Commonsense knowledge-graphs (CKGs) are important resources towards building machines that can 'reason' on text or environmental inputs and make inferences beyond perception. While current CKGs encode world knowledge for a large number of concepts and have been effectively utilized for incorporating commonsense in neural models, they primarily encode declarative or single-condition inferential knowledge and assume all conceptual beliefs to have the same likelihood. Further, these CKGs utilize a limited set of relations shared across concepts and lack a coherent knowledge organization structure resulting in redundancies as well as sparsity across the larger knowledge graph. Consequently, today's CKGs, while useful for a first level of reasoning, do not adequately capture deeper human-level commonsense inferences which can be more nuanced and influenced by multiple contextual or situational factors. Accordingly, in this work, we study how commonsense knowledge can be better represented by -- (i) utilizing a probabilistic logic representation scheme to model composite inferential knowledge and represent conceptual beliefs with varying likelihoods and (ii) incorporating a hierarchical conceptual ontology to identify salient concept-relevant relations and organize beliefs at different conceptual levels. Our resulting knowledge representation framework can encode a wider variety of world knowledge and represent beliefs flexibly using grounded concepts as well as free-text phrases. As a result, the framework can be utilized as both a traditional free-text knowledge graph and a grounded logic-based inference system more suitable for neuro-symbolic applications. We describe how we extend the PrimeNet knowledge base with our framework through crowd-sourcing and expert-annotation, and demonstrate its application for more interpretable passage-based semantic parsing and question answering.

Despite many recent advancements in language modeling, state-of-the-art language models lack grounding in the real world and struggle with tasks involving complex reasoning. Meanwhile, advances in the symbolic reasoning capabilities of AI have led to systems that outperform humans in games like chess and Go (Silver et al., 2018). Chess commentary provides an interesting domain for bridging these two fields of research, as it requires reasoning over a complex board state and providing analyses in natural language. In this work we demonstrate how to combine symbolic reasoning engines with controllable language models to generate chess commentaries. We conduct experiments to demonstrate that our approach generates commentaries that are preferred by human judges over previous baselines.

As AI systems become more capable, we would like to enlist their help to supervise other AIs. We experiment with methods for training a harmless AI assistant through self-improvement, without any human labels identifying harmful outputs. The only human oversight is provided through a list of rules or principles, and so we refer to the method as 'Constitutional AI'. The process involves both a supervised learning and a reinforcement learning phase. In the supervised phase we sample from an initial model, then generate self-critiques and revisions, and then finetune the original model on revised responses. In the RL phase, we sample from the finetuned model, use a model to evaluate which of the two samples is better, and then train a preference model from this dataset of AI preferences. We then train with RL using the preference model as the reward signal, i.e. we use 'RL from AI Feedback' (RLAIF). As a result we are able to train a harmless but non-evasive AI assistant that engages with harmful queries by explaining its objections to them. Both the SL and RL methods can leverage chain-of-thought style reasoning to improve the human-judged performance and transparency of AI decision making. These methods make it possible to control AI behavior more precisely and with far fewer human labels.

The meaningful use of electronic health records (EHR) continues to progress in the digital era with clinical decision support systems augmented by artificial intelligence. A priority in improving provider experience is to overcome information overload and reduce the cognitive burden so fewer medical errors and cognitive biases are introduced during patient care. One major type of medical error is diagnostic error due to systematic or predictable errors in judgment that rely on heuristics. The potential for clinical natural language processing (cNLP) to model diagnostic reasoning in humans with forward reasoning from data to diagnosis and potentially reduce the cognitive burden and medical error has not been investigated. Existing tasks to advance the science in cNLP have largely focused on information extraction and named entity recognition through classification tasks. We introduce a novel suite of tasks coined as Diagnostic Reasoning Benchmarks, DR.BENCH, as a new benchmark for developing and evaluating cNLP models with clinical diagnostic reasoning ability. The suite includes six tasks from ten publicly available datasets addressing clinical text understanding, medical knowledge reasoning, and diagnosis generation. DR.BENCH is the first clinical suite of tasks designed to be a natural language generation framework to evaluate pre-trained language models. Experiments with state-of-the-art pre-trained generative language models using large general domain models and models that were continually trained on a medical corpus demonstrate opportunities for improvement when evaluated in DR. BENCH. We share DR. BENCH as a publicly available GitLab repository with a systematic approach to load and evaluate models for the cNLP community.

A key component of fact verification is thevevidence retrieval, often from multiple documents. Recent approaches use dense representations and condition the retrieval of each document on the previously retrieved ones. The latter step is performed over all the documents in the collection, requiring storing their dense representations in an index, thus incurring a high memory footprint. An alternative paradigm is retrieve-and-rerank, where documents are retrieved using methods such as BM25, their sentences are reranked, and further documents are retrieved conditioned on these sentences, reducing the memory requirements. However, such approaches can be brittle as they rely on heuristics and assume hyperlinks between documents. We propose a novel retrieve-and-rerank method for multi-hop retrieval, that consists of a retriever that jointly scores documents in the knowledge source and sentences from previously retrieved documents using an autoregressive formulation and is guided by a proof system based on natural logic that dynamically terminates the retrieval process if the evidence is deemed sufficient. This method is competitive with current state-of-the-art methods on FEVER, HoVer and FEVEROUS-S, while using $5$ to $10$ times less memory than competing systems. Evaluation on an adversarial dataset indicates improved stability of our approach compared to commonly deployed threshold-based methods. Finally, the proof system helps humans predict model decisions correctly more often than using the evidence alone.

Answering complex questions that require making latent decisions is a challenging task, especially when limited supervision is available. Recent works leverage the capabilities of large language models (LMs) to perform complex question answering in a few-shot setting by demonstrating how to output intermediate rationalizations while solving the complex question in a single pass. We introduce ``Successive Prompting'', where we iteratively break down a complex task into a simple task, solve it, and then repeat the process until we get the final solution. Successive prompting decouples the supervision for decomposing complex questions from the supervision for answering simple questions, allowing us to (1) have multiple opportunities to query in-context examples at each reasoning step (2) learn question decomposition separately from question answering, including using synthetic data, and (3) use bespoke (fine-tuned) components for reasoning steps where a large LM does not perform well. The intermediate supervision is typically manually written, which can be expensive to collect. We introduce a way to generate a synthetic dataset which can be used to bootstrap a model's ability to decompose and answer intermediate questions. Our best model (with successive prompting) achieves an improvement of ~5% absolute F1 on a few-shot version of the DROP dataset when compared with a state-of-the-art model with the same supervision.

Machine reading comprehension (MRC) is a long-standing topic in natural language processing (NLP). The MRC task aims to answer a question based on the given context. Recently studies focus on multi-hop MRC which is a more challenging extension of MRC, which to answer a question some disjoint pieces of information across the context are required. Due to the complexity and importance of multi-hop MRC, a large number of studies have been focused on this topic in recent years, therefore, it is necessary and worth reviewing the related literature. This study aims to investigate recent advances in the multi-hop MRC approaches based on 31 studies from 2018 to 2022. In this regard, first, the multi-hop MRC problem definition will be introduced, then 31 models will be reviewed in detail with a strong focus on their multi-hop aspects. They also will be categorized based on their main techniques. Finally, a fine-grain comprehensive comparison of the models and techniques will be presented.

This paper presents ReasonFormer, a unified reasoning framework for mirroring the modular and compositional reasoning process of humans in complex decision-making. Inspired by dual-process theory in cognitive science, the representation module (automatic thinking) and reasoning modules (controlled thinking) are decoupled to capture different levels of cognition. Upon the top of the representation module, the pre-trained reasoning modules are modular and professional in specific and fundamental reasoning skills (e.g., logic, simple QA, etc). To mimic the controlled compositional thinking process, different reasoning modules are dynamically activated and composed in both parallel and cascaded manners to control what reasoning skills are activated and how deep the reasoning process will be reached to solve the current problems. The unified reasoning framework solves multiple tasks with a single model, and is trained and inferred in an end-to-end manner. Evaluated on 11 datasets requiring different reasoning skills and complexity, ReasonFormer demonstrates substantial performance boosts, revealing the compositional reasoning ability. Few-shot experiments exhibit better generalization ability by learning to compose pre-trained skills for new tasks with limited data, and decoupling the representation module and the reasoning modules. Further analysis shows the modularity of reasoning modules as different tasks activate distinct reasoning skills at different reasoning depths.

One of today's goals for industrial robot systems is to allow fast and easy provisioning for new tasks. Skill-based systems that use planning and knowledge representation have long been one possible answer to this. However, especially with contact-rich robot tasks that need careful parameter settings, such reasoning techniques can fall short if the required knowledge not adequately modeled. We show an approach that provides a combination of task-level planning and reasoning with targeted learning of skill parameters for a task at hand. Starting from a task goal formulated in PDDL, the learnable parameters in the plan are identified and an operator can choose reward functions and parameters for the learning process. A tight integration with a knowledge framework allows to form a prior for learning and the usage of multi-objective Bayesian optimization eases to balance aspects such as safety and task performance that can often affect each other. We demonstrate the efficacy and versatility of our approach by learning skill parameters for two different contact-rich tasks and show their successful execution on a real 7-DOF KUKA-iiwa.

Natural language inference has trended toward studying contexts beyond the sentence level. An important application area is law: past cases often do not foretell how they apply to new situations and implications must be inferred. This paper introduces LawngNLI, constructed from U.S. legal opinions with automatic labels with high human-validated accuracy. Premises are long and multigranular. Experiments show two use cases. First, LawngNLI can benchmark for in-domain generalization from short to long contexts. It has remained unclear if large-scale long-premise NLI datasets actually need to be constructed: near-top performance on long premises could be achievable by fine-tuning using short premises. Without multigranularity, benchmarks cannot distinguish lack of fine-tuning on long premises versus domain shift between short and long datasets. In contrast, our long and short premises share the same examples and domain. Models fine-tuned using several past NLI datasets and/or our short premises fall short of top performance on our long premises. So for at least certain domains (such as ours), large-scale long-premise datasets are needed. Second, LawngNLI can benchmark for implication-based retrieval. Queries are entailed or contradicted by target documents, allowing users to move between arguments and evidence. Leading retrieval models perform reasonably zero shot on a LawngNLI-derived retrieval task. We compare different systems for re-ranking, including lexical overlap and cross-encoders fine-tuned using a modified LawngNLI or past NLI datasets. LawngNLI can train and test systems for implication-based case retrieval and argumentation.