Structured tabular data exist across nearly all fields. Reasoning task over these data aims to answer questions or determine the truthiness of hypothesis sentences by understanding the semantic meaning of a table. While previous works have devoted significant efforts to the tabular reasoning task, they always assume there are sufficient labeled data. However, constructing reasoning samples over tables (and related text) is labor-intensive, especially when the reasoning process is complex. When labeled data is insufficient, the performance of models will suffer an unendurable decline. In this paper, we propose a unified framework for unsupervised complex tabular reasoning (UCTR), which generates sufficient and diverse synthetic data with complex logic for tabular reasoning tasks, assuming no human-annotated data at all. We first utilize a random sampling strategy to collect diverse programs of different types and execute them on tables based on a "Program-Executor" module. To bridge the gap between the programs and natural language sentences, we design a powerful "NL-Generator" module to generate natural language sentences with complex logic from these programs. Since a table often occurs with its surrounding texts, we further propose novel "Table-to-Text" and "Text-to-Table" operators to handle joint table-text reasoning scenarios. This way, we can adequately exploit the unlabeled table resources to obtain a well-performed reasoning model under an unsupervised setting. Our experiments cover different tasks (question answering and fact verification) and different domains (general and specific), showing that our unsupervised methods can achieve at most 93% performance compared to supervised models. We also find that it can substantially boost the supervised performance in low-resourced domains as a data augmentation technique. Our code is available at https://github.com/leezythu/UCTR.

World models learn the consequences of actions in vision-based interactive systems. However, in practical scenarios such as autonomous driving, there commonly exists noncontrollable dynamics independent of the action signals, making it difficult to learn effective world models. To tackle this problem, we present a novel reinforcement learning approach named Iso-Dream, which improves the Dream-to-Control framework in two aspects. First, by optimizing the inverse dynamics, we encourage the world model to learn controllable and noncontrollable sources of spatiotemporal changes on isolated state transition branches. Second, we optimize the behavior of the agent on the decoupled latent imaginations of the world model. Specifically, to estimate state values, we roll-out the noncontrollable states into the future and associate them with the current controllable state. In this way, the isolation of dynamics sources can greatly benefit long-horizon decision-making of the agent, such as a self-driving car that can avoid potential risks by anticipating the movement of other vehicles. Experiments show that Iso-Dream is effective in decoupling the mixed dynamics and remarkably outperforms existing approaches in a wide range of visual control and prediction domains.

Prompting large language models has enabled significant recent progress in multi-step reasoning over text. However, when applied to text generation from semi-structured data (e.g., graphs or tables), these methods typically suffer from low semantic coverage, hallucination, and logical inconsistency. We propose MURMUR, a neuro-symbolic modular approach to text generation from semi-structured data with multi-step reasoning. MURMUR is a best-first search method that generates reasoning paths using: (1) neural and symbolic modules with specific linguistic and logical skills, (2) a grammar whose production rules define valid compositions of modules, and (3) value functions that assess the quality of each reasoning step. We conduct experiments on two diverse data-to-text generation tasks like WebNLG and LogicNLG. These tasks differ in their data representations (graphs and tables) and span multiple linguistic and logical skills. MURMUR obtains significant improvements over recent few-shot baselines like direct prompting and chain-of-thought prompting, while also achieving comparable performance to fine-tuned GPT-2 on out-of-domain data. Moreover, human evaluation shows that MURMUR generates highly faithful and correct reasoning paths that lead to 26% more logically consistent summaries on LogicNLG, compared to direct prompting.

Knowledge representation and reasoning in law are essential to facilitate the automation of legal analysis and decision-making tasks. In this paper, we propose a new approach based on legal science, specifically legal taxonomy, for representing and reasoning with legal documents. Our approach interprets the regulations in legal documents as binary trees, which facilitates legal reasoning systems to make decisions and resolve logical contradictions. The advantages of this approach are twofold. First, legal reasoning can be performed on the basis of the binary tree representation of the regulations. Second, the binary tree representation of the regulations is more understandable than the existing sentence-based representations. We provide an example of how our approach can be used to interpret the regulations in a legal document.

Pre-trained language models (LMs) have shown remarkable reasoning performance using explanations (or ``chain-of-thought'' (CoT)) for in-context learning. On the other hand, these reasoning tasks are usually presumed to be more approachable for symbolic programming. To make progress towards understanding in-context learning, we curate synthetic datasets containing equivalent (natural, symbolic) data pairs, where symbolic examples contain first-order logic rules and predicates from knowledge bases (KBs). Then we revisit neuro-symbolic approaches and use Language Models as Logic Programmer (LMLP) that learns from demonstrations containing logic rules and corresponding examples to iteratively reason over KBs, recovering Prolog's backward chaining algorithm. Comprehensive experiments are included to systematically compare LMLP with CoT in deductive reasoning settings, showing that LMLP enjoys more than 25% higher accuracy than CoT on length generalization benchmarks even with fewer parameters.

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.