TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given the abstract of a research paper. Your task is to generate a summary of this abstract. Your summary should not be very short, but it's better if it's not more than 30 words.
PROBLEM: Plagiarism and text reuse become more available with the Internet development. Therefore it is important to check scientific papers for the fact of cheating, especially in Academia. Existing systems of plagiarism detection show the good performance and have a huge source databases. Thus now it is not enough just to copy the text as is from the source document to get the original work. Therefore, another type of plagiarism become popular -- cross-lingual plagiarism. We present a CrossLang system for such kind of plagiarism detection for English-Russian language pair.

SOLUTION: A system for cross-lingual (English-Russian) plagiarism detection

PROBLEM: Audio signals are sampled at high temporal resolutions, and learning to synthesize audio requires capturing structure across a range of timescales. Generative adversarial networks (GANs) have seen wide success at generating images that are both locally and globally coherent, but they have seen little application to audio generation. In this paper we introduce WaveGAN, a first attempt at applying GANs to unsupervised synthesis of raw-waveform audio. WaveGAN is capable of synthesizing one second slices of audio waveforms with global coherence, suitable for sound effect generation. Our experiments demonstrate that—without labels—WaveGAN learns to produce intelligible words when trained on a small-vocabulary speech dataset, and can also synthesize audio from other domains such as drums, bird vocalizations, and piano. We compare WaveGAN to a method which applies GANs designed for image generation on image-like audio feature representations, finding both approaches to be promising.

SOLUTION: Learning to synthesize raw waveform audio with GANs

PROBLEM: An important type of question that arises in Explainable Planning is a contrastive question, of the form "Why action A instead of action B?". These kinds of questions can be answered with a contrastive explanation that compares properties of the original plan containing A against the contrastive plan containing B. An effective explanation of this type serves to highlight the differences between the decisions that have been made by the planner and what the user would expect, as well as to provide further insight into the model and the planning process. Producing this kind of explanation requires the generation of the contrastive plan. This paper introduces domain-independent compilations of user questions into constraints. These constraints are added to the planning model, so that a solution to the new model represents the contrastive plan. We introduce a formal description of the compilation from user question to constraints in a temporal and numeric PDDL2.1 planning setting.

SOLUTION:
This paper introduces domain-independent compilations of user questions into constraints for contrastive explanations.