Search for: All records

Powerful domain-independent planners have been developed to solve various types of planning problems. These planners often require a model of the acting agent's actions, given in some planning domain description language. Manually designing such an action model is a notoriously challenging task. An alternative is to automatically learn action models from observation. Such an action model is called safe if every plan created with it is consistent with the real, unknown action model. Algorithms for learning such safe action models exist, yet they cannot handle domains with conditional or universal effects, which are common constructs in many planning problems. We prove that learning non-trivial safe action models with conditional effects may require an exponential number of samples. Then, we identify reasonable assumptions under which such learning is tractable and propose Conditional-SAM, the first algorithm capable of doing so. We analyze Conditional-SAM theoretically and evaluate it experimentally. Our results show that the action models learned by Conditional-SAM can be used to solve perfectly most of the test set problems in most of the experimented domains.

 

A common approach for solving planning problems is to model them in a formal language such as the Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL), and then use an appropriate PDDL planner. Several algorithms for learning PDDL models from observations have been proposed but plans created with these learned models may not be sound. We propose two algorithms for learning PDDL models that are guaranteed to be safe to use even when given observations that include partially observable states. We analyze these algorithms theoretically, characterizing the sample complexity each algorithm requires to guarantee probabilistic completeness. We also show experimentally that our algorithms are often better than FAMA, a state-of-the-art PDDL learning algorithm.

 

One approach to probabilistic inference involves counting the number of models of a given Boolean formula. Here, we are interested in inferences involving higher-order objects, i.e., functions. We study the following task: Given a Boolean specification between a set of inputs and outputs, count the number of functions of inputs such that the specification is met. Such functions are called Skolem functions.We are motivated by the recent development of scalable approaches to Boolean function synthesis. This stands in relation to our problem analogously to the relationship between Boolean satisfiability and the model counting problem. Yet, counting Skolem functions poses considerable new challenges. From the complexity-theoretic standpoint, counting Skolem functions is not only #P-hard; it is quite unlikely to have an FPRAS (Fully Polynomial Randomized Approximation Scheme) as the problem of synthesizing a Skolem function remains challenging, even given access to an NP oracle.The primary contribution of this work is the first algorithm, SkolemFC, that computes the number of Skolem functions. SkolemFC relies on technical connections between counting functions and propositional model counting: our algorithm makes a linear number of calls to an approximate model counter and computes an estimate of the number of Skolem functions with theoretical guarantees. Our prototype displays impressive scalability, handling benchmarks comparably to state-of-the-art Skolem function synthesis engines, even though counting all such functions ostensibly poses a greater challenge than synthesizing a single function.

 

We study the problem of auditing classifiers for statistical subgroup fairness. Kearns et al. [Kearns et al., 2018] showed that the problem of auditing combinatorial subgroups fairness is as hard as agnostic learning. Essentially all work on remedying statistical measures of discrimination against subgroups assumes access to an oracle for this problem, despite the fact that no efficient algorithms are known for it. If we assume the data distribution is Gaussian, or even merely log-concave, then a recent line of work has discovered efficient agnostic learning algorithms for halfspaces. Unfortunately, the reduction of Kearns et al. was formulated in terms of weak, "distribution-free" learning, and thus did not establish a connection for families such as log-concave distributions. In this work, we give positive and negative results on auditing for Gaussian distributions: On the positive side, we present an alternative approach to leverage these advances in agnostic learning and thereby obtain the first polynomial-time approximation scheme (PTAS) for auditing nontrivial combinatorial subgroup fairness: we show how to audit statistical notions of fairness over homogeneous halfspace subgroups when the features are Gaussian. On the negative side, we find that under cryptographic assumptions, no polynomial-time algorithm can guarantee any nontrivial auditing, even under Gaussian feature distributions, for general halfspace subgroups. 

Powerful domain-independent planners have been developed to solve various types of planning problems. These planners often require a model of the acting agent's actions, given in some planning domain description language. Yet obtaining such an action model is a notoriously hard task. This task is even more challenging in mission-critical domains, where a trial-and-error approach to learning how to act is not an option. In such domains, the action model used to generate plans must be safe, in the sense that plans generated with it must be applicable and achieve their goals. Learning safe action models for planning has been recently explored for domains in which states are sufficiently described with Boolean variables. In this work, we go beyond this limitation and propose the NSAM algorithm. NSAM runs in time that is polynomial in the number of observations and, under certain conditions, is guaranteed to return safe action models. We analyze its worst-case sample complexity, which may be intractable for some domains. Empirically, however, NSAM can quickly learn a safe action model that can solve most problems in the domain. 

The tension between deduction and induction is perhaps the most fundamental issue in areas such as philosophy, cognition, and artificial intelligence. In an influential paper,Valiantrecognized that the challenge of learning should be integrated with deduction. In particular, he proposed a semantics to capture the quality possessed by the output ofprobably approximately correct(PAC) learning algorithms when formulated in a logic. Although weaker than classical entailment, it allows for a powerful model-theoretic framework for answering queries. In this paper, we provide a new technical foundation to demonstrate PAC learning with multi-agent epistemic logics. To circumvent the negative results in the literature on the difficulty of robust learning with the PAC semantics, we consider so-called implicit learning where we are able to incorporate observations to the background theory in service of deciding the entailment of an epistemic query. We prove correctness of the learning procedure and discuss results on the sample complexity, that is how many observations we will need to provably assert that the query is entailed given a user-specified error bound. Finally, we investigate under what circumstances this algorithm can be made efficient. On the last point, given that reasoning in epistemic logics especially in multi-agent epistemic logics is PSPACE-complete, it might seem like there is no hope for this problem. We leverage some recent results on the so-calledRepresentation Theoremexplored for single-agent and multi-agent epistemic logics with theonly knowingoperator to reduce modal reasoning to propositional reasoning. 

Group-fair learning methods typically seek to ensure that some measure of prediction efficacy for (often historically) disadvantaged minority groups is comparable to that for the majority of the population. When a principal seeks to adopt a group-fair approach to replace another, the principal may face opposition from those who feel they may be harmed by the switch, and this, in turn, may deter adoption. We propose that a potential mitigation to this concern is to ensure that a group-fair model is also popular, in the sense that, for a majority of the target population, it yields a preferred distribution over outcomes compared with the conventional model. In this paper, we show that state of the art fair learning approaches are often unpopular in this sense. We propose several efficient algorithms for postprocessing an existing group-fair learning scheme to improve its popularity while retaining fairness. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that the proposed postprocessing approaches are highly effective in practice. 

We consider the problem of learning action models for planning in unknown stochastic environments that can be defined using the Probabilistic Planning Domain Description Language (PPDDL). As input, we are given a set of previously executed trajectories, and the main challenge is to learn an action model that has a similar goal achievement probability to the policies used to create these trajectories. To this end, we introduce a variant of PPDDL in which there is uncertainty about the transition probabilities, specified by an interval for each factor that contains the respective true transition probabilities. Then, we present SAM+, an algorithm that learns such an imprecise-PPDDL environment model. SAM+ has a polynomial time and sample complexity, and guarantees that with high probability, the true environment is indeed captured by the defined intervals. We prove that the action model SAM+ outputs has a goal achievement probability that is almost as good or better than that of the policies used to produced the training trajectories. Then, we show how to produce a PPDDL model based on this imprecise-PPDDL model that has similar properties.