AMORD: A Deductive Procedure System

This research was conducted at the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Support for the Laboratory's artificial intelligence research is provided in part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense under Office of Naval Research contract number N00014-75-C-0643.We have implemented an interpreter for a rule-based system, AMORD, based on a non-chronological control structure and a system of automatically maintained data-dependencies. The purpose of this paper is tutorial. We wish to illustrate: (1) The discipline of explicit control and dependencies, (2) How to use AMORD, and (3) One way to implement the mechanisms provided by AMORD. This paper is organized into sections. The first section is a short "reference manual" describing the major features of AMORD. Next, we present some examples which illustrate the style of expression encouraged by AMORD. This style makes control information explicit in a rule-manipulable form, and depends on an understanding of the use of non-chronological justifications for program beliefs as a means for determining the current set of beliefs. The third section is a brief description of the Truth Maintenance System employed by AMORD for maintaining these justifications and program beliefs. The fourth section presents a completely annotated interpreter for AMORD, written in SCHEME.MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agenc

Question Answering over Curated and Open Web Sources

The last few years have seen an explosion of research on the topic of automated question answering (QA), spanning the communities of information retrieval, natural language processing, and artificial intelligence. This tutorial would cover the highlights of this really active period of growth for QA to give the audience a grasp over the families of algorithms that are currently being used. We partition research contributions by the underlying source from where answers are retrieved: curated knowledge graphs, unstructured text, or hybrid corpora. We choose this dimension of partitioning as it is the most discriminative when it comes to algorithm design. Other key dimensions are covered within each sub-topic: like the complexity of questions addressed, and degrees of explainability and interactivity introduced in the systems. We would conclude the tutorial with the most promising emerging trends in the expanse of QA, that would help new entrants into this field make the best decisions to take the community forward. Much has changed in the community since the last tutorial on QA in SIGIR 2016, and we believe that this timely overview will indeed benefit a large number of conference participants

Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for Health and Wellness applications: a tutorial

Research on decision support applications in healthcare, such as those related to diagnosis, prediction, treatment planning, etc., have seen enormously increased interest recently. This development is thanks to the increase in data availability as well as advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning research. Highly promising research examples are published daily. However, at the same time, there are some unrealistic expectations with regards to the requirements for reliable development and objective validation that is needed in healthcare settings. These expectations may lead to unmet schedules and disappointments (or non-uptake) at the end-user side. It is the aim of this tutorial to provide practical guidance on how to assess performance reliably and efficiently and avoid common traps. Instead of giving a list of do's and don't s, this tutorial tries to build a better understanding behind these do's and don't s and presents both the most relevant performance evaluation criteria as well as how to compute them. Along the way, we will indicate common mistakes and provide references discussing various topics more in-depth.Comment: To be published in Computers in Biology and Medicin

Intelligent Personalized Searching

Search engine is a very useful tool for almost everyone nowadays. People use search engine for the purpose of searching about their personal finance, restaurants, electronic products, and travel information, to name a few. As helpful as search engines are in terms of providing information, they can also manipulate people behaviors because most people trust online information without a doubt. Furthermore, ordinary users usually only pay attention the highest-ranking pages from the search results. Knowing this predictable user behavior, search engine providers such as Google and Yahoo take advantage and use it as a tool for them to generate profit. Search engine providers are enterprise companies with the goal to generate profit, and an easy way for them to do so is by ranking up particular web pages to promote the product or services of their own or their paid customers. The results from search engine could be misleading. The goal of this project is to filter the bias from search results and provide best matches on behalf of users’ interest

Generating Levels That Teach Mechanics

The automatic generation of game tutorials is a challenging AI problem. While it is possible to generate annotations and instructions that explain to the player how the game is played, this paper focuses on generating a gameplay experience that introduces the player to a game mechanic. It evolves small levels for the Mario AI Framework that can only be beaten by an agent that knows how to perform specific actions in the game. It uses variations of a perfect A* agent that are limited in various ways, such as not being able to jump high or see enemies, to test how failing to do certain actions can stop the player from beating the level.Comment: 8 pages, 7 figures, PCG Workshop at FDG 2018, 9th International Workshop on Procedural Content Generation (PCG2018

Modelling human teaching tactics and strategies for tutoring systems

One of the promises of ITSs and ILEs is that they will teach and assist learning in an intelligent manner. Historically this has tended to mean concentrating on the interface, on the representation of the domain and on the representation of the student’s knowledge. So systems have attempted to provide students with reifications both of what is to be learned and of the learning process, as well as optimally sequencing and adjusting activities, problems and feedback to best help them learn that domain. We now have embodied (and disembodied) teaching agents and computer-based peers, and the field demonstrates a much greater interest in metacognition and in collaborative activities and tools to support that collaboration. Nevertheless the issue of the teaching competence of ITSs and ILEs is still important, as well as the more specific question as to whether systems can and should mimic human teachers. Indeed increasing interest in embodied agents has thrown the spotlight back on how such agents should behave with respect to learners. In the mid 1980s Ohlsson and others offered critiques of ITSs and ILEs in terms of the limited range and adaptability of their teaching actions as compared to the wealth of tactics and strategies employed by human expert teachers. So are we in any better position in modelling teaching than we were in the 80s? Are these criticisms still as valid today as they were then? This paper reviews progress in understanding certain aspects of human expert teaching and in developing tutoring systems that implement those human teaching strategies and tactics. It concentrates particularly on how systems have dealt with student answers and how they have dealt with motivational issues, referring particularly to work carried out at Sussex: for example, on responding effectively to the student’s motivational state, on contingent and Vygotskian inspired teaching strategies and on the plausibility problem. This latter is concerned with whether tactics that are effectively applied by human teachers can be as effective when embodied in machine teachers