BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Carlo Metta

Carlo Metta appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Artificial Intelligencecs.CYHuman-Computer Interaction

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Artificial intelligence and renegotiation of commercial lease contracts affected by pandemic-related contingencies from Covid-19. The project A.I.A.Co

This paper aims to investigate the possibility of using artificial intelligence (AI) to resolve the legal issues raised by the Covid-19 emergency about the fate of continuing execution contracts, or those with deferred or periodic execution, as well as, more generally, to deal with exceptional events and contingencies. We first study whether the Italian legal system allows for ''maintenance'' remedies to cope with contingencies and to avoid the termination of the contract, while ensuring effective protection of the interests of both parties. We then give a complete and technical description of an AI-based predictive framework, aimed at assisting both the Magistrate (in the course of litigation) and the parties themselves (in out-of-court proceedings) in the redetermination of the rent of commercial lease contracts. This framework, called A.I.A.Co. for Artificial Intelligence for contract law Against Covid-19, has been developed under the Italian grant ''Fondo Integrativo Speciale per la Ricerca''.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2023arXiv

Score vs. Winrate in Score-Based Games: which Reward for Reinforcement Learning?

In the last years, the DeepMind algorithm AlphaZero has become the state of the art to efficiently tackle perfect information two-player zero-sum games with a win/lose outcome. However, when the win/lose outcome is decided by a final score difference, AlphaZero may play score-suboptimal moves because all winning final positions are equivalent from the win/lose outcome perspective. This can be an issue, for instance when used for teaching, or when trying to understand whether there is a better move. Moreover, there is the theoretical quest for the perfect game. A naive approach would be training an AlphaZero-like agent to predict score differences instead of win/lose outcomes. Since the game of Go is deterministic, this should as well produce an outcome-optimal play. However, it is a folklore belief that "this does not work". In this paper, we first provide empirical evidence for this belief. We then give a theoretical interpretation of this suboptimality in general perfect information two-player zero-sum game where the complexity of a game like Go is replaced by the randomness of the environment. We show that an outcome-optimal policy has a different preference for uncertainty when it is winning or losing. In particular, when in a losing state, an outcome-optimal agent chooses actions leading to a higher score variance. We then posit that when approximation is involved, a deterministic game behaves like a nondeterministic game, where the score variance is modeled by how uncertain the position is. We validate this hypothesis in AlphaZero-like software with a human expert.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access