Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models - A Logic-based framework

The advent of distributed and heterogeneous systems has laid the foundation for the birth of new architectural paradigms, in which many separated and autonomous entities collaborate and interact to the aim of achieving complex strategic goals, impossible to be accomplished on their own. A non exhaustive list of systems targeted by such paradigms includes Business Process Management, Clinical Guidelines and Careflow Protocols, Service-Oriented and Multi-Agent Systems. It is largely recognized that engineering these systems requires novel modeling techniques. In particular, many authors are claiming that an open, declarative perspective is needed to complement the closed, procedural nature of the state of the art specification languages. For example, the ConDec language has been recently proposed to target the declarative and open specification of Business Processes, overcoming the over-specification and over-constraining issues of classical procedural approaches. On the one hand, the success of such novel modeling languages strongly depends on their usability by non-IT savvy: they must provide an appealing, intuitive graphical front-end. On the other hand, they must be prone to verification, in order to guarantee the trustworthiness and reliability of the developed model, as well as to ensure that the actual executions of the system effectively comply with it. In this dissertation, we claim that Computational Logic is a suitable framework for dealing with the specification, verification, execution, monitoring and analysis of these systems. We propose to adopt an extended version of the ConDec language for specifying interaction models with a declarative, open flavor. We show how all the (extended) ConDec constructs can be automatically translated to the CLIMB Computational Logic-based language, and illustrate how its corresponding reasoning techniques can be successfully exploited to provide support and verification capabilities along the whole life cycle of the targeted systems.

Data Mining in Clinical Practice for the Quantification of Motor Impairment in Parkinson's Disease

Advances in biomedical signal acquisition systems for motion analysis have led to lowcost and ubiquitous wearable sensors which can be used to record movement data in different settings. This implies the potential availability of large amounts of quantitative data. It is then crucial to identify and to extract the information of clinical relevance from the large amount of available data. This quantitative and objective information can be an important aid for clinical decision making. Data mining is the process of discovering such information in databases through data processing, selection of informative data, and identification of relevant patterns. The databases considered in this thesis store motion data from wearable sensors (specifically accelerometers) and clinical information (clinical data, scores, tests). The main goal of this thesis is to develop data mining tools which can provide quantitative information to the clinician in the field of movement disorders. This thesis will focus on motor impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD). Different databases related to Parkinson subjects in different stages of the disease were considered for this thesis. Each database is characterized by the data recorded during a specific motor task performed by different groups of subjects. The data mining techniques that were used in this thesis are feature selection (a technique which was used to find relevant information and to discard useless or redundant data), classification, clustering, and regression. The aims were to identify high risk subjects for PD, characterize the differences between early PD subjects and healthy ones, characterize PD subtypes and automatically assess the severity of symptoms in the home setting.

Design of experiment in drug development: optimal allocations in multi-arm clinical trials and design space for multi-step processes

In this thesis, we deal with the design of experiments in the drug development process, focusing on the design of clinical trials for treatment comparisons (Part I) and the design of preclinical laboratory experiments for proteins development and manufacturing (Part II). In Part I we propose a multi-purpose design methodology for sequential clinical trials. We derived optimal allocations of patients to treatments for testing the efficacy of several experimental groups by also taking into account ethical considerations. We first consider exponential responses for survival trials and we then present a unified framework for heteroscedastic experimental groups that encompasses the general ANOVA set-up. The very good performance of the suggested optimal allocations, in terms of both inferential and ethical characteristics, are illustrated analytically and through several numerical examples, also performing comparisons with other designs proposed in the literature. Part II concerns the planning of experiments for processes composed of multiple steps in the context of preclinical drug development and manufacturing. Following the Quality by Design paradigm, the objective of the multi-step design strategy is the definition of the manufacturing design space of the whole process and, as we consider the interactions among the subsequent steps, our proposal ensures the quality and the safety of the final product, by enabling more flexibility and process robustness in the manufacturing.

Weak reasoning argumentative theory. A dialogical approach for the discovery of philosophy in high schools

In the literature on philosophical practices, despite the crucial role that argumentation plays in these activities, no specific argumentative theories have ever been proposed to assist the figure of the facilitator in conducting philosophical dialogue and to enhance student’s critical thinking skills. The dissertation starts from a cognitive perspective that challenges the classic Cartesian notion of rationality by focusing on limits and biases of human reasoning. An argumentative model (WRAT – Weak Reasoning Argumentative Theory) is then outlined in order to respond to the needs of philosophical dialogue. After justifying the claim that this learning activity, among other inductive methodologies, is the most suitable for critical thinking education, I inquired into the specific goal of ‘arguing’ within this context by means of the tools provided by Speech Act Theory: the speaker’s intention is to construct new knowledge by questioning her own and other’s beliefs. The model proposed has been theorized on this assumption, starting from which the goals, and, in turn, the related norms, have been pinpointed. In order to include all the epistemic attitudes required to accomplish the complex task of arguing in philosophical dialogue, I needed to integrate two opposed cognitive accounts, Dual Process Theory and Evolutionary Approach, that, although they provide incompatible descriptions of reasoning, can be integrated to provide a normative account of argumentation. The model, apart from offering a theoretical contribution to argumentation studies, is designed to be applied to the Italian educational system, in particular to classes in technical and professional high schools belonging to the newly created network Inventio. This initiative is one of the outcomes of the research project by the same name, which also includes an original Syllabus, research seminars, a monitoring action and publications focused on introducing philosophy, in the form of workshop activities, into technical and professional schools.