the area of multi-agent systems (MAS), such as multi-agent planning and robotics. The most general logic includes (i) atomic formulas for representing the truth of a given fact or the presence of a given agent at a certain position of the plane, (ii) atomic programs corresponding to the four basic orientations in the plane (up, down, left, right) as well as the four program constructs of propositional dynamic logic (sequential composition, nondeterministic composition, iteration and test). As this logic is not computably enumerable, we study some interesting decidable and axiomatizable fragments of it. We also present a decidable extension of the iteration-free fragment of the logic by special programs representing motion of agents in the plane.

Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini, Laurent Perrussel

We study the strategic aspects of social influence in a society of agents linked by a trust network, introducing a new class of games called games of influence. A game of influence is an infinite repeated game with incomplete information in which, at each stage of interaction, an agent can make her opinions visible (public) or invisible (private) in order to influence other agents' opinions. The influence process is mediated by a trust network, as we assume that the opinion of a given agent is only affected by the opinions of those agents that she considers trustworthy (i.e., the agents in the trust network that are directly linked to her). Each agent is endowed with a goal, expressed in a suitable temporal language inspired from linear temporal logic (LTL). We show that games of influence provide a simple abstraction to explore the effects of the trust network structure on the agents' behaviour, by considering solution concepts from game-theory such as Nash equilibrium, weak dominance and winning strategies.