Utility-Based Abstraction and Categorization

We take a utility-based approach to categorization. We construct generalizations about events and actions by considering losses associated with failing to distinguish among detailed distinctions in a decision model. The utility-based methods transform detailed states of the world into more abstract categories comprised of disjunctions of the states. We show how we can cluster distinctions into groups of distinctions at progressively higher levels of abstraction, and describe rules for decision making with the abstractions. The techniques introduce a utility-based perspective on the nature of concepts, and provide a means of simplifying decision models used in automated reasoning systems. We demonstrate the techniques by describing the capabilities and output of TUBA, a program for utility-based abstraction.

Reasoning, Metareasoning, and Mathematical Truth: Studies of Theorem Proving under Limited Resources

In earlier work, we introduced flexible inference and decision-theoretic metareasoning to address the intractability of normative inference. Here, rather than pursuing the task of computing beliefs and actions with decision models composed of distinctions about uncertain events, we examine methods for inferring beliefs about mathematical truth before an automated theorem prover completes a proof. We employ a Bayesian analysis to update belief in truth, given theorem-proving progress, and show how decision-theoretic methods can be used to determine the value of continuing to deliberate versus taking immediate action in time-critical situations.