We investigate the computational complexity of mining guarded clauses from clausal datasets through the framework of inductive logic programming (ILP). We show that learning guarded clauses is NP-complete and thus one step below the $\sigma^P_2$-complete task of learning Horn clauses on the polynomial hierarchy. Motivated by practical applications on large datasets we identify a natural tractable fragment of the problem. Finally, we also generalise all of our results to $k$-guarded clauses for constant $k$.

In the last years, XAI research has mainly been concerned with developing new technical approaches to explain deep learning models. Just recent research has started to acknowledge the need to tailor explanations to different contexts and requirements of stakeholders. Explanations must not only suit developers of models, but also domain experts as well as end users. Thus, in order to satisfy different stakeholders, explanation methods need to be combined. While multi-modal explanations have been used to make model predictions more transparent, less research has focused on treating explanation as a process, where users can ask for information according to the level of understanding gained at a certain point in time. Consequently, an opportunity to explore explanations on different levels of abstraction should be provided besides multi-modal explanations. We present a process-based approach that combines multi-level and multi-modal explanations. The user can ask for textual explanations or visualizations through conversational interaction in a drill-down manner. We use Inductive Logic Programming, an interpretable machine learning approach, to learn a comprehensible model. Further, we present an algorithm that creates an explanatory tree for each example for which a classifier decision is to be explained. The explanatory tree can be navigated by the user to get answers of different levels of detail. We provide a proof-of-concept implementation for concepts induced from a semantic net about living beings.

The goal of combining the robustness of neural networks and the expressivity of symbolic methods has rekindled the interest in neuro-symbolic AI. Recent advancements in neuro-symbolic AI often consider specifically-tailored architectures consisting of disjoint neural and symbolic components, and thus do not exhibit desired gains that can be achieved by integrating them into a unifying framework. We introduce SLASH -- a novel deep probabilistic programming language (DPPL). At its core, SLASH consists of Neural-Probabilistic Predicates (NPPs) and logical programs which are united via answer set programming. The probability estimates resulting from NPPs act as the binding element between the logical program and raw input data, thereby allowing SLASH to answer task-dependent logical queries. This allows SLASH to elegantly integrate the symbolic and neural components in a unified framework. We evaluate SLASH on the benchmark data of MNIST addition as well as novel tasks for DPPLs such as missing data prediction and set prediction with state-of-the-art performance, thereby showing the effectiveness and generality of our method.

We introduce SMProbLog, a generalization of the probabilistic logic programming language ProbLog. A ProbLog program defines a distribution over logic programs by specifying for each clause the probability that it belongs to a randomly sampled program, and these probabilities are mutually independent. The semantics of ProbLog is given by the success probability of a query, which corresponds to the probability that the query succeeds in a randomly sampled program. It is well-defined when each random sample uniquely determines the truth values of all logical atoms. Argumentation problems, however, represent an interesting practical application where this is not always the case. SMProbLog generalizes the semantics of ProbLog to the setting where multiple truth assignments are possible for a randomly sampled program, and implements the corresponding algorithms for both inference and learning tasks. We then show how this novel framework can be used to reason about probabilistic argumentation problems. Therefore, the key contribution of this paper are: a more general semantics for ProbLog programs, its implementation into a probabilistic programming framework for both inference and parameter learning, and a novel approach to probabilistic argumentation problems based on such framework.

Several queries and scores have been proposed to explain individual predictions made by ML models. Examples include queries based on "anchors", which are parts of an instance that are sufficient to justify its classification, and "featureperturbation" scores such as SHAP. Given the need for flexible, reliable, and easy-toapply interpretability methods for ML models, we foresee the need for developing declarative languages to naturally specify different explainability queries. We do this in a principled way by rooting such a language in a logic called FOIL, that allows for expressing many simple but important explainability queries, and might serve as a core for more expressive interpretability languages. We study the computational complexity of FOIL queries over classes of ML models often deemed to be easily interpretable: decision trees and more general decision diagrams. Since the number of possible inputs for an ML model is exponential in its dimension, tractability of the FOIL evaluation problem is delicate, but can be achieved by either restricting the structure of the models, or the fragment of FOIL being evaluated. We also present a prototype implementation of FOIL wrapped in a high-level declarative language, and perform experiments showing that such a language can be used in practice.

We developed a system able to automatically solve logical puzzles in natural language. Our solution is composed by a parser and an inference module. The parser translates the text into first order logic (FOL), while the MACE4 model finder is used to compute the models of the given FOL theory. We also empower our software agent with the capability to provide Yes/No answers to natural language questions related to each puzzle. Moreover, in line with Explainalbe Artificial Intelligence (XAI), the agent can back its answer, providing a graphical representation of the proof. The advantage of using reasoning for Natural Language Understanding (NLU) instead of Machine learning is that the user can obtain an explanation of the reasoning chain. We illustrate how the system performs on various types of natural language puzzles, including 382 knights and knaves puzzles. These features together with the overall performance rate of 80.89\% makes the proposed solution an improvement upon similar solvers for natural language understanding in the puzzles domain.

In this work, we present a flexible method for explaining, in human readable terms, the predictions made by decision trees used as decision support in liver transplantation. The decision trees have been obtained through machine learning applied on a dataset collected at the liver transplantation unit at the Coru\~na University Hospital Center and are used to predict long term (five years) survival after transplantation. The method we propose is based on the representation of the decision tree as a set of rules in a logic program (LP) that is further annotated with text messages. This logic program is then processed using the tool xclingo (based on Answer Set Programming) that allows building compound explanations depending on the annotation text and the rules effectively fired when a given input is provided. We explore two alternative LP encodings: one in which rules respect the tree structure (more convenient to reflect the learning process) and one where each rule corresponds to a (previously simplified) tree path (more readable for decision making).

Logic artificial intelligence (AI) is a subfield of AI where variables can take two defined arguments, True or False, and are arranged in clauses that follow the rules of formal logic. Several problems that span from physical systems to mathematical conjectures can be encoded into these clauses and be solved by checking their satisfiability (SAT). Recently, SAT solvers have become a sophisticated and powerful computational tool capable, among other things, of solving long-standing mathematical conjectures. In this work, we propose the use of logic AI for the design of optical quantum experiments. We show how to map into a SAT problem the experimental preparation of an arbitrary quantum state and propose a logic-based algorithm, called Klaus, to find an interpretable representation of the photonic setup that generates it. We compare the performance of Klaus with the state-of-the-art algorithm for this purpose based on continuous optimization. We also combine both logic and numeric strategies to find that the use of logic AI improves significantly the resolution of this problem, paving the path to develop more formal-based approaches in the context of quantum physics experiments.

We present a clustering- and demotion-based algorithm called Kmeans-FOLD to induce nonmonotonic logic programs from positive and negative examples. Our algorithm improves upon-and is inspired by-the FOLD algorithm. The FOLD algorithm itself is an improvement over the FOIL algorithm. Our algorithm generates a more concise logic program compared to the FOLD algorithm. Our algorithm uses the K-means based clustering method to cluster the input positive samples before applying the FOLD algorithm. Positive examples that are covered by the partially learned program in intermediate steps are not discarded as in the FOLD algorithm, rather they are demoted, i.e., their weights are reduced in subsequent iterations of the algorithm. Our experiments on the UCI dataset show that a combination of K-Means clustering and our demotion strategy produces significant improvement for datasets with more than one cluster of positive examples. The resulting induced program is also more concise and therefore easier to understand compared to the FOLD and ALEPH systems, two state of the art inductive logic programming (ILP) systems.

While pre-trained language models (PLMs) are the go-to solution to tackle many natural language processing problems, they are still very limited in their ability to capture and to use common-sense knowledge. In fact, even if information is available in the form of approximate (soft) logical rules, it is not clear how to transfer it to a PLM in order to improve its performance for deductive reasoning tasks. Here, we aim to bridge this gap by teaching PLMs how to reason with soft Horn rules. We introduce a classification task where, given facts and soft rules, the PLM should return a prediction with a probability for a given hypothesis. We release the first dataset for this task, and we propose a revised loss function that enables the PLM to learn how to predict precise probabilities for the task. Our evaluation results show that the resulting fine-tuned models achieve very high performance, even on logical rules that were unseen at training. Moreover, we demonstrate that logical notions expressed by the rules are transferred to the fine-tuned model, yielding state-of-the-art results on external datasets.