On Graphical Modeling of Preference and Importance

In recent years, CP-nets have emerged as a useful tool for supporting preference elicitation, reasoning, and representation. CP-nets capture and support reasoning with qualitative conditional preference statements, statements that are relatively natural for users to express. In this paper, we extend the CP-nets formalism to handle another class of very natural qualitative statements one often uses in expressing preferences in daily life - statements of relative importance of attributes. The resulting formalism, TCP-nets, maintains the spirit of CP-nets, in that it remains focused on using only simple and natural preference statements, uses the ceteris paribus semantics, and utilizes a graphical representation of this information to reason about its consistency and to perform, possibly constrained, optimization using it. The extra expressiveness it provides allows us to better model tradeoffs users would like to make, more faithfully representing their preferences

Graphically structured value-function compilation

AbstractClassical work on eliciting and representing preferences over multi-attribute alternatives has attempted to recognize conditions under which value functions take on particularly simple and compact form, making their elicitation much easier. In this paper we consider preferences over discrete domains, and show that for a certain class of simple and intuitive qualitative preference statements, one can always generate compact value functions consistent with these statements. These value functions maintain the independence structure implicit in the original statements. For discrete domains, these representation theorems are much more general than previous results. However, we also show that it is not always possible to maintain this compact structure if we add explicit ordering constraints among the available outcomes

Preferences over Objects, Sets and Sequences

Recently, a lot of interest arose in the artificial intelligence and database communities concerning the topic of preference elicitation, modelling and reasoning. In fact, due to the huge amount of information users are faced up to daily, the development of formalisms allowing preference specification and reasoning turns out to be an essential task.

DrAGON: A Framework for Computing Preferred Defense Policies from Logical Attack Graphs

Attack graphs provide formalism for modelling the vulnerabilities using a compact representation scheme. Two of the most popular attack graph representations are scenario attack graphs, and logical attack graphs. In logical attack graphs, the host machines present in the network are represented as exploit nodes, while the configurations (IDS rules, firewall policies etc.) running on them are represented as fact nodes. The actual user privileges that are possible on each of these hosts are represented as privilege nodes. Existing work provides methods to analyze logical attack graphs and compute attack paths of varying costs. In this thesis we develop a framework for analyzing the attack graph from a defender perspective. Given an acyclic logical dependency attack graph we compute defense policies that cover all known exploits that can be used by the attacker and also are preferred with respect to minimizing the impacts. In contrast to previous work on analysis of logical attack graphs where quantitative costs are assigned to the vulnerabilities (exploits), our framework allows attack graph analysis using descriptions of vulnerabilities on a qualitative scale. We develop two algorithms for computing preferred defense policies that are optimal with respect to defender preferences. Our research to the best of our knowledge is the first fully qualitative approach to analyzing these logical attack graphs and formulating defense policies based on the preferences and priorities of the defender. We provide a prototype implementation of our framework that allows logical attack graphs to be input using a simple text file (custom language), or using a GUI tool in graphical markup language (GML) format. Our implementation uses the NVD (National Vulnerability Database) as the source of CVSS impact metrics for vulnerabilities in the attack graph. Our framework generates a preferred order of defense policies using an existing preference reasoner. Preliminary experiments on various attack graphs show the correctness and efficiency of our approach

Reasoning with qualitative preferences for optimization of component-based system development

A component-based system is a set of entities that work together in well-defined ways to satisfy a given requirement specified by the stakeholders for the system. This requirement can be modeled as a set of combinations of traits, which represent acceptable alternatives for providing the required functionality. A system satisfies its requirement if and only if it provides one of the required sets of traits in its entirety. Beyond the requirement, system stakeholders may also have preferences with respect to optional functionality that could be provided by a system, tradeoffs between non-functional properties, or other system design options. This work focuses on integrating support for both qualitative preference reasoning and formal verification into the component-based system design process in order to choose a set of components for the system that, when composed, will (1) satisfy the stakeholders\u27 requirement for the system and (2) provide a set of traits that is optimal with respect to the given preferences. Our primary research objective is to develop a generic, modular, end-to-end framework for developing component-based systems of any type which are correct according to the system requirement and most preferred with respect to the stakeholders\u27 preferences. Applications of the framework to problems in Web service composition, goal-oriented requirements engineering, and other areas will be discussed, along with future work toward integrating multi-stakeholder preference reasoning and partial satisfaction of traits into the framework

Representing and reasoning with qualitative preferences for compositional systems

Many applications call for techniques for representing and reasoning about preferences, i.e., relative desirability over a set of alternatives. Preferences over the alternatives are typically derived from preferences with respect to the various attributes of the alternatives (e.g., a student\u27s preference for one course over another may be influenced by his preference for the topic, the time of the day when the course is offered, etc.). Such preferences are often qualitative and conditional. When the alternatives are expressed as tuples of valuations of the relevant attributes, preferences between alternatives can often be expressed in the form of (a) preferences over the values of each attribute, and (b) relative importance of certain attributes over others. An important problem in reasoning with multi-attribute qualitative preferences is dominance testing, i.e., to find if one alternative (assignment to all attributes) is preferred over another. This problem is hard (PSPACE-complete) in general for well known qualitative conditional preference languages such as TCP-nets. We provide two practical approaches to dominance testing. First, we study a restricted unconditional preference language, and provide a dominance relation that can be computed in polynomial time by evaluating the satisfiability of an appropriately constructed logic formula. Second, we show how to reduce dominance testing for TCP-nets to reachability analysis in an induced preference graph. We provide an encoding of TCP-nets in the form of a Kripke structure for CTL. We show how to compute dominance using NuSMV, a model checker for CTL. We address the problem of identifying a preferred outcome in a setting where the outcomes or alternatives to be compared are composite in nature (i.e., collections of components that satisfy certain functional requirements). We define a dominance relation that allows us to compare collections of objects in terms of preferences over attributes of the objects that make up the collection, and show that the dominance relation is a strict partial order under certain conditions. We provide algorithms that use this dominance relation to identify only (sound), all (complete), or at least one (weakly complete) of the most preferred collections. We establish some key properties of the dominance relation and analyze the quality of solutions produced by the algorithms. We present results of simulation experiments aimed at comparing the algorithms, and report interesting conjectures and results that were derived from our analysis. Finally, we show how the above formalism and algorithms can be used in preference-based service composition, substitution, and adaptation