Trading inference effort versus size in CNF Knowledge Compilation

Knowledge Compilation (KC) studies compilation of boolean functions f into some formalism F, which allows to answer all queries of a certain kind in polynomial time. Due to its relevance for SAT solving, we concentrate on the query type "clausal entailment" (CE), i.e., whether a clause C follows from f or not, and we consider subclasses of CNF, i.e., clause-sets F with special properties. In this report we do not allow auxiliary variables (except of the Outlook), and thus F needs to be equivalent to f. We consider the hierarchies UC_k <= WC_k, which were introduced by the authors in 2012. Each level allows CE queries. The first two levels are well-known classes for KC. Namely UC_0 = WC_0 is the same as PI as studied in KC, that is, f is represented by the set of all prime implicates, while UC_1 = WC_1 is the same as UC, the class of unit-refutation complete clause-sets introduced by del Val 1994. We show that for each k there are (sequences of) boolean functions with polysize representations in UC_{k+1}, but with an exponential lower bound on representations in WC_k. Such a separation was previously only know for k=0. We also consider PC < UC, the class of propagation-complete clause-sets. We show that there are (sequences of) boolean functions with polysize representations in UC, while there is an exponential lower bound for representations in PC. These separations are steps towards a general conjecture determining the representation power of the hierarchies PC_k < UC_k <= WC_k. The strong form of this conjecture also allows auxiliary variables, as discussed in depth in the Outlook.Comment: 43 pages, second version with literature updates. Proceeds with the separation results from the discontinued arXiv:1302.442

Translating between Horn Representations and their Characteristic Models

Characteristic models are an alternative, model based, representation for Horn expressions. It has been shown that these two representations are incomparable and each has its advantages over the other. It is therefore natural to ask what is the cost of translating, back and forth, between these representations. Interestingly, the same translation questions arise in database theory, where it has applications to the design of relational databases. This paper studies the computational complexity of these problems. Our main result is that the two translation problems are equivalent under polynomial reductions, and that they are equivalent to the corresponding decision problem. Namely, translating is equivalent to deciding whether a given set of models is the set of characteristic models for a given Horn expression. We also relate these problems to the hypergraph transversal problem, a well known problem which is related to other applications in AI and for which no polynomial time algorithm is known. It is shown that in general our translation problems are at least as hard as the hypergraph transversal problem, and in a special case they are equivalent to it.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for any accompanying file

Logic-Based Explainability in Machine Learning

The last decade witnessed an ever-increasing stream of successes in Machine Learning (ML). These successes offer clear evidence that ML is bound to become pervasive in a wide range of practical uses, including many that directly affect humans. Unfortunately, the operation of the most successful ML models is incomprehensible for human decision makers. As a result, the use of ML models, especially in high-risk and safety-critical settings is not without concern. In recent years, there have been efforts on devising approaches for explaining ML models. Most of these efforts have focused on so-called model-agnostic approaches. However, all model-agnostic and related approaches offer no guarantees of rigor, hence being referred to as non-formal. For example, such non-formal explanations can be consistent with different predictions, which renders them useless in practice. This paper overviews the ongoing research efforts on computing rigorous model-based explanations of ML models; these being referred to as formal explanations. These efforts encompass a variety of topics, that include the actual definitions of explanations, the characterization of the complexity of computing explanations, the currently best logical encodings for reasoning about different ML models, and also how to make explanations interpretable for human decision makers, among others

Achieving New Upper Bounds for the Hypergraph Duality Problem through Logic

The hypergraph duality problem DUAL is defined as follows: given two simple hypergraphs $\mathcal{G}$ and $\mathcal{H}$, decide whether $\mathcal{H}$ consists precisely of all minimal transversals of $\mathcal{G}$ (in which case we say that $\mathcal{G}$ is the dual of $\mathcal{H}$). This problem is equivalent to deciding whether two given non-redundant monotone DNFs are dual. It is known that non-DUAL, the complementary problem to DUAL, is in $\mathrm{GC}(\log^2 n,\mathrm{PTIME})$, where $\mathrm{GC}(f(n),\mathcal{C})$ denotes the complexity class of all problems that after a nondeterministic guess of $O(f(n))$ bits can be decided (checked) within complexity class $\mathcal{C}$. It was conjectured that non-DUAL is in $\mathrm{GC}(\log^2 n,\mathrm{LOGSPACE})$. In this paper we prove this conjecture and actually place the non-DUAL problem into the complexity class $\mathrm{GC}(\log^2 n,\mathrm{TC}^0)$ which is a subclass of $\mathrm{GC}(\log^2 n,\mathrm{LOGSPACE})$. We here refer to the logtime-uniform version of $\mathrm{TC}^0$, which corresponds to $\mathrm{FO(COUNT)}$, i.e., first order logic augmented by counting quantifiers. We achieve the latter bound in two steps. First, based on existing problem decomposition methods, we develop a new nondeterministic algorithm for non-DUAL that requires to guess $O(\log^2 n)$ bits. We then proceed by a logical analysis of this algorithm, allowing us to formulate its deterministic part in $\mathrm{FO(COUNT)}$. From this result, by the well known inclusion $\mathrm{TC}^0\subseteq\mathrm{LOGSPACE}$, it follows that DUAL belongs also to $\mathrm{DSPACE}[\log^2 n]$. Finally, by exploiting the principles on which the proposed nondeterministic algorithm is based, we devise a deterministic algorithm that, given two hypergraphs $\mathcal{G}$ and $\mathcal{H}$, computes in quadratic logspace a transversal of $\mathcal{G}$ missing in $\mathcal{H}$.Comment: Restructured the presentation in order to be the extended version of a paper that will shortly appear in SIAM Journal on Computin

Optimized Framework based on Rough Set Theory for Big Data Pre-processing in Certain and Imprecise Contexts” -- Marie Sklodowska-Curie Project: Open Problems’

Peer reviewe

On Tackling Explanation Redundancy in Decision Trees

Decision trees (DTs) epitomize the ideal of interpretability of machine learning (ML) models. The interpretability of decision trees motivates explainability approaches by so-called intrinsic interpretability, and it is at the core of recent proposals for applying interpretable ML models in high-risk applications. The belief in DT interpretability is justified by the fact that explanations for DT predictions are generally expected to be succinct. Indeed, in the case of DTs, explanations correspond to DT paths. Since decision trees are ideally shallow, and so paths contain far fewer features than the total number of features, explanations in DTs are expected to be succinct, and hence interpretable. This paper offers both theoretical and experimental arguments demonstrating that, as long as interpretability of decision trees equates with succinctness of explanations, then decision trees ought not be deemed interpretable. The paper introduces logically rigorous path explanations and path explanation redundancy, and proves that there exist functions for which decision trees must exhibit paths with arbitrarily large explanation redundancy. The paper also proves that only a very restricted class of functions can be represented with DTs that exhibit no explanation redundancy. In addition, the paper includes experimental results substantiating that path explanation redundancy is observed ubiquitously in decision trees, including those obtained using different tree learning algorithms, but also in a wide range of publicly available decision trees. The paper also proposes polynomial-time algorithms for eliminating path explanation redundancy, which in practice require negligible time to compute. Thus, these algorithms serve to indirectly attain irreducible, and so succinct, explanations for decision trees