-
A Community-driven vision for a new Knowledge Resource for AI
Authors:
Vinay K Chaudhri,
Chaitan Baru,
Brandon Bennett,
Mehul Bhatt,
Darion Cassel,
Anthony G Cohn,
Rina Dechter,
Esra Erdem,
Dave Ferrucci,
Ken Forbus,
Gregory Gelfond,
Michael Genesereth,
Andrew S. Gordon,
Benjamin Grosof,
Gopal Gupta,
Jim Hendler,
Sharat Israni,
Tyler R. Josephson,
Patrick Kyllonen,
Yuliya Lierler,
Vladimir Lifschitz,
Clifton McFate,
Hande K. McGinty,
Leora Morgenstern,
Alessandro Oltramari
, et al. (7 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
The long-standing goal of creating a comprehensive, multi-purpose knowledge resource, reminiscent of the 1984 Cyc project, still persists in AI. Despite the success of knowledge resources like WordNet, ConceptNet, Wolfram|Alpha and other commercial knowledge graphs, verifiable, general-purpose widely available sources of knowledge remain a critical deficiency in AI infrastructure. Large language m…
▽ More
The long-standing goal of creating a comprehensive, multi-purpose knowledge resource, reminiscent of the 1984 Cyc project, still persists in AI. Despite the success of knowledge resources like WordNet, ConceptNet, Wolfram|Alpha and other commercial knowledge graphs, verifiable, general-purpose widely available sources of knowledge remain a critical deficiency in AI infrastructure. Large language models struggle due to knowledge gaps; robotic planning lacks necessary world knowledge; and the detection of factually false information relies heavily on human expertise. What kind of knowledge resource is most needed in AI today? How can modern technology shape its development and evaluation? A recent AAAI workshop gathered over 50 researchers to explore these questions. This paper synthesizes our findings and outlines a community-driven vision for a new knowledge infrastructure. In addition to leveraging contemporary advances in knowledge representation and reasoning, one promising idea is to build an open engineering framework to exploit knowledge modules effectively within the context of practical applications. Such a framework should include sets of conventions and social structures that are adopted by contributors.
△ Less
Submitted 19 June, 2025;
originally announced June 2025.
-
Understanding Rulelog Computations in Silk
Authors:
Carl Andersen,
Brett Benyo,
Miguel Calejo,
Mike Dean,
Paul Fodor,
Benjamin N. Grosof,
Michael Kifer,
Senlin Liang,
Terrance Swift
Abstract:
Rulelog is a knowledge representation and reasoning language based on logic programming under the well-founded semantics. It is an extension of the language of Flora-2 and so supports inheritance and other object-oriented features, as well as the higher-order syntax of Hilog. However, Rulelog rules may also contain quantifiers and may be contra-positional. In addition, these rules are evaluated in…
▽ More
Rulelog is a knowledge representation and reasoning language based on logic programming under the well-founded semantics. It is an extension of the language of Flora-2 and so supports inheritance and other object-oriented features, as well as the higher-order syntax of Hilog. However, Rulelog rules may also contain quantifiers and may be contra-positional. In addition, these rules are evaluated in the presence of defeasibility mechanisms that include rule cancellation, rule priorities, and other aspects. Rulelog programs are sometimes developed by loosely coordinated teams of knowledge engineers (KEs) who are not necessarily programmers. This requires not only declarative debugging support, but also support for profiling to help KEs understand the overall structure of a computation, including its termination properties. The design of debugging and profiling tools is made more challenging because Rulelog programs undergo a series of transformations into normal programs, so that there is a cognitive distance between how rules are specified and how they are executed.
In this paper, we describe the debugging and profiling environment for Rulelog implemented in the integrated development environment of the Silk system. Our approach includes an interface to justification graphs, which treat why-not and defeasibility as well as provenance of the rules supporting answers. It also includes tools for trace-based analysis of computations to permit understanding of erroneous non-termination and of general performance issues. For semantically correct cases of the non-terminating behavior, Silk offers a different approach, which addresses the problem in a formally sound manner by leveraging a form of bounded rationality called restraint.
△ Less
Submitted 19 August, 2013;
originally announced August 2013.
-
Evidential Confirmation as Transformed Probability
Authors:
Benjamin N. Grosof
Abstract:
A considerable body of work in AI has been concerned with aggregating measures of confirmatory and disconfirmatory evidence for a common set of propositions. Claiming classical probability to be inadequate or inappropriate, several researchers have gone so far as to invent new formalisms and methods. We show how to represent two major such alternative approaches to evidential confirmation not only…
▽ More
A considerable body of work in AI has been concerned with aggregating measures of confirmatory and disconfirmatory evidence for a common set of propositions. Claiming classical probability to be inadequate or inappropriate, several researchers have gone so far as to invent new formalisms and methods. We show how to represent two major such alternative approaches to evidential confirmation not only in terms of transformed (Bayesian) probability, but also in terms of each other. This unifies two of the leading approaches to confirmation theory, by showing that a revised MYCIN Certainty Factor method [12] is equivalent to a special case of Dempster-Shafer theory. It yields a well-understood axiomatic basis, i.e. conditional independence, to interpret previous work on quantitative confirmation theory. It substantially resolves the "taxe-them-or-leave-them" problem of priors: MYCIN had to leave them out, while PROSPECTOR had to have them in. It recasts some of confirmation theory's advantages in terms of the psychological accessibility of probabilistic information in different (transformed) formats. Finally, it helps to unify the representation of uncertain reasoning (see also [11]).
△ Less
Submitted 27 March, 2013;
originally announced April 2013.
-
An Inequality Paradigm for Probabilistic Knowledge
Authors:
Benjamin N. Grosof
Abstract:
We propose an inequality paradigm for probabilistic reasoning based on a logic of upper and lower bounds on conditional probabilities. We investigate a family of probabilistic logics, generalizing the work of Nilsson [14]. We develop a variety of logical notions for probabilistic reasoning, including soundness, completeness justification; and convergence: reduction of a theory to a simpler logical…
▽ More
We propose an inequality paradigm for probabilistic reasoning based on a logic of upper and lower bounds on conditional probabilities. We investigate a family of probabilistic logics, generalizing the work of Nilsson [14]. We develop a variety of logical notions for probabilistic reasoning, including soundness, completeness justification; and convergence: reduction of a theory to a simpler logical class. We argue that a bound view is especially useful for describing the semantics of probabilistic knowledge representation and for describing intermediate states of probabilistic inference and updating. We show that the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence is formally identical to a special case of our generalized probabilistic logic. Our paradigm thus incorporates both Bayesian "rule-based" approaches and avowedly non-Bayesian "evidential" approaches such as MYCIN and DempsterShafer. We suggest how to integrate the two "schools", and explore some possibilities for novel synthesis of a variety of ideas in probabilistic reasoning.
△ Less
Submitted 27 March, 2013;
originally announced April 2013.
-
Non-Monotonicity in Probabilistic Reasoning
Authors:
Benjamin N. Grosof
Abstract:
We start by defining an approach to non-monotonic probabilistic reasoning in terms of non-monotonic categorical (true-false) reasoning. We identify a type of non-monotonic probabilistic reasoning, akin to default inheritance, that is commonly found in practice, especially in "evidential" and "Bayesian" reasoning. We formulate this in terms of the Maximization of Conditional Independence (MCI), and…
▽ More
We start by defining an approach to non-monotonic probabilistic reasoning in terms of non-monotonic categorical (true-false) reasoning. We identify a type of non-monotonic probabilistic reasoning, akin to default inheritance, that is commonly found in practice, especially in "evidential" and "Bayesian" reasoning. We formulate this in terms of the Maximization of Conditional Independence (MCI), and identify a variety of applications for this sort of default. We propose a formalization using Pointwise Circumscription. We compare MCI to Maximum Entropy, another kind of non-monotonic principle, and conclude by raising a number of open questions
△ Less
Submitted 27 March, 2013;
originally announced April 2013.
-
Transforming Prioritized Defaults and Specificity into Parallel Defaults
Authors:
Benjamin N. Grosof
Abstract:
We show how to transform any set of prioritized propositional defaults into an equivalent set of parallel (i.e., unprioritized) defaults, in circumscription. We give an algorithm to implement the transform. We show how to use the transform algorithm as a generator of a whole family of inferencing algorithms for circumscription. The method is to employ the transform algorithm as a front end to a…
▽ More
We show how to transform any set of prioritized propositional defaults into an equivalent set of parallel (i.e., unprioritized) defaults, in circumscription. We give an algorithm to implement the transform. We show how to use the transform algorithm as a generator of a whole family of inferencing algorithms for circumscription. The method is to employ the transform algorithm as a front end to any inferencing algorithm, e.g., one of the previously available, that handles the parallel (empty) case of prioritization. Our algorithms provide not just coverage of a new expressive class, but also alternatives to previous algorithms for implementing the previously covered class (?layered?) of prioritization. In particular, we give a new query-answering algorithm for prioritized cirumscription which is sound and complete for the full expressive class of unrestricted finite prioritization partial orders, for propositional defaults (or minimized predicates). By contrast, previous algorithms required that the prioritization partial order be layered, i.e., structured similar to the system of rank in the military. Our algorithm enables, for the first time, the implementation of the most useful class of prioritization: non-layered prioritization partial orders. Default inheritance, for example, typically requires non-layered prioritization to represent specificity adequately. Our algorithm enables not only the implementation of default inheritance (and specificity) within prioritized circumscription, but also the extension and combination of default inheritance with other kinds of prioritized default reasoning, e.g.: with stratified logic programs with negation-as-failure. Such logic programs are previously known to be representable equivalently as layered-priority predicate circumscriptions. Worst-case, the transform increases the number of defaults exponentially. We discuss how inferencing is practically implementable nevertheless in two kinds of situations: general expressiveness but small numbers of defaults, or expressive special cases with larger numbers of defaults. One such expressive special case is non-?top-heaviness? of the prioritization partial order. In addition to its direct implementation, the transform can also be exploited analytically to generate special case algorithms, e.g., a tractable transform for a class within default inheritance (detailed in another, forthcoming paper). We discuss other aspects of the significance of the fundamental result. One can view the transform as reducing n degrees of partially ordered belief confidence to just 2 degrees of confidence: for-sure and (unprioritized) default. Ordinary, parallel default reasoning, e.g., in parallel circumscription or Poole's Theorist, can be viewed in these terms as reducing 2 degrees of confidence to just 1 degree of confidence: that of the non-monotonic theory's conclusions. The expressive reduction's computational complexity suggests that prioritization is valuable for its expressive conciseness, just as defaults are for theirs. For Reiter's Default Logic and Poole's Theorist, the transform implies how to extend those formalisms so as to equip them with a concept of prioritization that is exactly equivalent to that in circumscription. This provides an interesting alternative to Brewka's approach to equipping them with prioritization-type precedence.
△ Less
Submitted 20 February, 2013;
originally announced February 2013.
