https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Johannes+FichteInternational Center for Computational Logic - Benutzerbeiträge [de]2026-04-18T05:44:46ZBenutzerbeiträgeMediaWiki 1.43.1https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Alice_Gaggl/NAVAS_Workshop-Wien&diff=36458Sarah Alice Gaggl/NAVAS Workshop-Wien2022-05-13T17:48:56Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{DISPLAYTITLE:NAVAS Workshop 2022 in Vienna}}<br />
<br />
<br />
The NAVAS workshop on ''Navigation Approaches for Answer Sets'' is jointly organized by research groups at [http://www.tuwien.at TU Wien] and [http://www.tu-dresden.de TU Dresden] will take place in Vienna, Austria, May 23-24, 2022. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Vienna-Pierre Blaché.jpg|center|Vienna Skyline]]<br />
<br />
{{#maketabs:<br />
|Aim and Scope=<br />
Due to the continuous development in recent years, a large number of demanding combinatorial search problems of enormous practical relevance can now be efficiently solved by Answer Set Programming (ASP). Depending on the scope of the problem to be solved, a "combinatorial explosion" of the number of solutions can occur very quickly. While modern ASP solvers can easily calculate several million solutions in a short time, this poses a new problem for the user: How should the enormous solution space be handled and made accessible? Typically, the Answer Sets are output in any order. However, many of these solutions are very similar. In practice, however, often only solutions are of interest that are sufficiently different from each other, that have special properties, or that are similar to a given set of solutions. <br />
In this workshop we present recent developments on answer set navigation and related work in formal argumentation.<br />
<br />
'''This workshop is supported by:'''<br />
<br />
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/NAVAS/en Grant 01IS20056 NAVAS]<br />
DFG through the Collaborative Research Center, Grant TRR 248 (see [https://perspicuous-computing.science] project ID 389792660)<br />
|Program=<br />
The NaVAS workshop will take place from Monday, May 23th until Wednesday May 25th of 2022. <br />
<br />
Monday, May 23th:<br />
<br />
*09:15 - 09:20 Welcome<br />
*09:20 - 09:45 Talk: The NAVAS Project and NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces - [[Sarah Alice Gaggl]]<br />
*09:45 - 10:15 Talk: Tunas - Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy - [[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
*10:15 - 10:45 Talk: Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation - [[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
*10:45 - 11:00 Coffee break<br />
<br />
*11:00 - 11:30 Talk (tent.): Abstraction for non-ground answer set programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep G. Saribatur]<br />
*11:30 - 12:00 Talk: Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy - [[Dominik Rusovac]]<br />
*12:00 - 12:30 Talk: Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering - [https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
*12:30 - 12:45 Talk: Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
*12:45 - 13:00 Talk: Approximate Answer Set Counting - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
*13:00 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
<br />
*14:00 - 18:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*19:00 - 21:00 Dinner<br />
<br />
<br />
Tuesday, May 24th:<br />
*09:00 - 12:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
*14:00 - 19:00 [https://www.tuwien.at/caiml/news-detail/caiml-annual-event-edward-a-lee/# CAIML Lectures] - [https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Faculty/Homepages/lee.html Edward A. Lee], [https://www.dc.fi.udc.es/~cabalar/ Pedro Cabalar]<br />
<br />
<!--TODO: link ersetzen --><br />
<br />
<br />
|Abstracts=<br />
For the schedule on on Monday, May 23th the following talks are presented.<br />
=== NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces ===<br />
[[Sarah Gaggl]]<br />
<br />
Recent developments on solvers for abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) made them capable to compute extensions for many semantics efficiently. However, for many input instances these solution spaces can become very large and incomprehensible. So far, for the further exploration and investigation of the AF solution space the user needs to use post-processing methods or handcrafted tools. To compare and explore the solution spaces of two selected semantics, we propose an approach that visually supports the user, via a combination of dimensionality reduction of argumentation extensions and a projection of extensions to sets of accepted or rejected arguments. We introduce the novel web-based visualization tool NEXAS that allows for an interactive exploration of the solution space together with a statistical analysis of the acceptance of individual arguments for the selected semantics, as well as provides an interactive correlation matrix for the acceptance of arguments.<br />
<br />
=== Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy ===<br />
[[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) solvers have advanced in the recent years, with a variety of different specialisation and overall development. Thus, even more complex and detailed programs can be solved. A side effect of this development are growing solution spaces and the problem of how to find those answer sets one is interested in. One general approach is to give an overview in form of a small number of highly diverse answer sets. By choosing a favourite and repeating the process the user is able to leap through the solution space. But finding highly diverse answer sets is computationally expensive. In this paper we introduce a new approach called Tunas for Trade Up Navigation for Answer Sets to find diverse answer sets by reworking existing solution collections. The core idea is to collect diverse answer sets. Once no more answer sets can be added to the collection, the program is allowed to trade answer sets from the collection for different answer sets, as long as the collection grows and stays diverse. Elaboration of the approach is possible in three variations, which we implemented and compared to established methods in an empirical evaluation. The evaluation shows that the Tunas approach is competitive with existing methods, and that efficiency of the approach is highly connected to the underlying logic program.<br />
<br />
=== Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation ===<br />
[[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
Assumption-based argumentation (ABA) is one of the main general frameworks for structured argumentation. Dispute derivations for ABA allow for evaluating claims in a dialectical manner: i.e. on the basis of an exchange of arguments and counter-arguments for a claim between a proponent and an opponent of the claim. Current versions of dispute derivations are geared towards determining (credulous) acceptance of claims w.r.t. the admissibility-based semantics that ABA inherits from abstract argumentation. Relatedly, they make use of backwards or top down reasoning for constructing arguments. In this work we define flexible dispute derivations with forward as well as backward reasoning allowing us, in particular, to also have dispute derivations for finding admissible, complete, and stable assumption sets rather than only determine acceptability of claims. We give an argumentation-based definition of such dispute derivations and a more implementation friendly alternative representation in which disputes involve exchange of claims and rules rather than arguments. These can be seen as elaborations on, in particular, existing graph-based dispute derivations on two fronts: first, in also allowing for forward reasoning; second, in that all arguments put forward in the dispute are represented by a graph and not only the proponents.<br />
<br />
=== Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy ===<br />
[[Dominik Rusovac]] <br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) is a popular declarative programming paradigm with a wide range of applications in artificial intelligence. Oftentimes, when modeling an AI problem with ASP, and in particular when we are interested beyond simple search for optimal solutions, an actual solution, differences between solutions, or number of solutions of the ASP program matter. For example, when a user aims to identify a specific answer set according to her needs, or requires the total number of diverging solutions to comprehend probabilistic applications such as reasoning in medical domains. Then, there are only certain problem specific and handcrafted encoding techniques available to navigate the solution space of ASP programs, which is oftentimes not enough. We propose a formal and general framework for interactive navigation toward desired subsets of answer sets analogous to faceted browsing. Our approach enables the user to explore the solution space by consciously zooming in or out of sub-spaces of solutions at a certain configurable pace. We illustrate that weighted faceted navigation is computationally hard. Finally, we provide an implementation of our approach that demonstrates the feasibility of our framework for incomprehensible solution spaces.<br />
<br />
=== Abstraction for non-ground answer set programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep G. Saribatur]<br />
<br />
Abstraction is an important technique utilized by humans in model building and problem solving, in order to figure out key elements and relevant details of a world of interest. This naturally has led to investigations of using abstraction in AI and Computer Science to simplify problems, especially in the design of intelligent agents and automated problem solving. By omitting details, scenarios are reduced to ones that are easier to deal with and to understand, where further details are added back only when they matter. Despite the fact that abstraction is a powerful technique, it has not been considered much in the context of nonmonotonic knowledge representation and reasoning, and specifically not in Answer Set Programming (ASP), apart from some related simplification methods. In this work, we introduce a notion for abstracting from the domain of an ASP program such that the domain size shrinks while the set of answer sets (i.e., models) of the program is over-approximated. To achieve the latter, the program is transformed into an abstract program over the abstract domain while preserving the structure of the rules. We show in elaboration how this can be also achieved for single or multiple sub-domains (sorts) of a domain, and in case of structured domains like grid environments in which structure should be preserved. Furthermore, we introduce an abstraction-&-refinement methodology that makes it possible to start with an initial abstraction and to automatically achieve an abstraction with an associated abstract answer set that matches an answer set of the original program, provided that the program is satisfiable. Experiments based on prototypical implementations reveal the potential of the approach for problem analysis, by its ability to focus on the parts of the program that cause unsatisfiability and by achieving concrete abstract answer sets that merely reflect relevant details. This makes domain abstraction an interesting topic of research whose further use in important areas like Explainable AI remains to be explored.<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering ===<br />
[https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
<br />
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence (AI) builds on formal approaches to reasoning argumentatively. Common to many such approaches is to use argumentation frameworks (AFs) as reasoning engines, with AFs being composed of arguments and attacks between arguments, which are instantiated from knowledge bases in a principle-based manner. While representing what can be argued for in an AF provides a conceptually clean way, this process can face challenges arising from generating a large number of arguments, which can act as a barrier to explainability. Inspired by successful approaches to model checking where the state explosion is mitigated by applying existential abstraction, we study an adaption of existential abstraction in form of clustering arguments in an AF to address an associated "argument explosion". In the paper on which this talk is based on, we provide a foundational investigation of this form of existential abstraction by defining semantics of the resulting clustered AFs, which balance two inherent aspects of existential abstractions: abstracting from concrete AFs and not permitting too much spuriousness (i.e., conclusions that hold on the abstraction but not on the original AF). Moreover, we show properties of clustered AFs, including complexity results, discuss use of clusterings for explaining results of reasoning tasks, and employ the recently introduced methodology of abstraction in answer set programming (ASP) for obtaining and reasoning over clustered AFs.<br />
<br />
=== Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
<br />
Extending the popular answer set programming paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, that is, contained in all or some answer sets, respectively. ELPs thus deliver multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. Employing ELPs for reasoning problems so far has mainly been restricted to standard decision problems (complexity analysis) and enumeration (development of systems) of world views. In this paper, we take a next step and contribute to epistemic logic programming in two ways: First, we establish quantitative reasoning for ELPs, where the acceptance of a certain set of literals depends on the number (proportion) of world views that are compatible with the set. Second, we present a novel system that is capable of efficiently solving the underlying counting problems required to answer such quantitative reasoning problems. Our system exploits the graph-based measure treewidth and works by iteratively finding and refining (graph) abstractions of an ELP program. On top of these abstractions, we apply dynamic programming that is combined with utilizing existing search-based solvers like (e)clingo for hard combinatorial subproblems that appear during solving. It turns out that our approach is competitive with existing systems that were introduced recently.<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Approximate Answer Set Counting ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a framework in artificial intelligence and knowledge representation for declarative modeling and problem solving. Modern ASP solvers focus on the computation or enumeration of answer sets. However, a variety of probabilistic applications in reasoning or logic programming require counting answer sets. While counting can be done by enumeration, simple enumeration becomes immediately infeasible if the number of solutions is high. On the other hand, approaches to exact counting are of high worst-case complexity. In fact, in propositional model counting, exact counting becomes impractical. In this work, we present a scalable approach to approximate counting for ASP. Our approach is based on systematically adding parity (XOR) constraints to<br />
ASP programs, which divide the search space. We prove that adding random XOR constraints partitions the answer sets of an ASP program. In practice, we use a Gaussian elimination based approach by lifting ideas from SAT to ASP and integrate it into a state of the art ASP solver.<br />
Finally, our experimental evaluation shows the scalability of our approach over existing ASP systems.<br />
<br />
<br />
|Organization=<br />
'''Organization '''<br /><br />
*[[Sarah Gaggl]] (TU Dresden)<br />
*[https://informatics.tuwien.ac.at/people/johannes-fichte Johannes Fichte] (TU Wien)<br />
<br />
<br />
}}<!-- End of #maketabs --></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Alice_Gaggl/NAVAS_Workshop-Wien&diff=36457Sarah Alice Gaggl/NAVAS Workshop-Wien2022-05-13T17:37:37Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{DISPLAYTITLE:NAVAS Workshop 2022 in Vienna}}<br />
<br />
<br />
The NAVAS workshop on ''Navigation Approaches for Answer Sets'' is jointly organized by research groups at [http://www.tuwien.at TU Wien] and [http://www.tu-dresden.de TU Dresden] will take place in Vienna, Austria, May 23-24, 2022. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Vienna-Pierre Blaché.jpg|center|Vienna Skyline]]<br />
<br />
{{#maketabs:<br />
|Aim and Scope=<br />
Due to the continuous development in recent years, a large number of demanding combinatorial search problems of enormous practical relevance can now be efficiently solved by Answer Set Programming (ASP). Depending on the scope of the problem to be solved, a "combinatorial explosion" of the number of solutions can occur very quickly. While modern ASP solvers can easily calculate several million solutions in a short time, this poses a new problem for the user: How should the enormous solution space be handled and made accessible? Typically, the Answer Sets are output in any order. However, many of these solutions are very similar. In practice, however, often only solutions are of interest that are sufficiently different from each other, that have special properties, or that are similar to a given set of solutions. <br />
In this workshop we present recent developments on answer set navigation and related work in formal argumentation.<br />
<br />
'''This workshop is supported by:'''<br />
<br />
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/NAVAS/en Grant 01IS20056 NAVAS]<br />
DFG through the Collaborative Research Center, Grant TRR 248 (see [https://perspicuous-computing.science] project ID 389792660)<br />
|Program=<br />
The NaVAS workshop will take place from Monday, May 23th until Wednesday May 25th of 2022. <br />
<br />
Monday, May 23th:<br />
<br />
*09:15 - 09:20 Welcome<br />
*09:20 - 09:45 Talk: The NAVAS Project and NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces - [[Sarah Alice Gaggl]]<br />
*09:45 - 10:15 Talk: Tunas - Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy - [[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
*10:15 - 10:45 Talk: Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation - [[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
*10:45 - 11:00 Coffee break<br />
<br />
*11:00 - 11:30 Talk (tent.): Abstraction for non-ground answer set programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
*11:30 - 12:00 Talk: Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy - [[Dominik Rusovac]]<br />
*12:00 - 12:30 Talk: Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering - [https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
*12:30 - 12:45 Talk: Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
*12:45 - 13:00 Talk: Approximate Answer Set Counting - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
*13:00 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
<br />
*14:00 - 18:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*19:00 - 21:00 Dinner<br />
<br />
<br />
Tuesday, May 24th:<br />
*09:00 - 12:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
*14:00 - 19:00 [https://www.tuwien.at/caiml/news-detail/caiml-annual-event-edward-a-lee/# CAIML Lectures] - [https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Faculty/Homepages/lee.html Edward A. Lee], [https://www.dc.fi.udc.es/~cabalar/ Pedro Cabalar]<br />
<br />
<!--TODO: link ersetzen --><br />
<br />
<br />
|Abstracts=<br />
For the schedule on on Monday, May 23th the following talks are presented.<br />
=== NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces ===<br />
[[Sarah Gaggl]]<br />
<br />
Recent developments on solvers for abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) made them capable to compute extensions for many semantics efficiently. However, for many input instances these solution spaces can become very large and incomprehensible. So far, for the further exploration and investigation of the AF solution space the user needs to use post-processing methods or handcrafted tools. To compare and explore the solution spaces of two selected semantics, we propose an approach that visually supports the user, via a combination of dimensionality reduction of argumentation extensions and a projection of extensions to sets of accepted or rejected arguments. We introduce the novel web-based visualization tool NEXAS that allows for an interactive exploration of the solution space together with a statistical analysis of the acceptance of individual arguments for the selected semantics, as well as provides an interactive correlation matrix for the acceptance of arguments.<br />
<br />
=== Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy ===<br />
[[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) solvers have advanced in the recent years, with a variety of different specialisation and overall development. Thus, even more complex and detailed programs can be solved. A side effect of this development are growing solution spaces and the problem of how to find those answer sets one is interested in. One general approach is to give an overview in form of a small number of highly diverse answer sets. By choosing a favourite and repeating the process the user is able to leap through the solution space. But finding highly diverse answer sets is computationally expensive. In this paper we introduce a new approach called Tunas for Trade Up Navigation for Answer Sets to find diverse answer sets by reworking existing solution collections. The core idea is to collect diverse answer sets. Once no more answer sets can be added to the collection, the program is allowed to trade answer sets from the collection for different answer sets, as long as the collection grows and stays diverse. Elaboration of the approach is possible in three variations, which we implemented and compared to established methods in an empirical evaluation. The evaluation shows that the Tunas approach is competitive with existing methods, and that efficiency of the approach is highly connected to the underlying logic program.<br />
<br />
=== Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation ===<br />
[[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
Assumption-based argumentation (ABA) is one of the main general frameworks for structured argumentation. Dispute derivations for ABA allow for evaluating claims in a dialectical manner: i.e. on the basis of an exchange of arguments and counter-arguments for a claim between a proponent and an opponent of the claim. Current versions of dispute derivations are geared towards determining (credulous) acceptance of claims w.r.t. the admissibility-based semantics that ABA inherits from abstract argumentation. Relatedly, they make use of backwards or top down reasoning for constructing arguments. In this work we define flexible dispute derivations with forward as well as backward reasoning allowing us, in particular, to also have dispute derivations for finding admissible, complete, and stable assumption sets rather than only determine acceptability of claims. We give an argumentation-based definition of such dispute derivations and a more implementation friendly alternative representation in which disputes involve exchange of claims and rules rather than arguments. These can be seen as elaborations on, in particular, existing graph-based dispute derivations on two fronts: first, in also allowing for forward reasoning; second, in that all arguments put forward in the dispute are represented by a graph and not only the proponents.<br />
<br />
=== Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy ===<br />
[[Dominik Rusovac]] <br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) is a popular declarative programming paradigm with a wide range of applications in artificial intelligence. Oftentimes, when modeling an AI problem with ASP, and in particular when we are interested beyond simple search for optimal solutions, an actual solution, differences between solutions, or number of solutions of the ASP program matter. For example, when a user aims to identify a specific answer set according to her needs, or requires the total number of diverging solutions to comprehend probabilistic applications such as reasoning in medical domains. Then, there are only certain problem specific and handcrafted encoding techniques available to navigate the solution space of ASP programs, which is oftentimes not enough. We propose a formal and general framework for interactive navigation toward desired subsets of answer sets analogous to faceted browsing. Our approach enables the user to explore the solution space by consciously zooming in or out of sub-spaces of solutions at a certain configurable pace. We illustrate that weighted faceted navigation is computationally hard. Finally, we provide an implementation of our approach that demonstrates the feasibility of our framework for incomprehensible solution spaces.<br />
<br />
=== Abstraction for non-ground answer set programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
<br />
tba<br />
<br />
=== Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering ===<br />
[https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
<br />
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence (AI) builds on formal approaches to reasoning argumentatively. Common to many such approaches is to use argumentation frameworks (AFs) as reasoning engines, with AFs being composed of arguments and attacks between arguments, which are instantiated from knowledge bases in a principle-based manner. While representing what can be argued for in an AF provides a conceptually clean way, this process can face challenges arising from generating a large number of arguments, which can act as a barrier to explainability. Inspired by successful approaches to model checking where the state explosion is mitigated by applying existential abstraction, we study an adaption of existential abstraction in form of clustering arguments in an AF to address an associated "argument explosion". In the paper on which this talk is based on, we provide a foundational investigation of this form of existential abstraction by defining semantics of the resulting clustered AFs, which balance two inherent aspects of existential abstractions: abstracting from concrete AFs and not permitting too much spuriousness (i.e., conclusions that hold on the abstraction but not on the original AF). Moreover, we show properties of clustered AFs, including complexity results, discuss use of clusterings for explaining results of reasoning tasks, and employ the recently introduced methodology of abstraction in answer set programming (ASP) for obtaining and reasoning over clustered AFs.<br />
<br />
=== Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
<br />
Extending the popular answer set programming paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, that is, contained in all or some answer sets, respectively. ELPs thus deliver multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. Employing ELPs for reasoning problems so far has mainly been restricted to standard decision problems (complexity analysis) and enumeration (development of systems) of world views. In this paper, we take a next step and contribute to epistemic logic programming in two ways: First, we establish quantitative reasoning for ELPs, where the acceptance of a certain set of literals depends on the number (proportion) of world views that are compatible with the set. Second, we present a novel system that is capable of efficiently solving the underlying counting problems required to answer such quantitative reasoning problems. Our system exploits the graph-based measure treewidth and works by iteratively finding and refining (graph) abstractions of an ELP program. On top of these abstractions, we apply dynamic programming that is combined with utilizing existing search-based solvers like (e)clingo for hard combinatorial subproblems that appear during solving. It turns out that our approach is competitive with existing systems that were introduced recently.<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Approximate Answer Set Counting ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a framework in artificial intelligence and knowledge representation for declarative modeling and problem solving. Modern ASP solvers focus on the computation or enumeration of answer sets. However, a variety of probabilistic applications in reasoning or logic programming require counting answer sets. While counting can be done by enumeration, simple enumeration becomes immediately infeasible if the number of solutions is high. On the other hand, approaches to exact counting are of high worst-case complexity. In fact, in propositional model counting, exact counting becomes impractical. In this work, we present a scalable approach to approximate counting for ASP. Our approach is based on systematically adding parity (XOR) constraints to<br />
ASP programs, which divide the search space. We prove that adding random XOR constraints partitions the answer sets of an ASP program. In practice, we use a Gaussian elimination based approach by lifting ideas from SAT to ASP and integrate it into a state of the art ASP solver.<br />
Finally, our experimental evaluation shows the scalability of our approach over existing ASP systems.<br />
<br />
<br />
|Organization=<br />
'''Organization '''<br /><br />
*[[Sarah Gaggl]] (TU Dresden)<br />
*[https://informatics.tuwien.ac.at/people/johannes-fichte Johannes Fichte] (TU Wien)<br />
<br />
<br />
}}<!-- End of #maketabs --></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Alice_Gaggl/NAVAS_Workshop-Wien&diff=36456Sarah Alice Gaggl/NAVAS Workshop-Wien2022-05-13T17:36:02Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{DISPLAYTITLE:NAVAS Workshop 2022 in Vienna}}<br />
<br />
<br />
The NAVAS workshop on ''Navigation Approaches for Answer Sets'' is jointly organized by research groups at [http://www.tuwien.at TU Wien] and [http://www.tu-dresden.de TU Dresden] will take place in Vienna, Austria, May 23-24, 2022. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Vienna-Pierre Blaché.jpg|center|Vienna Skyline]]<br />
<br />
{{#maketabs:<br />
|Aim and Scope=<br />
Due to the continuous development in recent years, a large number of demanding combinatorial search problems of enormous practical relevance can now be efficiently solved by Answer Set Programming (ASP). Depending on the scope of the problem to be solved, a "combinatorial explosion" of the number of solutions can occur very quickly. While modern ASP solvers can easily calculate several million solutions in a short time, this poses a new problem for the user: How should the enormous solution space be handled and made accessible? Typically, the Answer Sets are output in any order. However, many of these solutions are very similar. In practice, however, often only solutions are of interest that are sufficiently different from each other, that have special properties, or that are similar to a given set of solutions. <br />
In this workshop we present recent developments on answer set navigation and related work in formal argumentation.<br />
<br />
'''This workshop is supported by:'''<br />
<br />
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/NAVAS/en Grant 01IS20056 NAVAS]<br />
DFG through the Collaborative Research Center, Grant TRR 248 (see [https://perspicuous-computing.science] project ID 389792660)<br />
|Program=<br />
The NaVAS workshop will take place from Monday, May 23th until Wednesday May 25th of 2022. <br />
<br />
Monday, May 23th:<br />
<br />
*09:15 - 09:20 Welcome<br />
*09:20 - 09:45 Talk: The NAVAS Project and NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces - [[Sarah Alice Gaggl]]<br />
*09:45 - 10:15 Talk: Tunas - Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy - [[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
*10:15 - 10:45 Talk: Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation - [[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
*10:45 - 11:00 Coffee break<br />
<br />
*11:00 - 11:30 Talk (tent.): tba - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
*11:30 - 12:00 Talk: Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy - [[Dominik Rusovac]]<br />
*12:00 - 12:30 Talk: Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering - [https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
*12:30 - 12:45 Talk: Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
*12:45 - 13:00 Talk: Approximate Answer Set Counting - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
*13:00 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
<br />
*14:00 - 18:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*19:00 - 21:00 Dinner<br />
<br />
<br />
Tuesday, May 24th:<br />
*09:00 - 12:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
*14:00 - 19:00 [https://www.tuwien.at/caiml/news-detail/caiml-annual-event-edward-a-lee/# CAIML Lectures] - [https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Faculty/Homepages/lee.html Edward A. Lee], [https://www.dc.fi.udc.es/~cabalar/ Pedro Cabalar]<br />
<br />
<!--TODO: link ersetzen --><br />
<br />
<br />
|Abstracts=<br />
For the schedule on on Monday, May 23th the following talks are presented.<br />
=== NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces ===<br />
[[Sarah Gaggl]]<br />
<br />
Recent developments on solvers for abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) made them capable to compute extensions for many semantics efficiently. However, for many input instances these solution spaces can become very large and incomprehensible. So far, for the further exploration and investigation of the AF solution space the user needs to use post-processing methods or handcrafted tools. To compare and explore the solution spaces of two selected semantics, we propose an approach that visually supports the user, via a combination of dimensionality reduction of argumentation extensions and a projection of extensions to sets of accepted or rejected arguments. We introduce the novel web-based visualization tool NEXAS that allows for an interactive exploration of the solution space together with a statistical analysis of the acceptance of individual arguments for the selected semantics, as well as provides an interactive correlation matrix for the acceptance of arguments.<br />
<br />
=== Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy ===<br />
[[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) solvers have advanced in the recent years, with a variety of different specialisation and overall development. Thus, even more complex and detailed programs can be solved. A side effect of this development are growing solution spaces and the problem of how to find those answer sets one is interested in. One general approach is to give an overview in form of a small number of highly diverse answer sets. By choosing a favourite and repeating the process the user is able to leap through the solution space. But finding highly diverse answer sets is computationally expensive. In this paper we introduce a new approach called Tunas for Trade Up Navigation for Answer Sets to find diverse answer sets by reworking existing solution collections. The core idea is to collect diverse answer sets. Once no more answer sets can be added to the collection, the program is allowed to trade answer sets from the collection for different answer sets, as long as the collection grows and stays diverse. Elaboration of the approach is possible in three variations, which we implemented and compared to established methods in an empirical evaluation. The evaluation shows that the Tunas approach is competitive with existing methods, and that efficiency of the approach is highly connected to the underlying logic program.<br />
<br />
=== Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation ===<br />
[[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
Assumption-based argumentation (ABA) is one of the main general frameworks for structured argumentation. Dispute derivations for ABA allow for evaluating claims in a dialectical manner: i.e. on the basis of an exchange of arguments and counter-arguments for a claim between a proponent and an opponent of the claim. Current versions of dispute derivations are geared towards determining (credulous) acceptance of claims w.r.t. the admissibility-based semantics that ABA inherits from abstract argumentation. Relatedly, they make use of backwards or top down reasoning for constructing arguments. In this work we define flexible dispute derivations with forward as well as backward reasoning allowing us, in particular, to also have dispute derivations for finding admissible, complete, and stable assumption sets rather than only determine acceptability of claims. We give an argumentation-based definition of such dispute derivations and a more implementation friendly alternative representation in which disputes involve exchange of claims and rules rather than arguments. These can be seen as elaborations on, in particular, existing graph-based dispute derivations on two fronts: first, in also allowing for forward reasoning; second, in that all arguments put forward in the dispute are represented by a graph and not only the proponents.<br />
<br />
=== Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy ===<br />
[[Dominik Rusovac]] <br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) is a popular declarative programming paradigm with a wide range of applications in artificial intelligence. Oftentimes, when modeling an AI problem with ASP, and in particular when we are interested beyond simple search for optimal solutions, an actual solution, differences between solutions, or number of solutions of the ASP program matter. For example, when a user aims to identify a specific answer set according to her needs, or requires the total number of diverging solutions to comprehend probabilistic applications such as reasoning in medical domains. Then, there are only certain problem specific and handcrafted encoding techniques available to navigate the solution space of ASP programs, which is oftentimes not enough. We propose a formal and general framework for interactive navigation toward desired subsets of answer sets analogous to faceted browsing. Our approach enables the user to explore the solution space by consciously zooming in or out of sub-spaces of solutions at a certain configurable pace. We illustrate that weighted faceted navigation is computationally hard. Finally, we provide an implementation of our approach that demonstrates the feasibility of our framework for incomprehensible solution spaces.<br />
<br />
=== tba ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
<br />
=== Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering ===<br />
[https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
<br />
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence (AI) builds on formal approaches to reasoning argumentatively. Common to many such approaches is to use argumentation frameworks (AFs) as reasoning engines, with AFs being composed of arguments and attacks between arguments, which are instantiated from knowledge bases in a principle-based manner. While representing what can be argued for in an AF provides a conceptually clean way, this process can face challenges arising from generating a large number of arguments, which can act as a barrier to explainability. Inspired by successful approaches to model checking where the state explosion is mitigated by applying existential abstraction, we study an adaption of existential abstraction in form of clustering arguments in an AF to address an associated "argument explosion". In the paper on which this talk is based on, we provide a foundational investigation of this form of existential abstraction by defining semantics of the resulting clustered AFs, which balance two inherent aspects of existential abstractions: abstracting from concrete AFs and not permitting too much spuriousness (i.e., conclusions that hold on the abstraction but not on the original AF). Moreover, we show properties of clustered AFs, including complexity results, discuss use of clusterings for explaining results of reasoning tasks, and employ the recently introduced methodology of abstraction in answer set programming (ASP) for obtaining and reasoning over clustered AFs.<br />
<br />
=== Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
<br />
Extending the popular answer set programming paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, that is, contained in all or some answer sets, respectively. ELPs thus deliver multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. Employing ELPs for reasoning problems so far has mainly been restricted to standard decision problems (complexity analysis) and enumeration (development of systems) of world views. In this paper, we take a next step and contribute to epistemic logic programming in two ways: First, we establish quantitative reasoning for ELPs, where the acceptance of a certain set of literals depends on the number (proportion) of world views that are compatible with the set. Second, we present a novel system that is capable of efficiently solving the underlying counting problems required to answer such quantitative reasoning problems. Our system exploits the graph-based measure treewidth and works by iteratively finding and refining (graph) abstractions of an ELP program. On top of these abstractions, we apply dynamic programming that is combined with utilizing existing search-based solvers like (e)clingo for hard combinatorial subproblems that appear during solving. It turns out that our approach is competitive with existing systems that were introduced recently.<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Approximate Answer Set Counting ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a framework in artificial intelligence and knowledge representation for declarative modeling and problem solving. Modern ASP solvers focus on the computation or enumeration of answer sets. However, a variety of probabilistic applications in reasoning or logic programming require counting answer sets. While counting can be done by enumeration, simple enumeration becomes immediately infeasible if the number of solutions is high. On the other hand, approaches to exact counting are of high worst-case complexity. In fact, in propositional model counting, exact counting becomes impractical. In this work, we present a scalable approach to approximate counting for ASP. Our approach is based on systematically adding parity (XOR) constraints to<br />
ASP programs, which divide the search space. We prove that adding random XOR constraints partitions the answer sets of an ASP program. In practice, we use a Gaussian elimination based approach by lifting ideas from SAT to ASP and integrate it into a state of the art ASP solver.<br />
Finally, our experimental evaluation shows the scalability of our approach over existing ASP systems.<br />
<br />
<br />
|Organization=<br />
'''Organization '''<br /><br />
*[[Sarah Gaggl]] (TU Dresden)<br />
*[https://informatics.tuwien.ac.at/people/johannes-fichte Johannes Fichte] (TU Wien)<br />
<br />
<br />
}}<!-- End of #maketabs --></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Alice_Gaggl/NAVAS_Workshop-Wien&diff=36455Sarah Alice Gaggl/NAVAS Workshop-Wien2022-05-13T17:35:03Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{DISPLAYTITLE:NAVAS Workshop 2022 in Vienna}}<br />
<br />
<br />
The NAVAS workshop on ''Navigation Approaches for Answer Sets'' is jointly organized by research groups at [http://www.tuwien.at TU Wien] and [http://www.tu-dresden.de TU Dresden] will take place in Vienna, Austria, May 23-24, 2022. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Vienna-Pierre Blaché.jpg|center|Vienna Skyline]]<br />
<br />
{{#maketabs:<br />
|Aim and Scope=<br />
Due to the continuous development in recent years, a large number of demanding combinatorial search problems of enormous practical relevance can now be efficiently solved by Answer Set Programming (ASP). Depending on the scope of the problem to be solved, a "combinatorial explosion" of the number of solutions can occur very quickly. While modern ASP solvers can easily calculate several million solutions in a short time, this poses a new problem for the user: How should the enormous solution space be handled and made accessible? Typically, the Answer Sets are output in any order. However, many of these solutions are very similar. In practice, however, often only solutions are of interest that are sufficiently different from each other, that have special properties, or that are similar to a given set of solutions. <br />
In this workshop we present recent developments on answer set navigation and related work in formal argumentation.<br />
<br />
'''This workshop is supported by:'''<br />
<br />
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/NAVAS/en Grant 01IS20056 NAVAS]<br />
DFG through the Collaborative Research Center, Grant TRR 248 (see [https://perspicuous-computing.science] project ID 389792660)<br />
|Program=<br />
The NaVAS workshop will take place from Monday, May 23th until Wednesday May 25th of 2022. <br />
<br />
Monday, May 23th:<br />
<br />
*09:15 - 09:20 Welcome<br />
*09:20 - 09:45 Talk: The NAVAS Project and NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces - [[Sarah Alice Gaggl]]<br />
*09:45 - 10:15 Talk: Tunas - Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy - [[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
*10:15 - 10:30 Coffee break<br />
<br />
*10:30 - 11:00 Talk: Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation - [[Martin Diller]]<br />
*11:00 - 11:30 Talk (tent.): tba - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
*11:30 - 12:00 Talk: Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy - [[Dominik Rusovac]]<br />
*12:00 - 12:30 Talk: Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering - [https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
*12:30 - 12:45 Talk: Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
*12:45 - 13:00 Talk: Approximate Answer Set Counting - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
*13:00 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
<br />
*14:00 - 18:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*19:00 - 21:00 Dinner<br />
<br />
<br />
Tuesday, May 24th:<br />
*09:00 - 12:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
*14:00 - 19:00 [https://www.tuwien.at/caiml/news-detail/caiml-annual-event-edward-a-lee/# CAIML Lectures] - [https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Faculty/Homepages/lee.html Edward A. Lee], [https://www.dc.fi.udc.es/~cabalar/ Pedro Cabalar]<br />
<br />
<!--TODO: link ersetzen --><br />
<br />
<br />
|Abstracts=<br />
For the schedule on on Monday, May 23th the following talks are presented.<br />
=== NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces ===<br />
[[Sarah Gaggl]]<br />
<br />
Recent developments on solvers for abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) made them capable to compute extensions for many semantics efficiently. However, for many input instances these solution spaces can become very large and incomprehensible. So far, for the further exploration and investigation of the AF solution space the user needs to use post-processing methods or handcrafted tools. To compare and explore the solution spaces of two selected semantics, we propose an approach that visually supports the user, via a combination of dimensionality reduction of argumentation extensions and a projection of extensions to sets of accepted or rejected arguments. We introduce the novel web-based visualization tool NEXAS that allows for an interactive exploration of the solution space together with a statistical analysis of the acceptance of individual arguments for the selected semantics, as well as provides an interactive correlation matrix for the acceptance of arguments.<br />
<br />
=== Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy ===<br />
[[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) solvers have advanced in the recent years, with a variety of different specialisation and overall development. Thus, even more complex and detailed programs can be solved. A side effect of this development are growing solution spaces and the problem of how to find those answer sets one is interested in. One general approach is to give an overview in form of a small number of highly diverse answer sets. By choosing a favourite and repeating the process the user is able to leap through the solution space. But finding highly diverse answer sets is computationally expensive. In this paper we introduce a new approach called Tunas for Trade Up Navigation for Answer Sets to find diverse answer sets by reworking existing solution collections. The core idea is to collect diverse answer sets. Once no more answer sets can be added to the collection, the program is allowed to trade answer sets from the collection for different answer sets, as long as the collection grows and stays diverse. Elaboration of the approach is possible in three variations, which we implemented and compared to established methods in an empirical evaluation. The evaluation shows that the Tunas approach is competitive with existing methods, and that efficiency of the approach is highly connected to the underlying logic program.<br />
<br />
=== Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation ===<br />
[[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
Assumption-based argumentation (ABA) is one of the main general frameworks for structured argumentation. Dispute derivations for ABA allow for evaluating claims in a dialectical manner: i.e. on the basis of an exchange of arguments and counter-arguments for a claim between a proponent and an opponent of the claim. Current versions of dispute derivations are geared towards determining (credulous) acceptance of claims w.r.t. the admissibility-based semantics that ABA inherits from abstract argumentation. Relatedly, they make use of backwards or top down reasoning for constructing arguments. In this work we define flexible dispute derivations with forward as well as backward reasoning allowing us, in particular, to also have dispute derivations for finding admissible, complete, and stable assumption sets rather than only determine acceptability of claims. We give an argumentation-based definition of such dispute derivations and a more implementation friendly alternative representation in which disputes involve exchange of claims and rules rather than arguments. These can be seen as elaborations on, in particular, existing graph-based dispute derivations on two fronts: first, in also allowing for forward reasoning; second, in that all arguments put forward in the dispute are represented by a graph and not only the proponents.<br />
<br />
=== Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy ===<br />
[[Dominik Rusovac]] <br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) is a popular declarative programming paradigm with a wide range of applications in artificial intelligence. Oftentimes, when modeling an AI problem with ASP, and in particular when we are interested beyond simple search for optimal solutions, an actual solution, differences between solutions, or number of solutions of the ASP program matter. For example, when a user aims to identify a specific answer set according to her needs, or requires the total number of diverging solutions to comprehend probabilistic applications such as reasoning in medical domains. Then, there are only certain problem specific and handcrafted encoding techniques available to navigate the solution space of ASP programs, which is oftentimes not enough. We propose a formal and general framework for interactive navigation toward desired subsets of answer sets analogous to faceted browsing. Our approach enables the user to explore the solution space by consciously zooming in or out of sub-spaces of solutions at a certain configurable pace. We illustrate that weighted faceted navigation is computationally hard. Finally, we provide an implementation of our approach that demonstrates the feasibility of our framework for incomprehensible solution spaces.<br />
<br />
=== tba ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
<br />
=== Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering ===<br />
[https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
<br />
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence (AI) builds on formal approaches to reasoning argumentatively. Common to many such approaches is to use argumentation frameworks (AFs) as reasoning engines, with AFs being composed of arguments and attacks between arguments, which are instantiated from knowledge bases in a principle-based manner. While representing what can be argued for in an AF provides a conceptually clean way, this process can face challenges arising from generating a large number of arguments, which can act as a barrier to explainability. Inspired by successful approaches to model checking where the state explosion is mitigated by applying existential abstraction, we study an adaption of existential abstraction in form of clustering arguments in an AF to address an associated "argument explosion". In the paper on which this talk is based on, we provide a foundational investigation of this form of existential abstraction by defining semantics of the resulting clustered AFs, which balance two inherent aspects of existential abstractions: abstracting from concrete AFs and not permitting too much spuriousness (i.e., conclusions that hold on the abstraction but not on the original AF). Moreover, we show properties of clustered AFs, including complexity results, discuss use of clusterings for explaining results of reasoning tasks, and employ the recently introduced methodology of abstraction in answer set programming (ASP) for obtaining and reasoning over clustered AFs.<br />
<br />
=== Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
<br />
Extending the popular answer set programming paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, that is, contained in all or some answer sets, respectively. ELPs thus deliver multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. Employing ELPs for reasoning problems so far has mainly been restricted to standard decision problems (complexity analysis) and enumeration (development of systems) of world views. In this paper, we take a next step and contribute to epistemic logic programming in two ways: First, we establish quantitative reasoning for ELPs, where the acceptance of a certain set of literals depends on the number (proportion) of world views that are compatible with the set. Second, we present a novel system that is capable of efficiently solving the underlying counting problems required to answer such quantitative reasoning problems. Our system exploits the graph-based measure treewidth and works by iteratively finding and refining (graph) abstractions of an ELP program. On top of these abstractions, we apply dynamic programming that is combined with utilizing existing search-based solvers like (e)clingo for hard combinatorial subproblems that appear during solving. It turns out that our approach is competitive with existing systems that were introduced recently.<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Approximate Answer Set Counting ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a framework in artificial intelligence and knowledge representation for declarative modeling and problem solving. Modern ASP solvers focus on the computation or enumeration of answer sets. However, a variety of probabilistic applications in reasoning or logic programming require counting answer sets. While counting can be done by enumeration, simple enumeration becomes immediately infeasible if the number of solutions is high. On the other hand, approaches to exact counting are of high worst-case complexity. In fact, in propositional model counting, exact counting becomes impractical. In this work, we present a scalable approach to approximate counting for ASP. Our approach is based on systematically adding parity (XOR) constraints to<br />
ASP programs, which divide the search space. We prove that adding random XOR constraints partitions the answer sets of an ASP program. In practice, we use a Gaussian elimination based approach by lifting ideas from SAT to ASP and integrate it into a state of the art ASP solver.<br />
Finally, our experimental evaluation shows the scalability of our approach over existing ASP systems.<br />
<br />
<br />
|Organization=<br />
'''Organization '''<br /><br />
*[[Sarah Gaggl]] (TU Dresden)<br />
*[https://informatics.tuwien.ac.at/people/johannes-fichte Johannes Fichte] (TU Wien)<br />
<br />
<br />
}}<!-- End of #maketabs --></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Sarah_Alice_Gaggl/NAVAS_Workshop-Wien&diff=36454Sarah Alice Gaggl/NAVAS Workshop-Wien2022-05-13T17:34:32Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{DISPLAYTITLE:NAVAS Workshop 2022 in Vienna}}<br />
<br />
<br />
The NAVAS workshop on ''Navigation Approaches for Answer Sets'' is jointly organized by research groups at [http://www.tuwien.at TU Wien] and [http://www.tu-dresden.de TU Dresden] will take place in Vienna, Austria, May 23-24, 2022. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Vienna-Pierre Blaché.jpg|center|Vienna Skyline]]<br />
<br />
{{#maketabs:<br />
|Aim and Scope=<br />
Due to the continuous development in recent years, a large number of demanding combinatorial search problems of enormous practical relevance can now be efficiently solved by Answer Set Programming (ASP). Depending on the scope of the problem to be solved, a "combinatorial explosion" of the number of solutions can occur very quickly. While modern ASP solvers can easily calculate several million solutions in a short time, this poses a new problem for the user: How should the enormous solution space be handled and made accessible? Typically, the Answer Sets are output in any order. However, many of these solutions are very similar. In practice, however, often only solutions are of interest that are sufficiently different from each other, that have special properties, or that are similar to a given set of solutions. <br />
In this workshop we present recent developments on answer set navigation and related work in formal argumentation.<br />
<br />
'''This workshop is supported by:'''<br />
<br />
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/NAVAS/en Grant 01IS20056 NAVAS]<br />
DFG through the Collaborative Research Center, Grant TRR 248 (see [https://perspicuous-computing.science] project ID 389792660)<br />
|Program=<br />
The NaVAS workshop will take place from Monday, May 23th until Wednesday May 25th of 2022. <br />
<br />
Monday, May 23th:<br />
<br />
*09:15 - 09:20 Welcome<br />
*09:20 - 09:45 Talk: The NAVAS Project and NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces - [[Sarah Alice Gaggl]]<br />
*09:45 - 10:15 Talk: Tunas - Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy - [[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
*10:15 - 10:30 Coffee break<br />
<br />
*10:30 - 11:00 Talk: Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation - [[Martin Diller]]<br />
*11:00 - 11:30 Talk (tent.): tba - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
*11:30 - 12:00 Talk: Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy - [[Dominik Rusovac]]<br />
*12:00 - 12:30 Talk: Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering - [https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
*12:30 - 12:45 Talk: Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
*12:45 - 13:00 Talk: Approximate Answer Set Counting - [https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
<br />
*13:00 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
<br />
*14:00 - 18:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*19:00 - 21:00 Dinner<br />
<br />
<br />
Tuesday, May 24th:<br />
*09:00 - 12:00 Internal Meetings<br />
*12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break<br />
*14:00 - 19:00 [https://www.tuwien.at/caiml/news-detail/caiml-annual-event-edward-a-lee/# CAIML Lectures] - [https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Faculty/Homepages/lee.html Edward A. Lee], [https://www.dc.fi.udc.es/~cabalar/ Pedro Cabalar]<br />
<br />
<!--TODO: link ersetzen --><br />
<br />
<br />
|Abstracts=<br />
For the schedule on on Monday, May 23th the following talks are presented.<br />
=== NEXAS - A Visual Tool for Navigating and Exploring Argumentation Solution Spaces ===<br />
[[Sarah Gaggl]]<br />
<br />
Recent developments on solvers for abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) made them capable to compute extensions for many semantics efficiently. However, for many input instances these solution spaces can become very large and incomprehensible. So far, for the further exploration and investigation of the AF solution space the user needs to use post-processing methods or handcrafted tools. To compare and explore the solution spaces of two selected semantics, we propose an approach that visually supports the user, via a combination of dimensionality reduction of argumentation extensions and a projection of extensions to sets of accepted or rejected arguments. We introduce the novel web-based visualization tool NEXAS that allows for an interactive exploration of the solution space together with a statistical analysis of the acceptance of individual arguments for the selected semantics, as well as provides an interactive correlation matrix for the acceptance of arguments.<br />
<br />
=== Fishing for Diverse Answer Sets: A Multi-Shot Trade up Strategy ===<br />
[[Elisa Böhl]]<br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) solvers have advanced in the recent years, with a variety of different specialisation and overall development. Thus, even more complex and detailed programs can be solved. A side effect of this development are growing solution spaces and the problem of how to find those answer sets one is interested in. One general approach is to give an overview in form of a small number of highly diverse answer sets. By choosing a favourite and repeating the process the user is able to leap through the solution space. But finding highly diverse answer sets is computationally expensive. In this paper we introduce a new approach called Tunas for Trade Up Navigation for Answer Sets to find diverse answer sets by reworking existing solution collections. The core idea is to collect diverse answer sets. Once no more answer sets can be added to the collection, the program is allowed to trade answer sets from the collection for different answer sets, as long as the collection grows and stays diverse. Elaboration of the approach is possible in three variations, which we implemented and compared to established methods in an empirical evaluation. The evaluation shows that the Tunas approach is competitive with existing methods, and that efficiency of the approach is highly connected to the underlying logic program.<br />
<br />
=== Flexible Dispute Derivations with Forward and Backward Arguments for Assumption-Based Argumentation ===<br />
[[Martin Diller]]<br />
<br />
Assumption-based argumentation (ABA) is one of the main general frameworks for structured argumentation. Dispute derivations for ABA allow for evaluating claims in a dialectical manner: i.e. on the basis of an exchange of arguments and counter-arguments for a claim between a proponent and an opponent of the claim. Current versions of dispute derivations are geared towards determining (credulous) acceptance of claims w.r.t. the admissibility-based semantics that ABA inherits from abstract argumentation. Relatedly, they make use of backwards or top down reasoning for constructing arguments. In this work we define flexible dispute derivations with forward as well as backward reasoning allowing us, in particular, to also have dispute derivations for finding admissible, complete, and stable assumption sets rather than only determine acceptability of claims. We give an argumentation-based definition of such dispute derivations and a more implementation friendly alternative representation in which disputes involve exchange of claims and rules rather than arguments. These can be seen as elaborations on, in particular, existing graph-based dispute derivations on two fronts: first, in also allowing for forward reasoning; second, in that all arguments put forward in the dispute are represented by a graph and not only the proponents.<br />
<br />
=== Rushing and Strolling among Answer Sets - Navigation Made Easy ===<br />
[[Dominik Rusovac]] <br />
<br />
Answer set programming (ASP) is a popular declarative programming paradigm with a wide range of applications in artificial intelligence. Oftentimes, when modeling an AI problem with ASP, and in particular when we are interested beyond simple search for optimal solutions, an actual solution, differences between solutions, or number of solutions of the ASP program matter. For example, when a user aims to identify a specific answer set according to her needs, or requires the total number of diverging solutions to comprehend probabilistic applications such as reasoning in medical domains. Then, there are only certain problem specific and handcrafted encoding techniques available to navigate the solution space of ASP programs, which is oftentimes not enough. We propose a formal and general framework for interactive navigation toward desired subsets of answer sets analogous to faceted browsing. Our approach enables the user to explore the solution space by consciously zooming in or out of sub-spaces of solutions at a certain configurable pace. We illustrate that weighted faceted navigation is computationally hard. Finally, we provide an implementation of our approach that demonstrates the feasibility of our framework for incomprehensible solution spaces.<br />
<br />
=== tba ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/saribat/ Zeynep Gözen Saribatur]<br />
<br />
=== Existential Abstraction on Argumentation Frameworks via Clustering ===<br />
[https://wallner.ist.tugraz.at/ Johannes Wallner]<br />
<br />
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence (AI) builds on formal approaches to reasoning argumentatively. Common to many such approaches is to use argumentation frameworks (AFs) as reasoning engines, with AFs being composed of arguments and attacks between arguments, which are instantiated from knowledge bases in a principle-based manner. While representing what can be argued for in an AF provides a conceptually clean way, this process can face challenges arising from generating a large number of arguments, which can act as a barrier to explainability. Inspired by successful approaches to model checking where the state explosion is mitigated by applying existential abstraction, we study an adaption of existential abstraction in form of clustering arguments in an AF to address an associated "argument explosion". In the paper on which this talk is based on, we provide a foundational investigation of this form of existential abstraction by defining semantics of the resulting clustered AFs, which balance two inherent aspects of existential abstractions: abstracting from concrete AFs and not permitting too much spuriousness (i.e., conclusions that hold on the abstraction but not on the original AF). Moreover, we show properties of clustered AFs, including complexity results, discuss use of clusterings for explaining results of reasoning tasks, and employ the recently introduced methodology of abstraction in answer set programming (ASP) for obtaining and reasoning over clustered AFs.<br />
<br />
=== Utilizing Treewidth for Quantitative Reasoning on Epistemic Logic Programs ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/user/vbesin/ Viktor Besin]<br />
Extending the popular answer set programming paradigm by introspective reasoning capacities has received increasing interest within the last years. Particular attention is given to the formalism of epistemic logic programs (ELPs) where standard rules are equipped with modal operators which allow to express conditions on literals for being known or possible, that is, contained in all or some answer sets, respectively. ELPs thus deliver multiple collections of answer sets, known as world views. Employing ELPs for reasoning problems so far has mainly been restricted to standard decision problems (complexity analysis) and enumeration (development of systems) of world views. In this paper, we take a next step and contribute to epistemic logic programming in two ways: First, we establish quantitative reasoning for ELPs, where the acceptance of a certain set of literals depends on the number (proportion) of world views that are compatible with the set. Second, we present a novel system that is capable of efficiently solving the underlying counting problems required to answer such quantitative reasoning problems. Our system exploits the graph-based measure treewidth and works by iteratively finding and refining (graph) abstractions of an ELP program. On top of these abstractions, we apply dynamic programming that is combined with utilizing existing search-based solvers like (e)clingo for hard combinatorial subproblems that appear during solving. It turns out that our approach is competitive with existing systems that were introduced recently.<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Approximate Answer Set Counting ===<br />
[https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/staff/fichte Johannes Fichte]<br />
Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a framework in artificial intelligence and knowledge representation for declarative modeling and problem solving. Modern ASP solvers focus on the computation or enumeration of answer sets. However, a variety of probabilistic applications in reasoning or logic programming require counting answer sets. While counting can be done by enumeration, simple enumeration becomes immediately infeasible if the number of solutions is high. On the other hand, approaches to exact counting are of high worst-case complexity. In fact, in propositional model counting, exact counting becomes impractical. In this work, we present a scalable approach to approximate counting for ASP. Our approach is based on systematically adding parity (XOR) constraints to<br />
ASP programs, which divide the search space. We prove that adding random XOR constraints partitions the answer sets of an ASP program. In practice, we use a Gaussian elimination based approach by lifting ideas from SAT to ASP and integrate it into a state of the art ASP solver.<br />
Finally, our experimental evaluation shows the scalability of our approach over existing ASP systems.<br />
<br />
<br />
|Organization=<br />
'''Organization '''<br /><br />
*[[Sarah Gaggl]] (TU Dresden)<br />
*[https://informatics.tuwien.ac.at/people/johannes-fichte Johannes Fichte] (TU Wien)<br />
<br />
<br />
}}<!-- End of #maketabs --></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Johannes_Fichte&diff=34083Johannes Fichte2021-06-22T09:37:11Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Johannes K.<br />
|Nachname=Fichte<br />
|Akademischer Titel=Dr.<br />
|Stellung=Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter<br />
|Ehemaliger=0<br />
|Telefon=+49 351 463 43548<br />
|Email=johannes.fichte@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Bild=Photo1.jpg<br />
|Info=My work interests in computational complexity theory and its applications. In particular I work on the understanding of the gap between intractability (strong theoretical evidence) and practical efficient solutions (industrial/structured setting). I consider the boolean satisfiability problem (SAT), answer-set programming (ASP), and related formalisms.<br/><br/><br />
<br />
I am happy to supervise theses of motivated students in topics related to my research area. If you have ideas or questions regarding possible topics, please contact me.<br/><br />
<br />
You can also find details on the faculty web page [https://tu-dresden.de/ing/informatik/ki/krr/die-professur/staff/dr-johannes-k-fichte].<br />
|Info EN=My work interests in computational complexity theory and its applications. In particular I work on the understanding of the gap between intractability (strong theoretical evidence) and practical efficient solutions (industrial/structured setting). I consider the boolean satisfiability problem (SAT), answer-set programming (ASP), and related formalisms.<br/><br/><br />
<br />
I am happy to supervise theses of motivated students in topics related to my research area. If you have ideas or questions regarding possible topics, please contact me.<br/><br />
<br />
You can also find details on the faculty web page [https://tu-dresden.de/ing/informatik/ki/krr/die-professur/staff/dr-johannes-k-fichte].<br />
|DBLP=http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/f/Fichte:Johannes_Klaus<br />
|Google Scholar=https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=-yhf134AAAAJ&hl=en<br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=0<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=0<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Answer Set Programming<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Constraint Satisfaction Problems<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Wissensrepräsentation und logisches Schließen<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Logic and Decision Procedures<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Johannes_Fichte&diff=34082Johannes Fichte2021-06-22T09:33:57Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Johannes K.<br />
|Nachname=Fichte<br />
|Akademischer Titel=Dr.<br />
|Stellung=Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter<br />
|Ehemaliger=0<br />
|Telefon=+49 351 463 43548<br />
|Email=johannes.fichte@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Bild=Photo1.jpg<br />
|Info=My work interests in computational complexity theory and its applications. In particular I work on the understanding of the gap between intractability (strong theoretical evidence) and practical efficient solutions (industrial/structured setting). I consider the boolean satisfiability problem (SAT), answer-set programming (ASP), and related formalisms.<br/><br />
<br />
I am happy to supervise theses of motivated students in topics related to my research area. If you have ideas or questions regarding possible topics, please contact me.<br/><br />
|Info EN=My work interests in computational complexity theory and its applications. In particular I work on the understanding of the gap between intractability (strong theoretical evidence) and practical efficient solutions (industrial/structured setting). I consider the boolean satisfiability problem (SAT), answer-set programming (ASP), and related formalisms.<br/><br />
<br />
I am happy to supervise theses of motivated students in topics related to my research area. If you have ideas or questions regarding possible topics, please contact me.<br/><br />
|DBLP=http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/f/Fichte:Johannes_Klaus<br />
|Google Scholar=https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=-yhf134AAAAJ&hl=en<br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=0<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=0<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Answer Set Programming<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Constraint Satisfaction Problems<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Wissensrepräsentation und logisches Schließen<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Logic and Decision Procedures<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Datei:Photo1.jpg&diff=34081Datei:Photo1.jpg2021-06-22T09:33:53Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Datei:2b_photo.jpg&diff=34080Datei:2b photo.jpg2021-06-22T09:31:57Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div></div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Johannes_Fichte&diff=32626Johannes Fichte2021-02-02T22:53:56Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Johannes K.<br />
|Nachname=Fichte<br />
|Akademischer Titel=Dr.<br />
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Stellung=Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter<br />
|Ehemaliger=0<br />
|Telefon=+49 351 463 43548<br />
|Email=johannes.fichte@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Raum=APB2018 (https://goo.gl/maps/k7iD8kfi5Cu)<br />
|Bild=By sarameister23-3.jpg<br />
|Info=Please visit our new webpage at: <br><br />
https://tu-dresden.de/ing/informatik/ki/krr/die-professur/staff/dr-johannes-k-fichte<br />
|Info EN=Please visit our new webpage at: <br><br />
https://tu-dresden.de/ing/informatik/ki/krr/die-professur/staff/dr-johannes-k-fichte<br />
|DBLP=http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/f/Fichte:Johannes_Klaus<br />
|Google Scholar=https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=-yhf134AAAAJ&hl=en<br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=0<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=0<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Answer Set Programming<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Constraint Satisfaction Problems<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Wissensrepräsentation und logisches Schließen<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Logic and Decision Procedures<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Johannes_Fichte&diff=32625Johannes Fichte2021-02-02T22:52:50Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Johannes K.<br />
|Nachname=Fichte<br />
|Akademischer Titel=Dr.<br />
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Stellung=Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter<br />
|Ehemaliger=0<br />
|Telefon=+49 351 463 43548<br />
|Email=johannes.fichte@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Raum=APB2018 (https://goo.gl/maps/k7iD8kfi5Cu)<br />
|Bild=By sarameister23-3.jpg<br />
|Info=<a href="https://tu-dresden.de/ing/informatik/ki/krr/die-professur/staff/dr-johannes-k-fichte"> Please visit our new webpage.</a><br />
|Info EN=<a href="https://tu-dresden.de/ing/informatik/ki/krr/die-professur/staff/dr-johannes-k-fichte"> Please visit our new webpage.</a><br />
|DBLP=http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/f/Fichte:Johannes_Klaus<br />
|Google Scholar=https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=-yhf134AAAAJ&hl=en<br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=0<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=0<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Answer Set Programming<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Constraint Satisfaction Problems<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Wissensrepräsentation und logisches Schließen<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Logic and Decision Procedures<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=KRR_(WS2020)&diff=31307KRR (WS2020)2020-09-14T14:29:13Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Courses by the KRR Group<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler; Johannes Fichte; Marcos Cramer<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2020<br />
|SWSLecture=4<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung, Referat<br />
|Description===Various Courses KRR Group==<br />
For details on courses from knowledge representation and reasoning group, we refer to OPAL.<br />
Find the courses at:<br />
<br />
Denken als Berechnung<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741716/CourseNode/101413612795102?50<br />
<br />
Human Reasoning and the Weak Completion Semantics<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741715/CourseNode/101413612795102?51<br />
<br />
Logic and Science of Computational Logic Repetition<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741714/CourseNode/101413612795102?52<br />
<br />
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741713/CourseNode/101419626293623?53<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=KRR_(WS2020)/en&diff=31306KRR (WS2020)/en2020-09-14T14:28:54Z<p>Johannes Fichte: Page created automatically by parser function on page KRR (WS2020)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung/en}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=KRR_(WS2020)&diff=31305KRR (WS2020)2020-09-14T14:28:54Z<p>Johannes Fichte: Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „{{Vorlesung |Title=Courses by the KRR Group |Research group=Wissensverarbeitung |Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler; Johannes Fichte; Marcos Cramer |Term=WS |Year=2…“</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Courses by the KRR Group<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler; Johannes Fichte; Marcos Cramer<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2020<br />
|Module=<br />
|SWSLecture=4<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung, Referat<br />
|Description===Various Courses KRR Group==<br />
For details on courses from knowledge representation and reasoning group, we refer to OPAL.<br />
Find the courses at:<br />
<br />
Denken als Berechnung<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741716/CourseNode/101413612795102?50<br />
<br />
Human Reasoning and the Weak Completion Semantics<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741715/CourseNode/101413612795102?51<br />
<br />
Logic and Science of Computational Logic Repetition<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741714/CourseNode/101413612795102?52<br />
<br />
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar<br />
https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/26275741713/CourseNode/101419626293623?53<br />
<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30877Logic (WS2019)2020-06-25T07:41:40Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
Consult this webpage [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11] and register by July 9th for reviewing your corrected exam. <br />
The reviewing will take place on July 17th. Details will be provided after registration with OPAL.<br />
According to examination board guidelines, we allow reviewing only for students who failed the exam.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
</br><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30572Logic (WS2019)2020-05-18T11:44:03Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
Consult this webpage [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11] and register by June 8th, 2020 (EOD) for reviewing your corrected exam.<br />
Note that according to examination board guidelines, we allow reviewing only for students who failed the exam.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
</br><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30503Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T16:37:39Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
Consult this webpage [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11] and register by May 18th, 2020 18:34 for reviewing your corrected exam.<br />
Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
</br><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30502Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T14:06:14Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
Consult this webpage [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11] to register for reviewing your corrected exam.<br />
Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
</br><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30501Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T14:05:39Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
[https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11](Consult this webpage to register for reviewing your corrected exam).<br />
Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30500Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T14:05:24Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
Consult this webpage [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11"](to register for reviewing your corrected exam).<br />
Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30499Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T14:04:32Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
<a href="https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11">Registration to review your corrected exam.</a><br />
Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30498Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T14:04:09Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code><span style="color:#FF0000"><br />
[https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11](Registration to review your corrected exam.)<br />
Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.<br />
</span><br />
</code><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30497Logic (WS2019)2020-05-08T14:03:07Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000"><a href="https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/24010227716/CourseNode/101689986121774?11">Registration to review your corrected exam. Note that we don't have a formally approved procedure, yet.</a><br />
</code><br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Knowledge_Representation_and_Reasoning_Seminar_(SS2020)/en&diff=30156Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar (SS2020)/en2020-03-20T10:49:25Z<p>Johannes Fichte: Page created automatically by parser function on page Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar (SS2020)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung/en}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Knowledge_Representation_and_Reasoning_Seminar_(SS2020)&diff=30155Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar (SS2020)2020-03-20T10:49:24Z<p>Johannes Fichte: Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „{{Vorlesung |Title=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar |Research group=Wissensverarbeitung |Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler; Johannes Fichte; |Term=SS…“</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler; Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=SS<br />
|Year=2020<br />
|Module=INF-04-HS,INF-AQUA,INF-BAS2,INF-D-940,MCL-KR,MCL-PI,MCL-PCS,EMCL-A-KR,EMCL-PI,EMCL-PCS<br />
|SWSLecture=0<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung, Referat<br />
|Description===Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar==<br />
For details and enrollment see: [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/23082467337?20 OPAL Course Page]<br />
<br />
We will start with remote tasks and self studying/slides in April after Eastern.<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=PC4SAT_(SS2020)&diff=30154PC4SAT (SS2020)2020-03-19T11:47:21Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Parameterized Algorithms and Implementations for SAT and Generalizations<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Tutors=Marcos Cramer;<br />
|Term=SS<br />
|Year=2020<br />
|Module=INF-BAS3, INF-E-3, INF-PM-FOR, INF-VERT2, MCL-KR, MCL-PI<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=1<br />
|SWSPractical=2<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung<br />
|Description=For details and enrollment see: [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/23071064074/CourseNode/101413612795102 OPAL Course Page]<br />
<br />
We will start with remote tasks and self studying/slides in April after Eastern.<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=PC4SAT_(SS2020)&diff=30153PC4SAT (SS2020)2020-03-19T11:31:44Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Parameterized Algorithms and Implementations for SAT and Generalizations<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Tutors=Marcos Cramer;<br />
|Term=SS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=INF-BAS3, INF-E-3, INF-PM-FOR, INF-VERT2, MCL-KR, MCL-PI<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=1<br />
|SWSPractical=2<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung<br />
|Description=<br />
For details and enrollment see: [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/23071064074/CourseNode/101413612795102 OPAL Course Page]<br />
<br />
We will start with remote tasks and self studying/slides in April after Eastern.<br />
<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=PC4SAT_(SS2020)/en&diff=30152PC4SAT (SS2020)/en2020-03-19T11:31:17Z<p>Johannes Fichte: Page created automatically by parser function on page PC4SAT (SS2020)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung/en}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=PC4SAT_(SS2020)&diff=30151PC4SAT (SS2020)2020-03-19T11:31:16Z<p>Johannes Fichte: Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „{{Vorlesung |Title=SAT-Solving |Research group=Wissensverarbeitung |Lecturers=Johannes Fichte; |Tutors=Marcos Cramer; |Term=SS |Year=2019 |Module=INF-BAS3, INF…“</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=SAT-Solving<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Tutors=Marcos Cramer;<br />
|Term=SS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=INF-BAS3, INF-E-3, INF-PM-FOR, INF-VERT2, MCL-KR, MCL-PI<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=1<br />
|SWSPractical=2<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung<br />
|Description=<br />
For details and enrollment see: [https://bildungsportal.sachsen.de/opal/auth/RepositoryEntry/23071064074/CourseNode/101413612795102 OPAL Course Page]<br />
<br />
We will start with remote tasks and self studying/slides in April after Eastern.<br />
<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Tobias_Philipp&diff=30149Tobias Philipp2020-03-13T15:17:19Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Tobias<br />
|Nachname=Philipp<br />
|Akademischer Titel=M. Sc.<br />
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Stellung=Doktorand<br />
|Ehemaliger=0<br />
|Telefon=+49 351 463 38547<br />
|Email=tobias.philipp@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Raum=APB 2019<br />
|Sprechstunde Tag=Do<br />
|Sprechstunde Beginn=14:50<br />
|Sprechstunde Ende=16:20<br />
|Bild=Profil tp.jpg<br />
|Info=Ich bin seit Dezember 2013 Doktorand bei der Professur für Wissensverarbeitung im Institut Künstliche Intelligenz an der Fakultät Informatik der TU Dresden.<br />
Meine Forschungsinteressen umfassen paralleles Lösen von SAT Problemen und Verifikation von SAT Solvern.<br />
|Info EN=Since December 2013, I am a research assistant in the knowledge representation and reasoning group at the Institute for Artificial Intelligence at the Faculty of Computer Science at the Technische Universität Dresden.<br />
My research interests comprise parallel SAT solving and verification of SAT solvers.<br />
|DBLP=http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/pers/hd/p/Philipp:Tobias<br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=1<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=1<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Logic and Decision Procedures<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Emmanuelle_Dietz&diff=30148Emmanuelle Dietz2020-03-13T15:16:56Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Emmanuelle-Anna<br />
|Nachname=Dietz Saldanha<br />
|Akademischer Titel=Dr.<br />
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Stellung=Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter<br />
|Ehemaliger=1<br />
|Email=emmanuelle.dietz@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Raum=APB 2020<br />
|Bild=Emma1.jpg<br />
|DBLP=http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/d/Dietz:Emmanuelle=Anna<br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=1<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=1<br />
}}<br />
{{Forschungsgebiet Auswahl<br />
|Forschungsgebiet=Logic and Human Reasoning<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Sylvia_W%C3%BCnsch&diff=30145Sylvia Wünsch2020-03-13T15:12:34Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Mitarbeiter<br />
|Vorname=Sylvia<br />
|Nachname=Wünsch<br />
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Stellung=Sekretärin<br />
|Ehemaliger=0<br />
|Telefon=+49 351 463 38341<br />
|Fax=+49 351 463 38342<br />
|Email=sylvia.wuensch@tu-dresden.de<br />
|Raum=APB 2006<br />
|Bild=Sylvia.jpg<br />
|Info=<span style="color:red">Wir sind aktuell nur per E-Mail erreichbar. Persönliche Termine sind derzeit leider nicht möglich. Steffen Hölldobler ist für Notfälle unter 0151 27023623 erreichbar.</span><br />
|Info EN=<span style="color:red">Currently, we have no access to university phones. Please contact us via E-Mail. Offices are closed from public access. In case emergency contact Steffen Hölldobler at 0151 27023623.</span><br />
|Publikationen anzeigen=0<br />
|Abschlussarbeiten anzeigen=0<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Wissensverarbeitung&diff=30144Wissensverarbeitung2020-03-13T15:11:16Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Forschungsgruppe<br />
|Name EN=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning<br />
|Kurzname=KRR<br />
|Beschreibung DE=Die Professur Wissensverarbeitung untergliedert sich gegenwärtig in zwei Schwerpunkte: menschliches Schließen in Logikprogramme abzubilden, und das Erfüllbarkeitsproblem und damit verwandte Probleme maschinell zu lösen. Auf beiden Gebieten wird sowohl aktiv geforscht, als auch Lehre mit aktuellsten Inhalten gehalten.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Wir sind aktuell nur per E-Mail erreichbar. Persönliche Termine sind derzeit leider nicht möglich. Steffen Hölldobler ist für Notfälle unter 0151 27023623 erreichbar.</span><br />
|Beschreibung EN=The Knowledge Representation and Reasoning group has two major parts: human reasoning and solving the satisfiability testing and related decision and discrete optimization problems. In both areas we focus on research, and on the other hand teach with most recent research results.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Currently, we have no access to university phones. Please contact us via E-Mail. Offices are closed from public access. In case emergency contact Steffen Hölldobler at 0151 27023623.</span><br />
|Forschungsgruppenleiter=Steffen Hölldobler<br />
|Bild=Kiwv-group-picture.jpg<br />
|Ehemalige Forschungsgruppe=0<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Wissensverarbeitung&diff=30143Wissensverarbeitung2020-03-13T15:05:09Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Forschungsgruppe<br />
|Name EN=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning<br />
|Kurzname=KRR<br />
|Beschreibung DE=Die Professur Wissensverarbeitung untergliedert sich gegenwärtig in zwei Schwerpunkte: menschliches Schließen in Logikprogramme abzubilden, und das Erfüllbarkeitsproblem und damit verwandte Probleme maschinell zu lösen. Auf beiden Gebieten wird sowohl aktiv geforscht, als auch Lehre mit aktuellsten Inhalten gehalten.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Wir sind aktuell nur per E-Mail erreichbar. Persönliche Termine sind derzeit leider nicht möglich.</span><br />
|Beschreibung EN=The Knowledge Representation and Reasoning group has two major parts: human reasoning and solving the satisfiability testing and related decision and discrete optimization problems. In both areas we focus on research, and on the other hand teach with most recent research results.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Currently, we have no access to university phones. Please contact us via E-Mail. Offices are closed from public access.</span><br />
|Forschungsgruppenleiter=Steffen Hölldobler<br />
|Bild=Kiwv-group-picture.jpg<br />
|Ehemalige Forschungsgruppe=0<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Wissensverarbeitung&diff=30142Wissensverarbeitung2020-03-13T15:03:32Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Forschungsgruppe<br />
|Name EN=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning<br />
|Kurzname=KRR<br />
|Beschreibung DE=Die Professur Wissensverarbeitung untergliedert sich gegenwärtig in zwei Schwerpunkte: menschliches Schließen in Logikprogramme abzubilden, und das Erfüllbarkeitsproblem und damit verwandte Probleme maschinell zu lösen. Auf beiden Gebieten wird sowohl aktiv geforscht, als auch Lehre mit aktuellsten Inhalten gehalten.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Wir sind aktuell nur per E-Mail erreichbar.</span><br />
|Beschreibung EN=The Knowledge Representation and Reasoning group has two major parts: human reasoning and solving the satisfiability testing and related decision and discrete optimization problems. In both areas we focus on research, and on the other hand teach with most recent research results.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Currently, we have no access to university phones. Please contact us via E-Mail.</span><br />
|Forschungsgruppenleiter=Steffen Hölldobler<br />
|Bild=Kiwv-group-picture.jpg<br />
|Ehemalige Forschungsgruppe=0<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Wissensverarbeitung&diff=30141Wissensverarbeitung2020-03-13T15:03:02Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Forschungsgruppe<br />
|Name EN=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning<br />
|Kurzname=KRR<br />
|Beschreibung DE=Die Professur Wissensverarbeitung untergliedert sich gegenwärtig in zwei Schwerpunkte: menschliches Schließen in Logikprogramme abzubilden, und das Erfüllbarkeitsproblem und damit verwandte Probleme maschinell zu lösen. Auf beiden Gebieten wird sowohl aktiv geforscht, als auch Lehre mit aktuellsten Inhalten gehalten.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Wir sind aktuell nur per E-Mail erreichbar.</span><br />
|Beschreibung EN=The Knowledge Representation and Reasoning group has two major parts: human reasoning and solving the satisfiability testing and related decision and discrete optimization problems. In both areas we focus on research, and on the other hand teach with most recent research results.<br />
<br />
<span style="color:red">Please contact us via E-Mail.</span><br />
|Forschungsgruppenleiter=Steffen Hölldobler<br />
|Bild=Kiwv-group-picture.jpg<br />
|Ehemalige Forschungsgruppe=0<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=30140Logic (WS2019)2020-03-05T13:41:09Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Results are available. Pls contact Ms Thieme via E-Mail.</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Knowledge_Representation_and_Reasoning_Seminar_(WS2019)&diff=30098Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar (WS2019)2020-02-01T14:27:08Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler; Emmanuelle Dietz;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=INF-04-HS,INF-AQUA,INF-BAS2,INF-D-940,MCL-KR,MCL-PI,MCL-PCS,EMCL-A-KR,EMCL-PI,EMCL-PCS<br />
|SWSLecture=0<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=mündliche Prüfung, Referat<br />
|Description===Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Seminar==<br />
<br />
The seminar will be about the most recent results on the Winograd Schema Challenge.<br />
<br />
The requirements for the KRR Seminar are as follows:<br />
* You need to be at least a minimum of five students that want to participate<br />
* You attend '''all''' talks during the semester<br />
* You select one of the papers presented below and communicate your choice to Emmanuelle Dietz until 14.11.2019<br />
* You give a presentation of 30 minutes about the chosen paper in January 2020<br />
* You send (a preliminary version of) your presentation slides until 16.12.2019 to Emmanuelle Dietz<br />
<br />
<br />
==Schedule==<br />
<br />
The seminar meetings will take place on thursdays, 5.DS (14:50 - 16:20, starting on 24.10.2019) in room APB2026.<br />
<br />
* <b>17.10.19</b> initial meeting<br />
* <b>24.10.19</b> Presentation of the topics<br />
* <b>29.10.19</b> ''Graph matching, theory and SAT implementation'' by Orianne Laura Bargain (this talk will take place on Tuesday, 10:30)<br />
* <b>07.11.19</b> ''SCF2 - an Argumentation Semantics for Rational Human Judgments on Argument Acceptability'' by Marcos Cramer<br />
* <b>14.11.19</b> ''Abduction in a neuro-symbolic system'' by Andrzej Gajda <br />
* <b>21.11.19</b> How to make a presentation in LaTeX. Template slides in Beamer for presentations are online. You can find them [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/images/1/1b/Beamer-intro.zip here] [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/images/a/a5/A-TALK-ON-GIVING-TALKS-I-beamer-emma.pdf how to give a talk I] [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/images/d/d3/A-TALK-ON-GIVING-TALKS-II-beamer-emma.pdf how to give a talk II]<br />
* <b>28.11.19</b> ''TE-ETH: Lower Bounds for QBFs of Bounded Treewidth'' by Markus Hecher, joint work with Johannes Fichte and Andreas Pfandler (this talk will take place at 13:00 together with the [https://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/web/KBS_Seminar/en KBS seminar] in APB3027, see also the recent [https://fg-kp.gi.de/fileadmin/FG/KP/user_upload/newsletter/newsletter-sep19.pdf GI newsletter] for their guest commentary in German)<br />
* <b>5.12.19</b> ''Human Syllogistic Reasoning: Towards Predicting Individuals' Reasoning Behavior based on Cognitive Principles'' by Robert Schambach (joint work with Emmanuelle Dietz)<br />
* <b>12.12.19</b> ''Justifying All Differences Using Pseudo-Boolean Reasoning'' by Marcos Cramer<br />
* <b>17.12.19</b> ''Graph matching, theory and SAT implementation'' by Stephan Gocht (this talk will take place on Tuesday, 15:00 in APB2028)<br />
* <b>19.12.19</b> Feedback on handed in presentations<br />
* <b>09.01.20</b> ''Google’s T5 - A Unified Text-to-Text Transformer'' by Patrick Wienhöft <br />
* <b>16.01.20</b> ''Machine Learning approaches towards WSC'' by Abhiram Uppoor (part II)<br />
* <b>23.01.20</b> ''Human Baseline for Commonsense Reasoning Tasks'' by Vishwanath Hugar and ''COPA: Choice of Plausible Alternatives'' by Aldo Kurmeta<br />
* <b>30.01.20</b> ''How Reasonable are Common-Sense Reasoning Tasks'' by Lukas Gerlach and ''Machine Learning approaches towards WSC'' by Vidya Chandrashekar (part I)<br />
* <b>06.02.20</b> Several students will present their ongoing projects, i.e., Semester Project, Bachelor/Master theses<br />
<br />
<br />
<!--<br />
==Commonsense Reasoning==<br />
<br />
This seminar will be about commonsense reasoning in AI, and the Winograd Schema Challenge, an alternative to the Turing Test.<br />
<br />
===Topics===<br />
<br />
* What is commonsense reasoning?<br />
** sources<br />
*** wikipedia<br />
*** http://commonsensereasoning.org/<br />
*** Davis; Marcus (2015). "Commonsense reasoning". Communications of the ACM. Vol. 58 no. 9. pp. 92–103.<br />
*** McCarthy, J. (1959). "Programs with Common Sense". Proceedings of the Teddington Conference on the Mechanization of Thought Processes (pp. 75--91), London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.<br />
<br />
* Winograd Schema Challenge (WSC)<br />
** sources<br />
*** wikipedia<br />
*** http://commonsensereasoning.org/<br />
*** Levesque, Davis, and Morgenstern (2012). "The Winograd Schema Challenge". KR<br />
*** Levesque (2013). "On Our Best Behaviour". IJCAI Research Excellence Award Presentation <br />
*** Morgenstern, Davis, and Ortiz (2016). "Planning, Executing, and Evaluating the Winograd Schema Challenge". AI Magazine<br />
<br />
* Human Baseline for Commonsense Reasoning Tasks<br />
** sources<br />
*** Davis, Morgenstern, Oriz (2016). [https://cs.nyu.edu/faculty/davise/papers/WinogradSchemas/WS2016SubjectTests.pdf Human tests of materials for the Winograd SchemaChallenge 2016]<br />
*** Bender, Establishing a Human Baseline for the Winograd Schema Challenge. MAICS 2015 <br />
*** Nangia and Bowman, [https://woollysocks.github.io/assets/GLUE_Human_Baseline.pdf A Conservative Human Baseline Estimate for GLUE: People Still (Mostly) Beat Machines] <br />
*** Nangia, Bowma, Human vs. Muppet: A Conservative Estimate of Human Performance on the GLUE Benchmark, 2019<br />
<br />
* Machine Learning approaches towards WSC<br />
** sources<br />
*** Trichelair et al. (2018). [https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.01778 On the Evaluation of Common-Sense Reasoning in Natural Language Understanding]<br />
*** Trinh and Le (2018). [https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02847 A Simple Method for Commonsense Reasoning]<br />
*** Radford et al. (2019). [https://d4mucfpksywv.cloudfront.net/better-language-models/language_models_are_unsupervised_multitask_learners.pdf Language Models are Unsupervised Multitask Learners]<br />
*** Ruan, Zhu, Ling, Liu, Wei .[https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.09705.pdf Exploring Unsupervised Pretraining and Sentence Structure Modeling for Winograd Schema Challenge] <br />
*** Kocijan, Cretu, Camburu, Yordanov, Lukasiewicz (2019). [https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.06290 A Surprisingly Robust Trick for Winograd Schema Challenge] <br />
<br />
* A critical view on Commonsense Reasoning Tasks<br />
** possible sources<br />
*** Trichelair, Emami, Trischler, Suleman, Cheung. "How Reasonable are Common-Sense Reasoning Tasks: A Case-Study on the Winograd Schema Challenge and SWAG"<br />
<br />
--><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29874Logic (WS2019)2019-12-10T12:01:40Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.111, 4.117, 4.129, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29873Logic (WS2019)2019-12-10T11:59:22Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: 4.117, 4.129, 4.131, Recall: 3.59, 3.62, 3.129, 3.130<br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29801Logic (WS2019)2019-11-29T14:12:52Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77<br />
** Dec 4: 4.78, 4.93, 3.129(b)<br />
** Dec 6: 4.104, 4.114, 4.115, 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 11: <br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29770Logic (WS2019)2019-11-22T14:58:02Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.92, 3.81 (3.86)<br />
** Oct 27: 3.156, 4.6, 4.40, 4.42<br />
** Oct 29: 4.56, 4.77, 4.78, 3.129(b), 3.130(c), 3.140(d) <br />
** Dec 4:<br />
** Dec 6:<br />
** Dec 11: <br />
** Dec 12: Optional Consultation<br />
** Dec 13: Mid Term Exam<br />
<!---<br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.15, 4.78, 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
---><br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29769Logic (WS2019)2019-11-22T14:49:39Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.86, 3.92, 3.81, 4.78<br />
** Oct 27: 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, <br />
** Oct 29: 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.151<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29768Logic (WS2019)2019-11-22T14:49:18Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.86, 3.92, 3.81, 4.78<br />
** Oct 27: 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, <br />
** Oct 29: 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.151<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29767Logic (WS2019)2019-11-22T14:49:06Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span></code><br />
*** <span style="color:#FF0000">Room is available from 11:10 on. Please show up by 12:15.</span><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.86, 3.92, 3.81, 4.78<br />
** Oct 27: 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, <br />
** Oct 29: 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.151<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29766Logic (WS2019)2019-11-22T14:46:02Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Register for the final exam at SCIS. Will take place on Dec. 13</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)<br />
** Final: <br />
*** <code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Dec 13 (Fri), 13:00-14:30 at ZEU/LICH/H Zeuner-Bau, George-Bähr-Str. 3c, "Lichtenheldt Hörsaal"</span></code><br />
*** See: [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/karten/dresden/geb/zeu](Building Details) and [https://navigator.tu-dresden.de/etplan/zeu/01/raum/118101.0480](Room Details) and <br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.86, 3.92, 3.81, 4.78<br />
** Oct 27: 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, <br />
** Oct 29: 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.151<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29765Logic (WS2019)2019-11-22T07:57:59Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Mid-Term dates changed. It will take place on Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
** Final: <br />
*** Dec 13 (Fri), precise time and place tba<br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 3.1, 3.12a<br />
** Oct 25: 3.12b+c, 3.25, 3.38, (3.41), (3.10), <br />
** Oct 30: 3.41, 3.51, 3.54, 3.74 <br />
** Oct 6: 3.73, 3.78, 3.80, (3.23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 3.80 cont., 3.23a, 3.33, 3.85<br />
** Oct 8: 3.87, 3.56, 3.57, 3.58, 3.59<br />
** Oct 13: 3.62, 3.95, 3.3, 3.4, 3.86, 3.173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct 22: 3.86, 3.92, 3.81, 4.78<br />
** Oct 27: 4.93, 4.104, 4.114, 3.106, <br />
** Oct 29: 4.115, .., 3.129, <br />
** Oct X: 3.137, 3.140, 3.151<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29694Logic (WS2019)2019-11-07T12:42:54Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Mid-Term dates changed. It will take place on Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
** Final: <br />
*** Dec 13 (Fri), precise time and place tba<br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 1, 12a<br />
** Oct 25: 12b+c, 25, 38, (41), (10), <br />
** Oct 30: 41, 51, 54, 74 <br />
** Oct 6: 73, 78, 80, (23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 80 cont., 23a, 33, 85<br />
** Oct 8: 87, 56, 57, 58, 59<br />
** Oct 13: 62, 95, 3, 4, 86, 173<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
** Oct X: 86, 92, 81,<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29684Logic (WS2019)2019-11-07T07:27:57Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Mid-Term dates changed. It will take place on Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
** Final: <br />
*** Dec 13 (Fri), precise time and place tba<br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 1, 12a<br />
** Oct 25: 12b+c, 25, 38, (41), (10), <br />
** Oct 30: 41, 51, 54, 74 <br />
** Oct 6: 73, 78, 80, (23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 80 cont., 23a, 33, 85, 86, 87, 88<br />
** Oct 8: 56, 57, 58, 59<br />
** Oct 13: 89, 92, 95, 3, 4, 81<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichtehttps://iccl.inf.tu-dresden.de/w/index.php?title=Logic_(WS2019)&diff=29672Logic (WS2019)2019-11-06T13:12:08Z<p>Johannes Fichte: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Vorlesung<br />
|Title=Logic<br />
|Research group=Wissensverarbeitung<br />
|Lecturers=Steffen Hölldobler;<br />
|Tutors=Johannes Fichte;<br />
|Term=WS<br />
|Year=2019<br />
|Module=MCL-F, EMCL-B-F<br />
|SWSLecture=2<br />
|SWSExercise=2<br />
|SWSPractical=0<br />
|Exam type=Klausur<br />
|Description=<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">Mid-Term dates changed. It will take place on Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
<br />
This course introduces propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. After reviewing syntax and semantics, we cover some basic concepts like normal forms, substitution, and unification. We introduce proof procedures such as the resolution calculus and related concepts including soundness, completeness, and decidability.<br />
<br />
* Lectures (room APB/E05)<br />
** 4/4/0 lecture until the end of November<br />
** Mondays 4.DS (1:00pm) and Thursday 4.DS (1:00pm)<br />
** In the first week the only lecture is on Friday 4.DS (Oct 18)<br />
* Exercises (room APB/E05)<br />
** Wednesday 1. DS (7:30am) and Friday 4. DS (1:00pm)<br />
** Starting from: Oct 23, 1. DS<br />
** Exception: Fri 01.11.2019 -> Thu 07.11.2019 (9:20 - 10:50) place APB-2026<br />
* Lecture notes<br />
** We handout copies of a manuscript once we know how many students will show up<br />
** Slides are available online [http://www.wv.inf.tu-dresden.de/materials/logic/] (password will be given in the lecture or during exercises)<br />
<br />
* Exams (Updated): <br />
<code> <span style="color:#FF0000">** Mid-Term: Nov. 15 (Fri)</span></code><br />
** Final: <br />
*** Dec 13 (Fri), precise time and place tba<br />
*** Show up early (20 min in advance; we need you to register etc.)!<br />
<br />
* Exercises (Notes/Tasks)<br />
** 3.X we only write the number for X below<br />
** Oct 23: 1, 12a<br />
** Oct 25: 12b+c, 25, 38, (41), (10), <br />
** Oct 30: 41, 51, 54, 74 <br />
** Oct 6: 73, 78, 80, (23a+e)<br />
** Oct 7: 80 cont., 23a, 33, 85, 86, 87, 88<br />
** Oct 8: 89, 92, 95, 3, 4 <br />
** Oct 13: 81<br />
** Oct 15: mid term<br />
}}</div>Johannes Fichte