skip to main content


Title: Recursive Rules With Aggregation: A Simple Unified Semantics
Complex reasoning problems are most clearly and easily specified using logical rules, but require recursive rules with aggregation such as counts and sums for practical applications. Unfortunately, the meaning of such rules has been a significant challenge, leading to many disagreeing semantics. This paper describes a unified semantics for recursive rules with aggregation, extending the unified founded semantics and constraint semantics for recursive rules with negation. The key idea is to support simple expression of the different assumptions underlying different semantics, and orthogonally interpret aggregation operations using their simple usual meaning. We present formal definition of the semantics, prove important properties of the semantics, and compare with prior semantics. In particular, we present an efficient inference over aggregation that gives precise answers to all examples we have studied from the literature. We also applied our semantics to a wide range of challenging examples, and performed experiments on the most challenging ones, all confirming our analyzed results.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1954837
NSF-PAR ID:
10327790
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Editor(s):
Artemov, Sergei; Nerode, Anil
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Logical Foundations of Computer Science (LFCS 2022)
Page Range / eLocation ID:
156–179
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract Complex reasoning problems are most clearly and easily specified using logical rules, but require recursive rules with aggregation such as count and sum for practical applications. Unfortunately, the meaning of such rules has been a significant challenge, leading to many disagreeing semantics. This paper describes a unified semantics for recursive rules with aggregation, extending the unified founded semantics and constraint semantics for recursive rules with negation. The key idea is to support simple expression of the different assumptions underlying different semantics, and orthogonally interpret aggregation operations using their simple usual meaning. We present a formal definition of the semantics, prove important properties of the semantics and compare with prior semantics. In particular, we present an efficient inference over aggregation that gives precise answers to all examples we have studied from the literature. We also apply our semantics to a wide range of challenging examples, and show that our semantics is simple and matches the desired results in all cases. Finally, we describe experiments on the most challenging examples, exhibiting unexpectedly superior performance over well-known systems when they can compute correct answers. 
    more » « less
  2. Predicate-centric rules for rewriting queries is a key technique in optimizing queries. These include pushing down the predicate below the join and aggregation operators, or optimizing the order of evaluating predicates. However, many of these rules are only applicable when the predicate uses a certain set of columns. For example, to move the predicate below the join operator, the predicate must only use columns from one of the joined tables. By generating a predicate that satisfies these column constraints and preserves the semantics of the original query, the optimizer may leverage additional predicate-centric rules that were not applicable before. Researchers have proposed syntax-driven rewrite rules and machine learning algorithms for inferring such predicates. However, these techniques suffer from two limitations. First, they do not let the optimizer constrain the set of columns that may be used in the learned predicate. Second, machine learning algorithms do not guarantee that the learned predicate preserves semantics. In this paper, we present SIA, a system for learning predicates while being guided by counter-examples and a verification technique, that addresses these limitations. The key idea is to leverage satisfiability modulo theories to generate counter-examples and use them to iteratively learn a valid, optimal predicate. We formalize this problem by proving the key properties of synthesized predicates. We implement our approach in SIA and evaluate its efficacy and efficiency. We demonstrate that it synthesizes a larger set of valid predicates compared to prior approaches. On a collection of 200 queries derived from the TPC-H benchmark, SIA successfully rewrites 114 queries with learned predicates. 66 of these rewritten queries exhibit more than 2X speed up. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    There is a growing interest in using social media content for Natural Language Processing applications. However, it is not easy to computationally identify the most relevant set of tweets related to any specific event. Challenging semantics coupled with different ways for using natural language in social media make it difficult for retrieving the most relevant set of data from any social media outlet. This paper seeks to demonstrate a way to present the changing semantics of Twitter within the context of a crisis event, specifically tweets during Hurricane Irma. These methods can be used to identify the most relevant corpus of text for analysis in relevance to a specific incident such as a hurricane. Using an implementation of the Word2Vec method of Neural Network training mechanisms to create Word Embeddings, this paper will: discuss how the relative meaning of words changes as events unfold; present a mechanism for scoring tweets based upon dynamic, relative context relatedness; and show that similarity between words is not necessarily static. We present different methods for training the vector model in Word2Vec for identification of the most relevant tweets for any search query. The impact of tuning parameters such as Word Window Size, Minimum Word Frequency, Hidden Layer Dimensionality, and Negative Sampling on model performance was explored. The window containing the local maximum for AU_ROC for each parameter serves as a guide for other studies using the methods presented here for social media data analysis.

     
    more » « less
  4. Abstract: Jury notetaking can be controversial despite evidence suggesting benefits for recall and understanding. Research on note taking has historically focused on the deliberation process. Yet, little research explores the notes themselves. We developed a 10-item coding guide to explore what jurors take notes on (e.g., simple vs. complex evidence) and how they take notes (e.g., gist vs. specific representation). In general, jurors made gist representations of simple and complex information in their notes. This finding is consistent with Fuzzy Trace Theory (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995) and suggests notes may serve as a general memory aid, rather than verbatim representation. Summary: The practice of jury notetaking in the courtroom is often contested. Some states allow it (e.g., Nebraska: State v. Kipf, 1990), while others forbid it (e.g., Louisiana: La. Code of Crim. Proc., Art. 793). Some argue notes may serve as a memory aid, increase juror confidence during deliberation, and help jurors engage in the trial (Hannaford & Munsterman, 2001; Heuer & Penrod, 1988, 1994). Others argue notetaking may distract jurors from listening to evidence, that juror notes may be given undue weight, and that those who took notes may dictate the deliberation process (Dann, Hans, & Kaye, 2005). While research has evaluated the efficacy of juror notes on evidence comprehension, little work has explored the specific content of juror notes. In a similar project on which we build, Dann, Hans, and Kaye (2005) found jurors took on average 270 words of notes each with 85% including references to jury instructions in their notes. In the present study we use a content analysis approach to examine how jurors take notes about simple and complex evidence. We were particularly interested in how jurors captured gist and specific (verbatim) information in their notes as they have different implications for information recall during deliberation. According to Fuzzy Trace Theory (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995), people extract “gist” or qualitative meaning from information, and also exact, verbatim representations. Although both are important for helping people make well-informed judgments, gist-based understandings are purported to be even more important than verbatim understanding (Reyna, 2008; Reyna & Brainer, 2007). As such, it could be useful to examine how laypeople represent information in their notes during deliberation of evidence. Methods Prior to watching a 45-minute mock bank robbery trial, jurors were given a pen and notepad and instructed they were permitted to take notes. The evidence included testimony from the defendant, witnesses, and expert witnesses from prosecution and defense. Expert testimony described complex mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) evidence. The present analysis consists of pilot data representing 2,733 lines of notes from 52 randomly-selected jurors across 41 mock juries. Our final sample for presentation at AP-LS will consist of all 391 juror notes in our dataset. Based on previous research exploring jury note taking as well as our specific interest in gist vs. specific encoding of information, we developed a coding guide to quantify juror note-taking behaviors. Four researchers independently coded a subset of notes. Coders achieved acceptable interrater reliability [(Cronbach’s Alpha = .80-.92) on all variables across 20% of cases]. Prior to AP-LS, we will link juror notes with how they discuss scientific and non-scientific evidence during jury deliberation. Coding Note length. Before coding for content, coders counted lines of text. Each notepad line with at minimum one complete word was coded as a line of text. Gist information vs. Specific information. Any line referencing evidence was coded as gist or specific. We coded gist information as information that did not contain any specific details but summarized the meaning of the evidence (e.g., “bad, not many people excluded”). Specific information was coded as such if it contained a verbatim descriptive (e.g.,“<1 of people could be excluded”). We further coded whether this information was related to non-scientific evidence or related to the scientific DNA evidence. Mentions of DNA Evidence vs. Other Evidence. We were specifically interested in whether jurors mentioned the DNA evidence and how they captured complex evidence. When DNA evidence was mention we coded the content of the DNA reference. Mentions of the characteristics of mtDNA vs nDNA, the DNA match process or who could be excluded, heteroplasmy, references to database size, and other references were coded. Reliability. When referencing DNA evidence, we were interested in whether jurors mentioned the evidence reliability. Any specific mention of reliability of DNA evidence was noted (e.g., “MT DNA is not as powerful, more prone to error”). Expert Qualification. Finally, we were interested in whether jurors noted an expert’s qualifications. All references were coded (e.g., “Forensic analyst”). Results On average, jurors took 53 lines of notes (range: 3-137 lines). Most (83%) mentioned jury instructions before moving on to case specific information. The majority of references to evidence were gist references (54%) focusing on non-scientific evidence and scientific expert testimony equally (50%). When jurors encoded information using specific references (46%), they referenced non-scientific evidence and expert testimony equally as well (50%). Thirty-three percent of lines were devoted to expert testimony with every juror including at least one line. References to the DNA evidence were usually focused on who could be excluded from the FBIs database (43%), followed by references to differences between mtDNA vs nDNA (30%), and mentions of the size of the database (11%). Less frequently, references to DNA evidence focused on heteroplasmy (5%). Of those references that did not fit into a coding category (11%), most focused on the DNA extraction process, general information about DNA, and the uniqueness of DNA. We further coded references to DNA reliability (15%) as well as references to specific statistical information (14%). Finally, 40% of jurors made reference to an expert’s qualifications. Conclusion Jury note content analysis can reveal important information about how jurors capture trial information (e.g., gist vs verbatim), what evidence they consider important, and what they consider relevant and irrelevant. In our case, it appeared jurors largely created gist representations of information that focused equally on non-scientific evidence and scientific expert testimony. This finding suggests note taking may serve not only to represent information verbatim, but also and perhaps mostly as a general memory aid summarizing the meaning of evidence. Further, jurors’ references to evidence tended to be equally focused on the non-scientific evidence and the scientifically complex DNA evidence. This observation suggests jurors may attend just as much to non-scientific evidence as they to do complex scientific evidence in cases involving complicated evidence – an observation that might inform future work on understanding how jurors interpret evidence in cases with complex information. Learning objective: Participants will be able to describe emerging evidence about how jurors take notes during trial. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    A bstract We give a unified treatment of dispersive sum rules for four-point correlators in conformal field theory. We call a sum rule “dispersive” if it has double zeros at all double-twist operators above a fixed twist gap. Dispersive sum rules have their conceptual origin in Lorentzian kinematics and absorptive physics (the notion of double discontinuity). They have been discussed using three seemingly different methods: analytic functionals dual to double-twist operators, dispersion relations in position space, and dispersion relations in Mellin space. We show that these three approaches can be mapped into one another and lead to completely equivalent sum rules. A central idea of our discussion is a fully nonperturbative expansion of the correlator as a sum over Polyakov-Regge blocks . Unlike the usual OPE sum, the Polyakov-Regge expansion utilizes the data of two separate channels, while having (term by term) good Regge behavior in the third channel. We construct sum rules which are non-negative above the double-twist gap; they have the physical interpretation of a subtracted version of “superconvergence” sum rules. We expect dispersive sum rules to be a very useful tool to study expansions around mean-field theory, and to constrain the low-energy description of holographic CFTs with a large gap. We give examples of the first kind of applications, notably we exhibit a candidate extremal functional for the spin-two gap problem. 
    more » « less