Importance-based Semantics of Polynomial Comparative Peference Inference

A basic task in preference reasoning is inferring a preference between a pair of outcomes (alternatives) from an input set of preference statements. This preference inference task for comparative preferences has been shown to be computationally very hard for the standard kind of inference. Recently, a new kind of preference inference has been developed, which is polynomial for relatively expressive preference languages, and has the additional property of being much less conservative; this can be a major advantage, since it will tend to make the number of undominated outcomes smaller. It derives from a semantics where models are weak orders that are generated by objects called cp-trees, which represent a kind of conditional lexicographic order. We show that there are simple conditions, based on the notion of importance, that determine whether a weak order can be generated by a cp-tree of the given form. This enables a simple characterisation of the less conservative preference inference. We go on to study the importance properties satisfied by a simple kind of cp-tree, leading to another characterisation of the corresponding preference inference.

[1]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Preference‐Based Constrained Optimization with CP‐Nets , 2004, Comput. Intell..

[2]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Extended Semantics and Optimization Algorithms for CP‐Networks , 2004, Comput. Intell..

[3]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  Extending Variable Importance in Preference Networks , 2005 .

[4]  Nic Wilson,et al.  Pruning Rules for Constrained Optimisation for Conditional Preferences , 2011, CP.

[5]  Francesco Ricci,et al.  Comparing Approaches to Preference Dominance for Conversational Recommenders , 2010, 2010 22nd IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[6]  Ulrich Endriss,et al.  Conditional Importance Networks: A Graphical Language for Representing Ordinal, Monotonic Preferences over Sets of Goods , 2009, IJCAI.

[7]  Vasant Honavar,et al.  Dominance Testing via Model Checking , 2010, AAAI.

[8]  Nic Wilson,et al.  Computational techniques for a simple theory of conditional preferences , 2011, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  CP-nets: A Tool for Representing and Reasoning withConditional Ceteris Paribus Preference Statements , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[10]  Jon Doyle,et al.  Utility Functions for Ceteris Paribus Preferences , 2004, Comput. Intell..

[11]  Nic Wilson,et al.  Extending CP-Nets with Stronger Conditional Preference Statements , 2004, AAAI.

[12]  Miroslaw Truszczynski,et al.  The computational complexity of dominance and consistency in CP-nets , 2005, IJCAI.

[13]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Reasoning With Conditional Ceteris Paribus Preference Statements , 1999, UAI.

[14]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  On Graphical Modeling of Preference and Importance , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[15]  Nic Wilson,et al.  From Preference Logics to Preference Languages, and Back , 2010, KR.

[16]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Introducing Variable Importance Tradeoffs into CP-Nets , 2002, UAI.

[17]  Jérôme Lang,et al.  Logical Preference Representation and Combinatorial Vote , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.