Bayesian Logic Programs for plan recognition and machine reading

textSeveral real world tasks involve data that is uncertain and relational in nature. Traditional approaches like first-order logic and probabilistic models either deal with structured data or uncertainty, but not both. To address these limitations, statistical relational learning (SRL), a new area in machine learning integrating both first-order logic and probabilistic graphical models, has emerged in the recent past. The advantage of SRL models is that they can handle both uncertainty and structured/relational data. As a result, they are widely used in domains like social network analysis, biological data analysis, and natural language processing. Bayesian Logic Programs (BLPs), which integrate both first-order logic and Bayesian net- works are a powerful SRL formalism developed in the recent past. In this dissertation, we develop approaches using BLPs to solve two real world tasks – plan recognition and machine reading. Plan recognition is the task of predicting an agent’s top-level plans based on its observed actions. It is an abductive reasoning task that involves inferring cause from effect. In the first part of the dissertation, we develop an approach to abductive plan recognition using BLPs. Since BLPs employ logical deduction to construct the networks, they cannot be used effectively for abductive plan recognition as is. Therefore, we extend BLPs to use logical abduction to construct Bayesian networks and call the resulting model Bayesian Abductive Logic Programs (BALPs). In the second part of the dissertation, we apply BLPs to the task of machine reading, which involves automatic extraction of knowledge from natural language text. Most information extraction (IE) systems identify facts that are explicitly stated in text. However, much of the information conveyed in text must be inferred from what is explicitly stated since easily inferable facts are rarely mentioned. Human readers naturally use common sense knowledge and “read between the lines” to infer such implicit information from the explicitly stated facts. Since IE systems do not have access to common sense knowledge, they cannot perform deeper reasoning to infer implicitly stated facts. Here, we first develop an approach using BLPs to infer implicitly stated facts from natural language text. It involves learning uncertain common sense knowledge in the form of probabilistic first-order rules by mining a large corpus of automatically extracted facts using an existing rule learner. These rules are then used to derive additional facts from extracted information using BLP inference. We then develop an online rule learner that handles the concise, incomplete nature of natural-language text and learns first-order rules from noisy IE extractions. Finally, we develop a novel approach to calculate the weights of the rules using a curated lexical ontology like WordNet. Both tasks described above involve inference and learning from partially observed or incomplete data. In plan recognition, the underlying cause or the top-level plan that resulted in the observed actions is not known or observed. Further, only a subset of the executed actions can be observed by the plan recognition system resulting in partially observed data. Similarly, in machine reading, since some information is implicitly stated, they are rarely observed in the data. In this dissertation, we demonstrate the efficacy of BLPs for inference and learning from incomplete data. Experimental comparison on various benchmark data sets on both tasks demonstrate the superior performance of BLPs over state-of-the-art methods.Computer Science

If interpretability is the answer, what is the question?

Due to the ability to model even complex dependencies, machine learning (ML) can be used to tackle a broad range of (high-stakes) prediction problems. The complexity of the resulting models comes at the cost of transparency, meaning that it is difficult to understand the model by inspecting its parameters. This opacity is considered problematic since it hampers the transfer of knowledge from the model, undermines the agency of individuals affected by algorithmic decisions, and makes it more challenging to expose non-robust or unethical behaviour. To tackle the opacity of ML models, the field of interpretable machine learning (IML) has emerged. The field is motivated by the idea that if we could understand the model's behaviour -- either by making the model itself interpretable or by inspecting post-hoc explanations -- we could also expose unethical and non-robust behaviour, learn about the data generating process, and restore the agency of affected individuals. IML is not only a highly active area of research, but the developed techniques are also widely applied in both industry and the sciences. Despite the popularity of IML, the field faces fundamental criticism, questioning whether IML actually helps in tackling the aforementioned problems of ML and even whether it should be a field of research in the first place: First and foremost, IML is criticised for lacking a clear goal and, thus, a clear definition of what it means for a model to be interpretable. On a similar note, the meaning of existing methods is often unclear, and thus they may be misunderstood or even misused to hide unethical behaviour. Moreover, estimating conditional-sampling-based techniques poses a significant computational challenge. With the contributions included in this thesis, we tackle these three challenges for IML. We join a range of work by arguing that the field struggles to define and evaluate "interpretability" because incoherent interpretation goals are conflated. However, the different goals can be disentangled such that coherent requirements can inform the derivation of the respective target estimands. We demonstrate this with the examples of two interpretation contexts: recourse and scientific inference. To tackle the misinterpretation of IML methods, we suggest deriving formal interpretation rules that link explanations to aspects of the model and data. In our work, we specifically focus on interpreting feature importance. Furthermore, we collect interpretation pitfalls and communicate them to a broader audience. To efficiently estimate conditional-sampling-based interpretation techniques, we propose two methods that leverage the dependence structure in the data to simplify the estimation problems for Conditional Feature Importance (CFI) and SAGE. A causal perspective proved to be vital in tackling the challenges: First, since IML problems such as algorithmic recourse are inherently causal; Second, since causality helps to disentangle the different aspects of model and data and, therefore, to distinguish the insights that different methods provide; And third, algorithms developed for causal structure learning can be leveraged for the efficient estimation of conditional-sampling based IML methods.Aufgrund der Fähigkeit, selbst komplexe Abhängigkeiten zu modellieren, kann maschinelles Lernen (ML) zur Lösung eines breiten Spektrums von anspruchsvollen Vorhersageproblemen eingesetzt werden. Die Komplexität der resultierenden Modelle geht auf Kosten der Interpretierbarkeit, d. h. es ist schwierig, das Modell durch die Untersuchung seiner Parameter zu verstehen. Diese Undurchsichtigkeit wird als problematisch angesehen, da sie den Wissenstransfer aus dem Modell behindert, sie die Handlungsfähigkeit von Personen, die von algorithmischen Entscheidungen betroffen sind, untergräbt und sie es schwieriger macht, nicht robustes oder unethisches Verhalten aufzudecken. Um die Undurchsichtigkeit von ML-Modellen anzugehen, hat sich das Feld des interpretierbaren maschinellen Lernens (IML) entwickelt. Dieses Feld ist von der Idee motiviert, dass wir, wenn wir das Verhalten des Modells verstehen könnten - entweder indem wir das Modell selbst interpretierbar machen oder anhand von post-hoc Erklärungen - auch unethisches und nicht robustes Verhalten aufdecken, über den datengenerierenden Prozess lernen und die Handlungsfähigkeit betroffener Personen wiederherstellen könnten. IML ist nicht nur ein sehr aktiver Forschungsbereich, sondern die entwickelten Techniken werden auch weitgehend in der Industrie und den Wissenschaften angewendet. Trotz der Popularität von IML ist das Feld mit fundamentaler Kritik konfrontiert, die in Frage stellt, ob IML tatsächlich dabei hilft, die oben genannten Probleme von ML anzugehen, und ob es überhaupt ein Forschungsgebiet sein sollte: In erster Linie wird an IML kritisiert, dass es an einem klaren Ziel und damit an einer klaren Definition dessen fehlt, was es für ein Modell bedeutet, interpretierbar zu sein. Weiterhin ist die Bedeutung bestehender Methoden oft unklar, so dass sie missverstanden oder sogar missbraucht werden können, um unethisches Verhalten zu verbergen. Letztlich stellt die Schätzung von auf bedingten Stichproben basierenden Verfahren eine erhebliche rechnerische Herausforderung dar. In dieser Arbeit befassen wir uns mit diesen drei grundlegenden Herausforderungen von IML. Wir schließen uns der Argumentation an, dass es schwierig ist, "Interpretierbarkeit" zu definieren und zu bewerten, weil inkohärente Interpretationsziele miteinander vermengt werden. Die verschiedenen Ziele lassen sich jedoch entflechten, sodass kohärente Anforderungen die Ableitung der jeweiligen Zielgrößen informieren. Wir demonstrieren dies am Beispiel von zwei Interpretationskontexten: algorithmischer Regress und wissenschaftliche Inferenz. Um der Fehlinterpretation von IML-Methoden zu begegnen, schlagen wir vor, formale Interpretationsregeln abzuleiten, die Erklärungen mit Aspekten des Modells und der Daten verknüpfen. In unserer Arbeit konzentrieren wir uns speziell auf die Interpretation von sogenannten Feature Importance Methoden. Darüber hinaus tragen wir wichtige Interpretationsfallen zusammen und kommunizieren sie an ein breiteres Publikum. Zur effizienten Schätzung auf bedingten Stichproben basierender Interpretationstechniken schlagen wir zwei Methoden vor, die die Abhängigkeitsstruktur in den Daten nutzen, um die Schätzprobleme für Conditional Feature Importance (CFI) und SAGE zu vereinfachen. Eine kausale Perspektive erwies sich als entscheidend für die Bewältigung der Herausforderungen: Erstens, weil IML-Probleme wie der algorithmische Regress inhärent kausal sind; zweitens, weil Kausalität hilft, die verschiedenen Aspekte von Modell und Daten zu entflechten und somit die Erkenntnisse, die verschiedene Methoden liefern, zu unterscheiden; und drittens können wir Algorithmen, die für das Lernen kausaler Struktur entwickelt wurden, für die effiziente Schätzung von auf bindingten Verteilungen basierenden IML-Methoden verwenden

Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning

These are the proceedings of the 11th Nonmonotonic Reasoning Workshop. The aim of this series is to bring together active researchers in the broad area of nonmonotonic reasoning, including belief revision, reasoning about actions, planning, logic programming, argumentation, causality, probabilistic and possibilistic approaches to KR, and other related topics. As part of the program of the 11th workshop, we have assessed the status of the field and discussed issues such as: Significant recent achievements in the theory and automation of NMR; Critical short and long term goals for NMR; Emerging new research directions in NMR; Practical applications of NMR; Significance of NMR to knowledge representation and AI in general

Is the God of Traditional Theism Logically Compatible with All the Evil in the World?

Is the God of traditional theism logically incompatible with all the evil in the world? In his book, Is a Good God Logically Possible? (Palgrave paperback, 2019) James Sterba argues that the God of traditional theism is logically incompatible with especially the horrendous evil consequences of moral and natural evil that exists in our world. In this Special Issue in Religions, sixteen philosophers challenge Sterba’s argument and he responds to all of them

Learning, conditionals, causation

This dissertation is on conditionals and causation. In particular, we (i) propose a method of how an agent learns conditional information, and (ii) analyse causation in terms of a new type of conditional. Our starting point is Ramsey's (1929/1990) test: accept a conditional when you can infer its consequent upon supposing its antecedent. Inspired by this test, Stalnaker (1968) developed a semantics of conditionals. In Ch. 2, we define and apply our new method of learning conditional information. It says, roughly, that you learn conditional information by updating on the corresponding Stalnaker conditional. By generalising Lewis's (1976) updating rule to Jeffrey imaging, our learning method becomes applicable to both certain and uncertain conditional information. The method generates the correct predictions for all of Douven's (2012) benchmark examples and Van Fraassen's (1981) Judy Benjamin Problem. In Ch. 3, we prefix Ramsey's test by suspending judgment on antecedent and consequent. Unlike the Ramsey Test semantics by Stalnaker (1968) and Gärdenfors (1978), our strengthened semantics requires the antecedent to be inferentially relevant for the consequent. We exploit this asymmetric relation of relevance in a semantic analysis of the natural language conjunction 'because'. In Ch. 4, we devise an analysis of actual causation in terms of production, where production is understood along the lines of our strengthened Ramsey Test. Our analysis solves the problems of overdetermination, conjunctive scenarios, early and late preemption, switches, double prevention, and spurious causation -- a set of problems that still challenges counterfactual accounts of actual causation in the tradition of Lewis (1973c). In Ch. 5, we translate our analysis of actual causation into Halpern and Pearl's (2005) framework of causal models. As a result, our analysis is considerably simplified on the cost of losing its reductiveness. The upshot is twofold: (i) Jeffrey imaging on Stalnaker conditionals emerges as an alternative to Bayesian accounts of learning conditional information; (ii) the analyses of causation in terms of our strengthened Ramsey Test conditional prove to be worthy rivals to contemporary counterfactual accounts of causation

Combining SOA and BPM Technologies for Cross-System Process Automation

This paper summarizes the results of an industry case study that introduced a cross-system business process automation solution based on a combination of SOA and BPM standard technologies (i.e., BPMN, BPEL, WSDL). Besides discussing major weaknesses of the existing, custom-built, solution and comparing them against experiences with the developed prototype, the paper presents a course of action for transforming the current solution into the proposed solution. This includes a general approach, consisting of four distinct steps, as well as specific action items that are to be performed for every step. The discussion also covers language and tool support and challenges arising from the transformation

Research Paper: Process Mining and Synthetic Health Data: Reflections and Lessons Learnt

Analysing the treatment pathways in real-world health data can provide valuable insight for clinicians and decision-makers. However, the procedures for acquiring real-world data for research can be restrictive, time-consuming and risks disclosing identifiable information. Synthetic data might enable representative analysis without direct access to sensitive data. In the first part of our paper, we propose an approach for grading synthetic data for process analysis based on its fidelity to relationships found in real-world data. In the second part, we apply our grading approach by assessing cancer patient pathways in a synthetic healthcare dataset (The Simulacrum provided by the English National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service) using process mining. Visualisations of the patient pathways within the synthetic data appear plausible, showing relationships between events confirmed in the underlying non-synthetic data. Data quality issues are also present within the synthetic data which reflect real-world problems and artefacts from the synthetic dataset’s creation. Process mining of synthetic data in healthcare is an emerging field with novel challenges. We conclude that researchers should be aware of the risks when extrapolating results produced from research on synthetic data to real-world scenarios and assess findings with analysts who are able to view the underlying data

Measuring the impact of COVID-19 on hospital care pathways

Care pathways in hospitals around the world reported significant disruption during the recent COVID-19 pandemic but measuring the actual impact is more problematic. Process mining can be useful for hospital management to measure the conformance of real-life care to what might be considered normal operations. In this study, we aim to demonstrate that process mining can be used to investigate process changes associated with complex disruptive events. We studied perturbations to accident and emergency (A &E) and maternity pathways in a UK public hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. Co-incidentally the hospital had implemented a Command Centre approach for patient-flow management affording an opportunity to study both the planned improvement and the disruption due to the pandemic. Our study proposes and demonstrates a method for measuring and investigating the impact of such planned and unplanned disruptions affecting hospital care pathways. We found that during the pandemic, both A &E and maternity pathways had measurable reductions in the mean length of stay and a measurable drop in the percentage of pathways conforming to normative models. There were no distinctive patterns of monthly mean values of length of stay nor conformance throughout the phases of the installation of the hospital’s new Command Centre approach. Due to a deficit in the available A &E data, the findings for A &E pathways could not be interpreted