Model Checking is widely applied in verifying the correctness of complex and concurrent systems against a specification. Pure symbolic approaches while popular, suffer from the state space explosion problem due to cross product operations required that make them prohibitively expensive for large-scale systems and/or specifications. In this paper, we propose to use graph representation learning (GRL) for solving linear temporal logic (LTL) model checking, where the system and the specification are expressed by a B{\"u}chi automaton and an LTL formula, respectively. A novel GRL-based framework \model, is designed to learn the representation of the graph-structured system and specification, which reduces the model checking problem to binary classification. Empirical experiments on two model checking scenarios show that \model achieves promising accuracy, with up to $11\times$ overall speedup against canonical SOTA model checkers and $31\times$ for satisfiability checking alone.

Synthesizing large logic programs through symbolic Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) typically requires intermediate definitions. However, cluttering the hypothesis space with intensional predicates typically degrades performance. In contrast, gradient descent provides an efficient way to find solutions within such high-dimensional spaces. Neuro-symbolic ILP approaches have not fully exploited this so far. We propose extending the {\delta}ILP approach to inductive synthesis with large-scale predicate invention, thus allowing us to exploit the efficacy of high-dimensional gradient descent. We show that large-scale predicate invention benefits differentiable inductive synthesis through gradient descent and allows one to learn solutions for tasks beyond the capabilities of existing neuro-symbolic ILP systems. Furthermore, we achieve these results without specifying the precise structure of the solution within the language bias.

Many inductive logic programming approaches struggle to learn programs from noisy data. To overcome this limitation, we introduce an approach that learns minimal description length programs from noisy data, including recursive programs. Our experiments on several domains, including drug design, game playing, and program synthesis, show that our approach can outperform existing approaches in terms of predictive accuracies and scale to moderate amounts of noise.

Reward machines have shown great promise at capturing non-Markovian reward functions for learning tasks that involve complex action sequencing. However, no algorithm currently exists for learning reward machines with realistic weak feedback in the form of preferences. We contribute REMAP, a novel algorithm for learning reward machines from preferences, with correctness and termination guarantees. REMAP introduces preference queries in place of membership queries in the L* algorithm, and leverages a symbolic observation table along with unification and constraint solving to narrow the hypothesis reward machine search space. In addition to the proofs of correctness and termination for REMAP, we present empirical evidence measuring correctness: how frequently the resulting reward machine is isomorphic under a consistent yet inexact teacher, and the regret between the ground truth and learned reward machines.

The goal of inductive logic programming is to induce a logic program (a set of logical rules) that generalises training examples. Inducing programs with many rules and literals is a major challenge. To tackle this challenge, we introduce an approach where we learn small non-separable programs and combine them. We implement our approach in a constraint-driven ILP system. Our approach can learn optimal and recursive programs and perform predicate invention. Our experiments on multiple domains, including game playing and program synthesis, show that our approach can drastically outperform existing approaches in terms of predictive accuracies and learning times, sometimes reducing learning times from over an hour to a few seconds.

Discovering novel abstractions is important for human-level AI. We introduce an approach to discover higher-order abstractions, such as map, filter, and fold. We focus on inductive logic programming, which induces logic programs from examples and background knowledge. We introduce the higher-order refactoring problem, where the goal is to compress a logic program by introducing higher-order abstractions. We implement our approach in STEVIE, which formulates the higher-order refactoring problem as a constraint optimisation problem. Our experimental results on multiple domains, including program synthesis and visual reasoning, show that, compared to no refactoring, STEVIE can improve predictive accuracies by 27% and reduce learning times by 47%. We also show that STEVIE can discover abstractions that transfer to different domains

The generation of comprehensible explanations is an essential feature of modern artificial intelligence systems. In this work, we consider probabilistic logic programming, an extension of logic programming which can be useful to model domains with relational structure and uncertainty. Essentially, a program specifies a probability distribution over possible worlds (i.e., sets of facts). The notion of explanation is typically associated with that of a world, so that one often looks for the most probable world as well as for the worlds where the query is true. Unfortunately, such explanations exhibit no causal structure. In particular, the chain of inferences required for a specific prediction (represented by a query) is not shown. In this paper, we propose a novel approach where explanations are represented as programs that are generated from a given query by a number of unfolding-like transformations. Here, the chain of inferences that proves a given query is made explicit. Furthermore, the generated explanations are minimal (i.e., contain no irrelevant information) and can be parameterized w.r.t. a specification of visible predicates, so that the user may hide uninteresting details from explanations.

Symmetry and dominance breaking can be crucial for solving hard combinatorial search and optimisation problems, but the correctness of these techniques sometimes relies on subtle arguments. For this reason, it is desirable to produce efficient, machine-verifiable certificates that solutions have been computed correctly. Building on the cutting planes proof system, we develop a certification method for optimisation problems in which symmetry and dominance breaking is easily expressible. Our experimental evaluation demonstrates that we can efficiently verify fully general symmetry breaking in Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solving, thus providing, for the first time, a unified method to certify a range of advanced SAT techniques that also includes cardinality and parity (XOR) reasoning. In addition, we apply our method to maximum clique solving and constraint programming as a proof of concept that the approach applies to a wider range of combinatorial problems.

We study how to efficiently combine formal methods, Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS), and deep learning in order to produce high-quality receding horizon policies in large Markov Decision processes (MDPs). In particular, we use model-checking techniques to guide the MCTS algorithm in order to generate offline samples of high-quality decisions on a representative set of states of the MDP. Those samples can then be used to train a neural network that imitates the policy used to generate them. This neural network can either be used as a guide on a lower-latency MCTS online search, or alternatively be used as a full-fledged policy when minimal latency is required. We use statistical model checking to detect when additional samples are needed and to focus those additional samples on configurations where the learnt neural network policy differs from the (computationally-expensive) offline policy. We illustrate the use of our method on MDPs that model the Frozen Lake and Pac-Man environments -- two popular benchmarks to evaluate reinforcement-learning algorithms.

We present Self-Driven Strategy Learning ($\textit{sdsl}$), a lightweight online learning methodology for automated reasoning tasks that involve solving a set of related problems. $\textit{sdsl}$ does not require offline training, but instead automatically constructs a dataset while solving earlier problems. It fits a machine learning model to this data which is then used to adjust the solving strategy for later problems. We formally define the approach as a set of abstract transition rules. We describe a concrete instance of the sdsl calculus which uses conditional sampling for generating data and random forests as the underlying machine learning model. We implement the approach on top of the Kissat solver and show that the combination of Kissat+$\textit{sdsl}$ certifies larger bounds and finds more counter-examples than other state-of-the-art bounded model checking approaches on benchmarks obtained from the latest Hardware Model Checking Competition.