Computing explanations for interactive constraint-based systems

Constraint programming has emerged as a successful paradigm for modelling combinatorial problems arising from practical situations. In many of those situations, we are not provided with an immutable set of constraints. Instead, a user will modify his requirements, in an interactive fashion, until he is satisfied with a solution. Examples of such applications include, amongst others, model-based diagnosis, expert systems, product configurators. The system he interacts with must be able to assist him by showing the consequences of his requirements. Explanations are the ideal tool for providing this assistance. However, existing notions of explanations fail to provide sufficient information. We define new forms of explanations that aim to be more informative. Even if explanation generation is a very hard task, in the applications we consider, we must manage to provide a satisfactory level of interactivity and, therefore, we cannot afford long computational times. We introduce the concept of representative sets of relaxations, a compact set of relaxations that shows the user at least one way to satisfy each of his requirements and at least one way to relax them, and present an algorithm that efficiently computes such sets. We introduce the concept of most soluble relaxations, maximising the number of products they allow. We present algorithms to compute such relaxations in times compatible with interactivity, achieving this by indifferently making use of different types of compiled representations. We propose to generalise the concept of prime implicates to constraint problems with the concept of domain consequences, and suggest to generate them as a compilation strategy. This sets a new approach in compilation, and allows to address explanation-related queries in an efficient way. We define ordered automata to compactly represent large sets of domain consequences, in an orthogonal way from existing compilation techniques that represent large sets of solutions.

Defending the 'public interest': an assessment of competing actor representations of 'solutions' to growing natural resource deficiencies.

This paper applies a SRT framework to the study of two case studies, namely the recent campaign of opposition to the legalization of hydraulic fracking in the State of New York and the more ongoing debate on land leasing in Africa. In relation to both campaigns, the analysis accounts for the arguments of a major financial institution and industry representatives who stress the safe and value-adding dimensions of these practices, as well as the views of opponents who refute the validity of industry's position and point to the unacceptable risks posed to the community, health and the environment. In spite of a number of obvious differences between these two case studies, not least differences arising from contrasting socio-economic and geo-political settings, there were also some notable similarities. First, was a tendency amongst protesters in both cases to formulate their role as contemporaries in a historically extended struggle for democratic justice. All perceived of themselves as guardians of their community's right to resist a corporate 'invasion' of their territories, like their forefathers and mothers before them. A theme of colonialism was explored in both settings through various identity and thematic anchoring devices that deliberately evoked shared understandings and historical memories of exploitation and human suffering. The evocation of powerful symbols of identity through visual narratives of protest further reinforced the cultural comprehensibility of opponents' message of protest in both contexts.

Diphtheria, the public health response and the origins of the childhood immunisation programme in Ireland

In common with most countries, the childhood immunisation programme in Ireland was founded on a successful public health response to diphtheria. The success of the antidiphtheria public health intervention in Ireland has meant that no case of the disease has been recorded in the state for almost fifty years. This is a significant achievement considering that diphtheria continues to appear annually in many European states, albeit in much reduced numbers on former years. For parents and children of nineteenth, and early twentieth-century Ireland, diphtheria represented the ‘most dreaded disease of childhood’, however, for their modern day counterparts diphtheria is no more than an obscure disease mentioned in leaflets promoting the benefits of childhood immunisation. In Ireland, diphtheria has been consigned to history, and so too have the horrors and mass fatalities once associated with it. But how was this achieved? Was active immunisation received with open arms by public health authorities, the wider medical community, and the general public? This study tackles these questions by undertaking the first historical examination of the issues which underpin the origins of active immunisation in Ireland. It explores the driving forces that shaped the national childhood immunisation programme, and those that opposed them. In addition, it examines the complex social implications attendant on the introduction of this mass public health intervention in an Irish context.