The paper proposes a framework for capturing how an agent’s beliefs evolve over time in response to observations and for answering the question of whether statements made by a third party can be believed. The basic components of the framework are a formalism for reasoning about actions, changes, and observations and a formalism for default reasoning. The paper describes a concrete implementation that leverages answer set programming for determining the evolution of an agent's ``belief state'', based on observations, knowledge about the effects of actions, and a theory about how these influence an agent's beliefs. The beliefs are then used to assess whether statements made by a third party can be accepted as truthful. The paper investigates an application of the proposed framework in the detection of man-in-the-middle attacks targeting computers and cyber-physical systems. Finally, we briefly discuss related work and possible extensions.
An Answer Set Programming Framework for Reasoning about Agents’ Beliefs and Truthfulness of Statements
The paper proposes a framework for capturing how an agent’s beliefs evolve over time in response to observations and for answering the question of whether statements made by a third party can be believed. The basic components of the framework are a formalism for reasoning about actions, changes, and observations and a formalism for default reasoning.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1812628
- PAR ID:
- 10286660
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2020)
- Volume:
- 17
- Issue:
- 1
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 69-78
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
null (Ed.)more » « less
-
During design, different forms of reasoning shape the designers’ decision-making. As a result, the ability to fluently transition across various forms of reasoning is essential. The purpose of this study is two-fold: first is to introduce and explain the concept of Semantic Fluency in Design Reasoning, as the ability to transition across multiple forms of reasoning fluently. To identify these transitions, this study used the Design Reasoning Quadrants framework, which represents four quadrants: experiential observations (reasoning based on observations and experiences), trade-offs (reasoning recognizing multiple competing design requirements), first-principles (reasoning requiring disciplinary understandings), and complex abstractions (reasoning in envisioning new situations). The second purpose of this study is to illustrate semantic fluency in a design review conversation. We selected and presented three different forms of transitions identified through our analysis of conversations between students and design reviewers. Our analysis revealed evidence of semantic fluency in young designers. Mike, one of the students, demonstrated fluency across three quadrants (experiential observations, trade-offs, and first-principles). Lisa and David demonstrated two-quadrant transitions. Lisa had fluency from experiential observations to trade-offs, and David transitioned from experiential observations to first-principles. We recommend the intentional use of design reviews to elicit student reasoning in design and adopt questioning strategies to promote fluency across different forms of design reasoning.more » « less
-
Reasoning about storage systems is challenging because these systems make persistence guarantees even if the system crashes at any point. To achieve these crash-safety guarantees, storage systems include recovery procedures to restore the system to a consistent state after a crash. Moreover, large-scale systems are structured as multiple stacked layers and can require recovery at multiple layers of abstraction. Formal verification can ensure that crash-safety guarantees hold regardless of when the system crashes. To make verification tractable, large-scale systems should be verified in a modular fashion, layer-by-layer in the software stack. Layered recovery makes modularity challenging because the system can crash in the middle of a high-level recovery procedure and must start over from the low-level recovery procedure. We present Argosy, a framework for machine-checked proofs of storage systems that supports layered recovery implementations with modular proofs. The framework is based on combinators for transition relations that are inspired by Kleene algebra, which provides a convenient formalism for specifying and reasoning about crashes and recovery. On top of this framework, we implement Crash Hoare Logic (CHL), the program logic used by FSCQ. Using the logic, we have verified an example of layered recovery featuring a write-ahead log on top of a disk, which itself runs by replicating over two unreliable disks. The metatheory of the framework, the soundness of the program logic, and these examples are all verified in the Coq theorem prover.more » « less
-
Human-designed systems are increasingly leveraged by data-driven methods and artificial intelligence. This leads to an urgent need for responsible design and ethical use. The goal of this conceptual paper is two-fold. First, we will introduce the Framework for Design Reasoning in Data Life-cycle Ethical Management, which integrates three existing frameworks: 1) the design reasoning quadrants framework (representing engineering design research), and 2) the data life-cycle model (representing data management), and 3) the reflexive principles framework (representing ethical decision-making). The integration of three critical components of the framework (design reasoning, data reasoning, and ethical reasoning) is accomplished by centering on the conscientious negotiation of design risks and benefits. Second, we will present an example of a student design project report to demonstrate how this framework guides educators towards delineating and integrating data reasoning, ethical reasoning, and design reasoning in settings where ethical issues (e.g., AI solutions) are commonly experienced. The framework can be implemented to design courses through design review conversations that seamlessly integrate ethical reasoning into the technical and data decision-making processes.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)We present a framework designed to help categorize various sense making moves, allowing for greater specificity in describing and understanding student reasoning and also in the development of curriculum to support this reasoning. The framework disaggregates between the mechanisms of student reasoning (the cognitive tool that they are employing) and what they are reasoning about (the object). Noting that either the tool or object could be mathematical or physical, the framework includes four basic sense making modes: Use of a mathematical tool to understand a mathematical object, use of a mathematical tool to understand a physical object, use of a physical tool to understand a mathematical object, and use of a physical tool to understand a physical object. We identify three fundamental processes by which these modes may be combined (translation, chaining, and coordination) and present a visual representation that captures both the individual reasoning modes and the processes by which they are combined. The utility of the framework as a tool for describing student reasoning is demonstrated through the analysis of two extended reasoning episodes. Finally, implications of this framework for curricular design are discussed.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
