The ability to generalise from a small number of examples is a fundamental challenge in machine learning. To tackle this challenge, we introduce an inductive logic programming (ILP) approach that combines negation and predicate invention. Combining these two features allows an ILP system to generalise better by learning rules with universally quantified body-only variables. We implement our idea in NOPI, which can learn normal logic programs with predicate invention, including Datalog programs with stratified negation. Our experimental results on multiple domains show that our approach can improve predictive accuracies and learning times.

We study the problem of learning linear temporal logic (LTL) formulas from examples, as a first step towards expressing a property separating positive and negative instances in a way that is comprehensible for humans. In this paper we initiate the study of the computational complexity of the problem. Our main results are hardness results: we show that the LTL learning problem is NP-complete, both for the full logic and for almost all of its fragments. This motivates the search for efficient heuristics, and highlights the complexity of expressing separating properties in concise natural language.

In Weighted Model Counting (WMC), we assign weights to literals and compute the sum of the weights of the models of a given propositional formula where the weight of an assignment is the product of the weights of its literals. The current WMC solvers work on Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) formulas. However, CNF is not a natural representation for human-being in many applications. Motivated by the stronger expressive power of pseudo-Boolean (PB) formulas than CNF, we propose to perform WMC on PB formulas. Based on a recent dynamic programming algorithm framework called ADDMC for WMC, we implement a weighted PB counting tool PBCounter. We compare PBCounter with the state-of-the-art weighted model counters SharpSAT-TD, ExactMC, D4, and ADDMC, where the latter tools work on CNF with encoding methods that convert PB constraints into a CNF formula. The experiments on three domains of benchmarks show that PBCounter is superior to the model counters on CNF formulas.

Program completion is a translation from the language of logic programs into the language of first-order theories. Its original definition has been extended to programs that include integer arithmetic, accept input, and distinguish between output predicates and auxiliary predicates. For tight programs, that generalization of completion is known to match the stable model semantics, which is the basis of answer set programming. We show that the tightness condition in this theorem can be replaced by a less restrictive "local tightness" requirement. From this fact we conclude that the proof assistant anthem-p2p can be used to verify equivalence between locally tight programs.

Many of the most fundamental laws of nature can be formulated as partial differential equations (PDEs). Understanding these equations is, therefore, of exceptional importance for many branches of modern science and engineering. However, since the general solution of many PDEs is unknown, the efficient approximate solution of these equations is one of humanity's greatest challenges. While multigrid represents one of the most effective methods for solving PDEs numerically, in many cases, the design of an efficient or at least working multigrid solver is an open problem. This thesis demonstrates that grammar-guided genetic programming, an evolutionary program synthesis technique, can discover multigrid methods of unprecedented structure that achieve a high degree of efficiency and generalization. For this purpose, we develop a novel context-free grammar that enables the automated generation of multigrid methods in a symbolically-manipulable formal language, based on which we can apply the same multigrid-based solver to problems of different sizes without having to adapt its internal structure. Treating the automated design of an efficient multigrid method as a program synthesis task allows us to find novel sequences of multigrid operations, including the combination of different smoothing and coarse-grid correction steps on each level of the discretization hierarchy. To prove the feasibility of this approach, we present its implementation in the form of the Python framework EvoStencils, which is freely available as open-source software. This implementation comprises all steps from representing the algorithmic sequence of a multigrid method in the form of a directed acyclic graph of Python objects to its automatic generation and optimization using the capabilities of the code generation framework ExaStencils and the evolutionary computation library DEAP.

We investigate explainability via short Boolean formulas in the data model based on unary relations. As an explanation of length k, we take a Boolean formula of length k that minimizes the error with respect to the target attribute to be explained. We first provide novel quantitative bounds for the expected error in this scenario. We then also demonstrate how the setting works in practice by studying three concrete data sets. In each case, we calculate explanation formulas of different lengths using an encoding in Answer Set Programming. The most accurate formulas we obtain achieve errors similar to other methods on the same data sets. However, due to overfitting, these formulas are not necessarily ideal explanations, so we use cross validation to identify a suitable length for explanations. By limiting to shorter formulas, we obtain explanations that avoid overfitting but are still reasonably accurate and also, importantly, human interpretable.

Theorem proving is a fundamental task in mathematics. With the advent of large language models (LLMs) and interactive theorem provers (ITPs) like Lean, there has been growing interest in integrating LLMs and ITPs to automate theorem proving. In this approach, the LLM generates proof steps (tactics), and the ITP checks the applicability of the tactics at the current goal. The two systems work together to complete the proof. In this paper, we introduce DS-Prover, a novel dynamic sampling method for theorem proving. This method dynamically determines the number of tactics to apply to expand the current goal, taking into account the remaining time compared to the total allocated time for proving a theorem. This makes the proof search process more efficient by adjusting the balance between exploration and exploitation as time passes. We also augment the training dataset by decomposing simplification and rewrite tactics with multiple premises into tactics with single premises. This gives the model more examples to learn from and helps it to predict the tactics with premises more accurately. We perform our experiments using the Mathlib dataset of the Lean theorem prover and report the performance on two standard datasets, MiniF2F and ProofNet. Our methods achieve significant performance gains on both datasets. We achieved a state-of-the-art performance (Pass@1) of 14.2% on the ProofNet dataset and a performance of 29.8% on MiniF2F, slightly surpassing the best-reported Pass@1 of 29.6% using Lean.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) has emerged as a promising paradigm in knowledge representation and automated reasoning owing to its ability to model hard combinatorial problems from diverse domains in a natural way. Building on advances in propositional SAT solving, the past two decades have witnessed the emergence of well-engineered systems for solving the answer set satisfiability problem, i.e., finding models or answer sets for a given answer set program. In recent years, there has been growing interest in problems beyond satisfiability, such as model counting, in the context of ASP. Akin to the early days of propositional model counting, state-of-the-art exact answer set counters do not scale well beyond small instances. Exact ASP counters struggle with handling larger input formulas. The primary contribution of this paper is a new ASP counting framework, called sharpASP, which counts answer sets avoiding larger input formulas. This relies on an alternative way of defining answer sets that allows for the lifting of key techniques developed in the context of propositional model counting. Our extensive empirical analysis over 1470 benchmarks demonstrates significant performance gain over current state-of-the-art exact answer set counters. Specifically, by using sharpASP, we were able to solve 1062 benchmarks with PAR2 score of 3082 whereas using prior state-of-the-art, we could only solve 895 benchmarks with a PAR2 score of 4205, all other experimental conditions being the same.

This is the first paper in a series of work we have accomplished over the past three years. In this paper, we have constructed a consistent formal plane geometry system. This will serve as a crucial bridge between IMO-level plane geometry challenges and readable AI automated reasoning. Within this formal framework, we have been able to seamlessly integrate modern AI models with our formal system. AI is now capable of providing deductive reasoning solutions to IMO-level plane geometry problems, just like handling other natural languages, and these proofs are readable, traceable, and verifiable. We propose the geometry formalization theory (GFT) to guide the development of the geometry formal system. Based on the GFT, we have established the FormalGeo, which consists of 88 geometric predicates and 196 theorems. It can represent, validate, and solve IMO-level geometry problems. we also have crafted the FGPS (formal geometry problem solver) in Python. It serves as both an interactive assistant for verifying problem-solving processes and an automated problem solver. We've annotated the formalgeo7k and formalgeo-imo datasets. The former contains 6,981 (expand to 133,818 through data augmentation) geometry problems, while the latter includes 18 (expand to 2,627 and continuously increasing) IMO-level challenging geometry problems. All annotated problems include detailed formal language descriptions and solutions. Implementation of the formal system and experiments validate the correctness and utility of the GFT. The backward depth-first search method only yields a 2.42% problem-solving failure rate, and we can incorporate deep learning techniques to achieve lower one. The source code of FGPS and datasets are available at https://github.com/BitSecret/FGPS.

Logical reasoning is central to complex human activities, such as thinking, debating, and planning; it is also a central component of many AI systems as well. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which encoder-only transformer language models (LMs) can reason according to logical rules. We ask whether those LMs can deduce theorems in propositional calculus and first-order logic; if their relative success in these problems reflects general logical capabilities; and which layers contribute the most to the task. First, we show for several encoder-only LMs that they can be trained, to a reasonable degree, to determine logical validity on various datasets. Next, by cross-probing fine-tuned models on these datasets, we show that LMs have difficulty in transferring their putative logical reasoning ability, which suggests that they may have learned dataset-specific features, instead of a general capability. Finally, we conduct a layerwise probing experiment, which shows that the hypothesis classification task is mostly solved through higher layers.