“Determining Possible and Necessary Winners Given Partial Orders” by L. Xia and V. Conitzer

“Usually a voting rule requires agents to give their preferences as linear orders. However, in some cases it is impractical for an agent to give a linear order over all the alternatives. It has been suggested to let agents submit partial orders instead. Then, given a voting rule, a profile of partial orders, and an alternative (candidate) c, two important questions arise: first, is it still possible for c to win, and second, is c guaranteed to win? These are the possible winner and necessary winner problems, respectively….”

“Scheduling Conservation Designs for Maximum Flexibility via Network Cascade Optimization” by Shan Xue, Alan Fern and Daniel Sheldon

“One approach to conserving endangered species is to purchase and protect a set of land parcels in a way that maximizes the expected future population spread. Unfortunately, an ideal set of parcels may have a cost that is beyond the immediate budget constraints and must thus be purchased incrementally. This raises the challenge of deciding how to schedule the parcel purchases in a way that maximizes the flexibility of budget usage while keeping population spread loss in control. In this paper, we introduce a formulation of this scheduling problem that does not rely on knowing the future budgets of an organization. In particular, we consider scheduling purchases in a way that achieves a population spread no less than desired but delays purchases as long as possible…”

“Lazy Model Expansion: Interleaving Grounding with Search” by Broes De Cat, Marc Denecker, Maurice Bruynooghe and Peter Stuckey

Finding satisfying assignments for the variables involved in a set of constraints can be cast as a (bounded) model generation problem: search for (bounded) models of a theory in some logic. The state-of-the-art approach for bounded model generation for rich knowledge representation languages is ground-and-solve: reduce the theory to a ground or propositional one and apply a search algorithm to the resulting theory.
An important bottleneck is the blow-up of the size of the theory caused by the grounding phase. Lazily grounding the theory during search is a way to overcome this bottleneck. We present a theoretical framework and an implementation in the context of the FO(.) knowledge representation language. Instead of grounding all parts of a theory, justifications are derived for some parts of it…

“Scaling up Heuristic Planning with Relational Decision Trees” by T. De la Rosa, S. Jimenez, R. Fuentetaja and D. Borrajo

“Current evaluation functions for heuristic planning are expensive to compute. In numerous planning problems these functions provide good guidance to the solution, so they are worth the expense. However, when evaluation functions are misguiding or when planning problems are large enough, lots of node evaluations must be computed, which severely limits the scalability of heuristic planners. In this paper, we present a novel solution for reducing node evaluations in heuristic planning based on machine learning…”

“Identifying Aspects for Web-Search Queries” by F. Wu, J. Madhavan and A. Halevy

“Many web-search queries serve as the beginning of an exploration of an unknown space of information, rather than looking for a specific web page. To answer such queries effec- tively, the search engine should attempt to organize the space of relevant information in a way that facilitates exploration.

We describe the Aspector system that computes aspects for a given query. Each aspect is a set of search queries that together represent a distinct information need relevant to the original search query. To serve as an effective means to explore the space, Aspector computes aspects that are orthogonal to each other and to have high combined coverage…