Autonomous AI is no longer a hard-to-reach concept, it enables the agents to move beyond executing tasks to independently addressing complex problems, adapting to change while handling the uncertainty of the environment. However, what makes the agents truly autonomous? It is agentic reasoning, that is crucial for foundation models to develop symbolic logic, statistical correlations, or large-scale pattern recognition to process information, draw inferences, and make decisions. However, it remains unclear why and how existing agentic reasoning approaches work, in comparison to biological reasoning, which instead is deeply rooted in neural mechanisms involving hierarchical cognition, multimodal integration, and dynamic interactions. In this work, we propose a novel neuroscience-inspired framework for agentic reasoning. Grounded in three neuroscience-based definitions and supported by mathematical and biological foundations, we propose a unified framework modeling reasoning from perception to action, encompassing four core types, perceptual, dimensional, logical, and interactive, inspired by distinct functional roles observed in the human brain. We apply this framework to systematically classify and analyze existing AI reasoning methods, evaluating their theoretical foundations, computational designs, and practical limitations. We also explore its implications for building more generalizable, cognitively aligned agents in physical and virtual environments. Finally, building on our framework, we outline future directions and propose new neural-inspired reasoning methods, analogous to chain-of-thought prompting. By bridging cognitive neuroscience and AI, this work offers a theoretical foundation and practical roadmap for advancing agentic reasoning in intelligent systems. The associated project can be found at: https://github.com/BioRAILab/Awesome-Neuroscience-Agent-Reasoning .

Expressing confidence is challenging for embodied agents navigating dynamic multimodal environments, where uncertainty arises from both perception and decision-making processes. We present the first work investigating embodied confidence elicitation in open-ended multimodal environments. We introduce Elicitation Policies, which structure confidence assessment across inductive, deductive, and abductive reasoning, along with Execution Policies, which enhance confidence calibration through scenario reinterpretation, action sampling, and hypothetical reasoning. Evaluating agents in calibration and failure prediction tasks within the Minecraft environment, we show that structured reasoning approaches, such as Chain-of-Thoughts, improve confidence calibration. However, our findings also reveal persistent challenges in distinguishing uncertainty, particularly under abductive settings, underscoring the need for more sophisticated embodied confidence elicitation methods.

Bad actors in the maritime industry engage in illegal behaviors after disabling their vessel's automatic identification system (AIS) - which makes finding such vessels difficult for analysts. Machine learning approaches only succeed in identifying the locations of these ``dark vessels'' in the immediate future. This work leverages ideas from the literature on abductive inference applied to locating adversarial agents to solve the problem. Specifically, we combine concepts from abduction, logic programming, and rule learning to create an efficient method that approaches full recall of dark vessels while requiring less search area than machine learning methods. We provide a logic-based paradigm for reasoning about maritime vessels, an abductive inference query method, an automatically extracted rule-based behavior model methodology, and a thorough suite of experiments.

Neural algorithmic reasoning is an emerging area of machine learning focusing on building models that can imitate the execution of classic algorithms, such as sorting, shortest paths, etc. One of the main challenges is to learn algorithms that are able to generalize to out-of-distribution data, in particular with significantly larger input sizes. Recent work on this problem has demonstrated the advantages of learning algorithms step-by-step, giving models access to all intermediate steps of the original algorithm. In this work, we instead focus on learning neural algorithmic reasoning only from the input-output pairs without appealing to the intermediate supervision. We propose simple but effective architectural improvements and also build a self-supervised objective that can regularise intermediate computations of the model without access to the algorithm trajectory.

Large language models have shown astonishing performance on a wide range of reasoning tasks. In this paper, we investigate whether they could reason about real-world events and help improve the prediction performance of event sequence models. Particularly, the language model performs abductive reasoning to assist an event sequence model: the event model proposes predictions on future events given the past; instructed by a few expert-annotated demonstrations, the language model learns to suggest possible causes for each proposal; a search module finds out the previous events that match the causes; a scoring function learns to examine whether the retrieved events could actually cause the proposal. Through extensive experiments on several challenging real-world datasets, we demonstrate that our framework---thanks to the reasoning capabilities of large language models---could significantly outperform the state-of-the-art event sequence models.

This paper introduces a new problem, Causal Abductive Reasoning on Video Events (CARVE), which involves identifying causal relationships between events in a video and generating hypotheses about causal chains that account for the occurrence of a target event. To facilitate research in this direction, we create two new benchmark datasets with both synthetic and realistic videos, accompanied by trigger-target labels generated through a novel counterfactual synthesis approach. To explore the challenge of solving CARVE, we present a Causal Event Relation Network (CERN) that examines the relationships between video events in temporal and semantic spaces to efficiently determine the root-cause trigger events. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate the critical roles of event relational representation learning and interaction modeling in solving video causal reasoning challenges. The introduction of the CARVE task, along with the accompanying datasets and the CERN framework, will advance future research on video causal reasoning and significantly facilitate various applications, including video surveillance, root-cause analysis and movie content management.

Explanation constitutes an archetypal feature of human rationality, underpinning learning and generalisation, and representing one of the media supporting scientific discovery and communication. Due to the importance of explanations in human reasoning, an increasing amount of research in Natural Language Inference (NLI) has started reconsidering the role that explanations play in learning and inference, attempting to build explanation-based NLI models that can effectively encode and use natural language explanations on downstream tasks. Research in explanation-based NLI, however, presents specific challenges and opportunities, as explanatory reasoning reflects aspects of both material and formal inference, making it a particularly rich setting to model and deliver complex reasoning. In this tutorial, we provide a comprehensive introduction to the field of explanation-based NLI, grounding this discussion on the epistemological-linguistic foundations of explanations, systematically describing the main architectural trends and evaluation methodologies that can be used to build systems capable of explanatory reasoning.

Will a Visual Language Model (VLM)-based bot warn us about slipping if it detects a wet floor? Recent VLMs have demonstrated impressive capabilities, yet their ability to infer outcomes and causes remains underexplored. To address this, we introduce NL-Eye, a benchmark designed to assess VLMs' visual abductive reasoning skills. NL-Eye adapts the abductive Natural Language Inference (NLI) task to the visual domain, requiring models to evaluate the plausibility of hypothesis images based on a premise image and explain their decisions. NL-Eye consists of 350 carefully curated triplet examples (1,050 images) spanning diverse reasoning categories: physical, functional, logical, emotional, cultural, and social. The data curation process involved two steps - writing textual descriptions and generating images using text-to-image models, both requiring substantial human involvement to ensure high-quality and challenging scenes. Our experiments show that VLMs struggle significantly on NL-Eye, often performing at random baseline levels, while humans excel in both plausibility prediction and explanation quality. This demonstrates a deficiency in the abductive reasoning capabilities of modern VLMs. NL-Eye represents a crucial step toward developing VLMs capable of robust multimodal reasoning for real-world applications, including accident-prevention bots and generated video verification.

Abductive explanations (AXp's) are widely used for understanding decisions of classifiers. Existing definitions are suitable when features are independent. However, we show that ignoring constraints when they exist between features may lead to an explosion in the number of redundant or superfluous AXp's. We propose three new types of explanations that take into account constraints and that can be generated from the whole feature space or from a sample (such as a dataset). They are based on a key notion of coverage of an explanation, the set of instances it explains. We show that coverage is powerful enough to discard redundant and superfluous AXp's. For each type, we analyse the complexity of finding an explanation and investigate its formal properties. The final result is a catalogue of different forms of AXp's with different complexities and different formal guarantees.

We view voting rules as classifiers that assign a winner (a class) to a profile of voters' preferences (an instance). We propose to apply techniques from formal explainability, most notably abductive and contrastive explanations, to identify minimal subsets of a preference profile that either imply the current winner or explain why a different candidate was not elected. Formal explanations turn out to have strong connections with classical problems studied in computational social choice such as bribery, possible and necessary winner identification, and preference learning. We design algorithms for computing abductive and contrastive explanations for scoring rules. For the Borda rule, we find a lower bound on the size of the smallest abductive explanations, and we conduct simulations to identify correlations between properties of preference profiles and the size of their smallest abductive explanations.