Henri Prade

Henri Prade, Gilles Richard

Starting from the Boolean notion of logical proportion in Piaget's sense, which turns out to be equivalent to analogical proportion, this note proposes a definition of analogical proportion between numerical values based on triangular norms (and dual co-norms). Frank's family of triangular norms is particularly interesting from this perspective. The article concludes with a comparative discussion with another very recent proposal for defining analogical proportions between numerical values based on the family of generalized means.

Myriam Bounhas, Henri Prade, Gilles Richard

Analogical proportions compare pairs of items (a, b) and (c, d) in terms of their differences and similarities. They play a key role in the formalization of analogical inference. The paper first discusses how to improve analogical inference in terms of accuracy and in terms of computational cost. Then it indicates the potential of analogical proportions for explanation. Finally, it highlights the close relationship between analogical proportions and multi-valued dependencies, which reveals an unsuspected aspect of the former.

Suryani Lim, Henri Prade, Gilles Richard

Focusing on the most significant features of a dataset is useful both in machine learning (ML) and data mining. In ML, it can lead to a higher accuracy, a faster learning process, and ultimately a simpler and more understandable model. In data mining, identifying significant features is essential not only for gaining a better understanding of the data but also for visualization. In this paper, we demonstrate a new way of identifying significant features inspired by analogical proportions. Such a proportion is of the form of "a is to b as c is to d", comparing two pairs of items (a, b) and (c, d) in terms of similarities and dissimilarities. In a classification context, if the similarities/dissimilarities between a and b correlate with the fact that a and b have different labels, this knowledge can be transferred to c and d, inferring that c and d also have different labels. From a feature selection perspective, observing a huge number of such pairs (a, b) where a and b have different labels provides a hint about the importance of the features where a and b differ. Following this idea, we introduce the Analogical Relevance Index (ARI), a new statistical test of the significance of a given feature with respect to the label. ARI is a filter-based method. Filter-based methods are ML-agnostic but generally unable to handle feature redundancy. However, ARI can detect feature redundancy. Our experiments show that ARI is effective and outperforms well-known methods on a variety of artificial and some real datasets.

Stergos Afantenos, Henri Prade, Leonardo Cortez Bernardes

Analogical proportions are statements of the form "$a$ is to $b$ as $c$ is to $d$", which expresses that the comparisons of the elements in pair $(a, b)$ and in pair $(c, d)$ yield similar results. Analogical proportions are creative in the sense that given 3 distinct items, the representation of a 4th item $d$, distinct from the previous items, which forms an analogical proportion with them can be calculated, provided certain conditions are met. After providing an introduction to analogical proportions and their properties, the paper reports the results of an experiment made with a database of animal descriptions and their class, where we try to "create" new animals from existing ones, retrieving rare animals such as platypus. We perform a series of experiments using word embeddings as well as Boolean features in order to propose novel animals based on analogical proportions, showing that word embeddings obtain better results.

Suryani Lim, Henri Prade, Gilles Richard

AI-driven outcomes can be challenging for end-users to understand. Explanations can address two key questions: "Why this outcome?" (factual) and "Why not another?" (counterfactual). While substantial efforts have been made to formalize factual explanations, a precise and comprehensive study of counterfactual explanations is still lacking. This paper proposes a formal definition of counterfactual explanations, proving some properties they satisfy, and examining the relationship with factual explanations. Given that multiple counterfactual explanations generally exist for a specific case, we also introduce a rigorous method to rank these counterfactual explanations, going beyond a simple minimality condition, and to identify the optimal ones. Our experiments with 12 real-world datasets highlight that, in most cases, a single optimal counterfactual explanation emerges. We also demonstrate, via three metrics, that the selected optimal explanation exhibits higher representativeness and can explain a broader range of elements than a random minimal counterfactual. This result highlights the effectiveness of our approach in identifying more robust and comprehensive counterfactual explanations.

Zied Bouraoui, Antoine Cornuéjols, Thierry Denœux et al.

This paper proposes a tentative and original survey of meeting points between Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KRR) and Machine Learning (ML), two areas which have been developing quite separately in the last three decades. Some common concerns are identified and discussed such as the types of used representation, the roles of knowledge and data, the lack or the excess of information, or the need for explanations and causal understanding. Then some methodologies combining reasoning and learning are reviewed (such as inductive logic programming, neuro-symbolic reasoning, formal concept analysis, rule-based representations and ML, uncertainty in ML, or case-based reasoning and analogical reasoning), before discussing examples of synergies between KRR and ML (including topics such as belief functions on regression, EM algorithm versus revision, the semantic description of vector representations, the combination of deep learning with high level inference, knowledge graph completion, declarative frameworks for data mining, or preferences and recommendation). This paper is the first step of a work in progress aiming at a better mutual understanding of research in KRR and ML, and how they could cooperate.

Jerome Lang, Didier Dubois, Henri Prade

A semantics is given to possibilistic logic, a logic that handles weighted classical logic formulae, and where weights are interpreted as lower bounds on degrees of certainty or possibility, in the sense of Zadeh's possibility theory. The proposed semantics is based on fuzzy sets of interpretations. It is tolerant to partial inconsistency. Satisfiability is extended from interpretations to fuzzy sets of interpretations, each fuzzy set representing a possibility distribution describing what is known about the state of the world. A possibilistic knowledge base is then viewed as a set of possibility distributions that satisfy it. The refutation method of automated deduction in possibilistic logic, based on previously introduced generalized resolution principle is proved to be sound and complete with respect to the proposed semantics, including the case of partial inconsistency.

Stephane Amarger, Didier Dubois, Henri Prade

An approach to reasoning with default rules where the proportion of exceptions, or more generally the probability of encountering an exception, can be at least roughly assessed is presented. It is based on local uncertainty propagation rules which provide the best bracketing of a conditional probability of interest from the knowledge of the bracketing of some other conditional probabilities. A procedure that uses two such propagation rules repeatedly is proposed in order to estimate any simple conditional probability of interest from the available knowledge. The iterative procedure, that does not require independence assumptions, looks promising with respect to the linear programming method. Improved bounds for conditional probabilities are given when independence assumptions hold.

Didier Dubois, Henri Prade, Lluis Godo et al.

This paper investigates the possibility of performing automated reasoning in probabilistic logic when probabilities are expressed by means of linguistic quantifiers. Each linguistic term is expressed as a prescribed interval of proportions. Then instead of propagating numbers, qualitative terms are propagated in accordance with the numerical interpretation of these terms. The quantified syllogism, modelling the chaining of probabilistic rules, is studied in this context. It is shown that a qualitative counterpart of this syllogism makes sense, and is relatively independent of the threshold defining the linguistically meaningful intervals, provided that these threshold values remain in accordance with the intuition. The inference power is less than that of a full-fledged probabilistic con-quaint propagation device but better corresponds to what could be thought of as commonsense probabilistic reasoning.

Didier Dubois, Luis Farinas del Cerro, Andreas Herzig et al.

An ordinal view of independence is studied in the framework of possibility theory. We investigate three possible definitions of dependence, of increasing strength. One of them is the counterpart to the multiplication law in probability theory, and the two others are based on the notion of conditional possibility. These two have enough expressive power to support the whole possibility theory, and a complete axiomatization is provided for the strongest one. Moreover we show that weak independence is well-suited to the problems of belief change and plausible reasoning, especially to address the problem of blocking of property inheritance in exception-tolerant taxonomic reasoning.

Didier Dubois, Henri Prade, Regis Sabbadin

This paper presents an axiomatic framework for qualitative decision under uncertainty in a finite setting. The corresponding utility is expressed by a sup-min expression, called Sugeno (or fuzzy) integral. Technically speaking, Sugeno integral is a median, which is indeed a qualitative counterpart to the averaging operation underlying expected utility. The axiomatic justification of Sugeno integral-based utility is expressed in terms of preference between acts as in Savage decision theory. Pessimistic and optimistic qualitative utilities, based on necessity and possibility measures, previously introduced by two of the authors, can be retrieved in this setting by adding appropriate axioms.

Salem Benferhat, Didier Dubois, Souhila Kaci et al.

Possibility theory offers either a qualitive, or a numerical framework for representing uncertainty, in terms of dual measures of possibility and necessity. This leads to the existence of two kinds of possibilistic causal graphs where the conditioning is either based on the minimum, or the product operator. Benferhat et al. (1999) have investigated the connections between min-based graphs and possibilistic logic bases (made of classical formulas weighted in terms of certainty). This paper deals with a more difficult issue : the product-based graphical representations of possibilistic bases, which provides an easy structural reading of possibilistic bases. Moreover, this paper also provides another reading of possibilistic bases in terms of comparative preferences of the form "in the context p, q is preferred to not q". This enables us to explicit preferences underlying a set of goals with different levels of priority.