AAAI 2026 Papers

ATL and Strategy Logic (SL) are important languages for representation and reasoning about strategic abilities of coalitions in multi-agent systems. In analyzing strategies of agents in multi-agent systems, an important concept to consider is rationality. Strategy Logic can express rationality concepts such as Nash Equilibrium (NE). Recently, there has been work on logics for joint abilities incorporating rationality concepts based on iterated elimination of dominated strategies (IEDS). Each of NE and IEDS has its strengths and limitations. However, when the payoff is binary, e.g., whether a goal is satisfied, IEDS has more distinguishing power than NE. In this work, we propose Strategy Logic with IEDS (SL_{IEDS}), an extension of Strategy Logic with an IEDS operator, where we can reason about rational strategies that survive IEDS. We prove that SL_{IEDS} is strictly more expressive than SL. Finally, we prove that model checking memoryless SL_{IEDS} is EXPTIME-complete.

Linear Temporal Logic over finite traces (LTLf) is a widely used formalism with applications in AI, process mining, model checking, and more. The primary reasoning task for LTLf is satisfiability checking; yet, the recent focus on explainable AI has increased interest in analyzing inconsistent formulae, making the enumeration of minimal explanations for unsatisfiability a relevant task also for LTLf. We introduce a novel technique for enumerating minimal unsatisfiable cores (MUCs) of an LTLf specification. The main idea is to encode an LTLf formula into an Answer Set Programming (ASP) specification, such that the minimal unsatisfiable subsets (MUSes) of the ASP program directly correspond to the MUCs of the original LTLf specification. Leveraging recent advancements in ASP solving yields an MUC enumerator achieving good performance in experiments conducted on established benchmarks from the literature.

We clarify the complexity of answering unions of conjunctive queries over knowledge bases formulated in the description logic S, the extension of ALC with transitive roles. Contrary to what existing partial results suggested, we show that the problem is, in fact, 2ExpTime-complete; hardness already holds in the presence of two transitive roles and for Boolean conjunctive queries. We complement this result by showing that the problem remains in coNExpTime when the input query is rooted or is restricted to use at most one transitive role (but may use arbitrarily many non-transitive roles).

We propose an extension of Description Logics (DLs) with generic concepts and conditional axioms. Inspired by object-oriented languages, generic concepts allow a compact definition of concepts with similar structures. For example, one can define a generic concept Owner[X] to describe objects that own another object from X, and later use a specific replacement of the parameter X, such as Owner[Pet] representing pet owners. Conditional axioms can be used to set bounds on the values that replace the generic parameters. For example, we could restrict replacements of X in a concept Keeper[X] to only subconcepts of Pet. As the set of possible parameter replacements can be infinite and even uncountable, the generic extensions are, in general, undecidable. To identify decidable generic DLs, we focus on the case of terminologies, requiring that variables are only used in definitions of generic concepts. We formulate restrictions that allow a reduction of generic entailment to classical entailment and further conditions that ensure decidability.

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) address two key challenges in applying deep learning to graph-structured data: they handle varying size input graphs and ensure invariance under graph isomorphism. While GNNs have demonstrated broad applicability, understanding their expressive power remains an important question. In this paper, we propose GNN architectures that correspond precisely to prominent fragments of first-order logic (FO), including various modal logics as well as more expressive two-variable fragments. To establish these results, we apply methods from finite model theory of first-order and modal logics to the domain of graph representation learning. Our results provide a unifying framework for understanding the logical expressiveness of GNNs within FO.

Standpoint logics offer unified modal logic-based formalisms for representing multiple heterogeneous viewpoints. At the same time, many non-monotonic reasoning frameworks can be naturally captured using modal logics — in particular using the modal logic S4F. In this work, we propose a novel formalism called S4F Standpoint Logic, which generalises both S4F and standpoint propositional logic and is therefore capable of expressing multi-viewpoint, non-monotonic semantic commitments. We define its syntax and semantics and analyze its computational complexity, obtaining the result that S4F Standpoint Logic is not computationally harder than its constituent logics, whether in monotonic or non-monotonic form. We also outline mechanisms for credulous and sceptical acceptance and illustrate the framework with an example.

Assumption‐Based Argumentation (ABA) is a powerful structured argumentation formalism, but exact computation of extensions under stable semantics is intractable for large frameworks. We present the first Graph Neural Network (GNN) approach to approximate credulous acceptance in ABA. To leverage GNNs, we model ABA frameworks via a dependency graph representation encoding assumptions, claims and rules as nodes, with heterogeneous edge labels distinguishing support, derive and attack relations. We propose two GNN architectures—ABAGCN and ABAGAT—that stack residual heterogeneous convolution or attention layers, respectively, to learn node embeddings. Our models are trained on the ICCMA 2023 benchmark, augmented with synthetic ABAFs, with hyperparameters optimised via Bayesian search. Empirically, both ABAGCN and ABAGAT outperform a state‐of‐the‐art GNN baseline that we adapt from the abstract argumentation iterature, achieving a node‐level F1 score of up to 0.71 on the ICCMA instances. Finally, we develop a sound polynomial time extension‐reconstruction algorithm driven by our predictor: it reconstructs stable extensions with F1 above 0.85 on small ABAFs and maintains an F1 of about 0.58 on large frameworks. Our work opens new avenues for scalable approximate reasoning in structured argumentation.

We study the computational problem of computing a fair means clustering of discrete vectors, which admits an equivalent formulation as editing a colored matrix into one with few distinct color-balanced rows by changing at most k values. While NP-hard in both the fairness-oblivious and the fair settings, the problem is well-known to admit a fixed-parameter algorithm in the former "vanilla" setting. As our first contribution, we exclude an analogous algorithm even for highly restricted fair means clustering instances. We then proceed to obtain a full complexity landscape of the problem, and establish tractability results which capture three means of circumventing our obtained lower bound: placing additional constraints on the problem instances, fixed-parameter approximation, or using an alternative parameterization targeting tree-like matrices.

In diffusion auctions, sellers can leverage an underlying social network to broaden participation, thereby increasing their potential revenue. Specifically, sellers can incentivise participants in their auction to diffuse information about the auction through the network. While numerous variants of such auctions have been recently studied in the literature, the formal verification and strategic reasoning perspectives have not been investigated yet. Our contribution is threefold. First, we introduce a logical formalism that captures the dynamics of diffusion and its strategic dimension. Second, for such a logic, we provide model-checking procedures that allow one to verify properties like the Nash equilibrium, and that pave the way towards checking the existence of sellers' strategies. Third, we establish computational complexity results for the presented algorithms.

Automata learning has many applications in artificial intelligence and software engineering. Central to these applications is the L* algorithm, introduced by Angluin (1987). The L* algorithm learns deterministic finite-state automata (DFAs) in polynomial time when provided with a minimally adequate teacher. Unfortunately, the L* algorithm can only learn DFAs over finite alphabets, which limits its applicability. In this paper, we extend L* to learn symbolic automata whose transitions use predicates over rational numbers, i.e., over infinite and dense alphabets. Our result makes the L* algorithm applicable to new settings like (real) RGX, and time series. Furthermore, our proposed algorithm for learning each predicate is optimal in the sense that it asks a number of queries to the teacher that is at most linear with respect to the size of their representation.

Market making (MM) through Reinforcement Learning (RL) has attracted significant attention in financial trading. With the development of Large Language Models (LLMs), more and more attempts are being made to apply LLMs to financial areas. A simple, direct application of LLM as an agent shows significant performance. Such methods are hindered by their slow inference speed, while most of the current research has not studied LLM distillation for this specific task. To address this, we first propose the normalized fluorescent probe to study the mechanism of the LLM’s feature. Based on the observation found by our investigation, we propose Cooperative Market Making (CMM), a novel framework that decouples LLM features across three orthogonal dimensions: layer, task, and data. Various student models collaboratively learn simple LLM features along with different dimensions, with each model responsible for a distinct feature to achieve knowledge distillation. Furthermore, CMM introduces an Hájek-MoE to integrate the output of the student models by investigating the contribution of different models in a kernel function-generated common feature space. Extensive experimental results on four real-world market datasets demonstrate the superiority of CMM over the current distillation method and RL-based market-making strategies.

Linear Temporal Logic on Finite Traces (LTLf) is a popular logic to express declarative specifications in Artificial Intelligence (AI). The recent call for explainable AI tools has made relevant the problem of computing efficiently minimal unsatisfiable cores (MUCs) and minimal correction sets (MCSes) of LTLf formulas. Recent work has focused on the extraction of MUCs on formulas in conjunctive form. In this paper, we present a method that operates on arbitrary formulas and computes a more refined notion of MUCs, as introduced by Schuppan, along with the corresponding notion of MCSes. Experiments show that our system, based on Answer Set Programming, outperforms available tools.

Multi-agent epistemic planning (MEP) is the task of generating action sequences that achieve goals specified over both the physical world and agents’ mental states. It plays an important role in research domains such as game theory, computational economics, and cognitive science. While dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) provides an expressive framework for MEP, it requires complete, model-based specifications of the initial state and action effects, and suffers from undecidability due to the unbounded nesting of beliefs. In this work, we propose a modal variant of the situation calculus that captures much of the expressive power of the DEL approach. Inspired by the cognitive concept Theory of Mind (ToM), we introduce action theories with hierarchical structures, allowing agents to reason about other agents' action theories up to bounded depths. We develop a regression method that reduces reasoning about future states to reasoning about the initial state. By preserving bounded-order ToM throughout the regression process, our approach ensures the decidability of the planning problem. Finally, we propose an algorithm to find the optimal solution, namely, to find the shortest action sequence that achieves the goal.

Knowledge graph reasoning in the fully-inductive setting—where both entities and relations at test time are unseen during training—remains an open challenge. In this work, we introduce GraphOracle, a novel framework that achieves robust fully-inductive reasoning by transforming each knowledge graph into a Relation-Dependency Graph (RDG). The RDG encodes directed precedence links between relations, capturing essential compositional patterns while drastically reducing graph density. Conditioned on a query relation, a multi-head attention mechanism propagates information over the RDG to produce context-aware relation embeddings. These embeddings then guide a second GNN to perform inductive message passing over the original knowledge graph, enabling prediction on entirely new entities and relations. Comprehensive experiments on 60 benchmarks demonstrate that GraphOracle outperforms prior methods by up to 25% in fully-inductive and 28% in cross-domain scenarios. Our analysis further confirms that the compact RDG structure and attention-based propagation are key to efficient and accurate generalization

We investigate the problem of synthesizing strategies that guarantee the successful execution of a high-level nondeterministic agent program in Golog within a nondeterministic first-order basic action theory, considering the environment as adversarial. Our approach constructs a symbolic program graph that captures the control flow independently of the domain, enabling strategy synthesis through the cross product of the program graph with the domain model. We formally relate graph-based transitions to standard Golog semantics and provide a synthesis procedure that is sound though incomplete (in general, the problem is undecidable, given that we have a first-order representation of the state). We also extend the framework to handle the case where the environment's possible behaviors are specified by a Golog program.

Qualitative spatial representation approaches which rely on Goodman-style predicative mereological theories and on a pseudo-topology, often causes some problems either for their use as a meta-information for knowledge conceptualization in advanced geometric reasoning, since they lack Euclidean geometry and fully-fledged topological spaces in the classical sense. Therefore, this paper seeks to extend an existing formalization, grounded in an underlying type theory using the Coq language, together with the Whitehead-like point-free Tarski's geometry. More precisely, we leverage an available library called lambda-MM to formalize Tarski's geometry of solids by investigating an algebraic formulation of topological relations on top of the library. Given that Tarski's work is grounded in Lesniewski’s mereology, and despite the fact that lambda-MM barely implements Tarski's geometry, the first part of the paper supplements their work by proving that mereological classes correspond to regular open sets. It forms a topology of individual names extensible with Tarski's geometric primitives. Unlike classical approaches used in qualitative logical theories, we adopt a solution that enables the specification of a topological space from mereology and a geometric subspace, thereby enhancing the theory’s expressiveness. Then, in a second part, we prove that Tarski’s geometry forms a subspace of the previous topology in which regions are restricted classes. We prove three postulates of Tarski’s work reducing his axiomatic system and extend the theory with the T2 (Hausdorff) property and additional definitions.

The ASP(Q) language extends Answer Set Programming (ASP) with Quantifiers that operate over answer sets. Thus, ASP(Q) facilitates a more natural encoding of problems whose complexity exceeds NP within the ASP framework. In this paper we focus on ASP(Q) programs with two quantifiers, i.e., 2-ASP(Q) programs, which can be used to model problems in the second level of the Polynomial Hierarchy. In particular, we propose an approach for evaluating 2-ASP(Q) programs that is inspired by Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement (CEGAR). Unlike existing state-of-the-art ASP(Q) solvers, which are typically based on QBF solvers, our new approach leverages ASP solvers, and suffers no overhead due to the effects of translating ASP(Q) in QBF. Experimental results demonstrate that our technique consistently outperforms state-of-the-art ASP(Q) solvers, across benchmark problems located at the second level of the polynomial hierarchy.

Analogical reasoning is a powerful inductive mechanism, widely used in human cognition and increasingly applied in artificial intelligence. Formal frameworks for analogical inference have been developed for Boolean domains, where inference is provably sound for affine functions and approximately correct for functions close to affine. These results have informed the design of analogy-based classifiers. However, they do not extend to regression tasks or continuous domains. In this paper, we revisit analogical inference from a foundational perspective. We first present a counterexample showing that existing generalization bounds fail even in the Boolean setting. We then introduce a unified framework for analogical reasoning in real-valued domains based on parameterized analogies defined via generalized means. This model subsumes both Boolean classification and regression, and supports analogical inference over continuous functions. We characterize the class of analogy-preserving functions in this setting and derive both worst-case and average-case error bounds under smoothness assumptions. Our results offer a general theory of analogical inference across discrete and continuous domains.

The goal of inductive logic programming (ILP) is to search for a hypothesis that generalises training data and background knowledge. The challenge is searching vast hypothesis spaces, which is exacerbated because many logically equivalent hypotheses exist. To address this challenge, we introduce a method to break symmetries in the hypothesis space. We implement our idea in answer set programming. Our experiments on multiple domains, including visual reasoning and game playing, show that our approach can reduce solving times from over an hour to just 17 seconds.