Neural models and symbolic algorithms have recently been combined for tasks requiring both perception and reasoning. Neural models ground perceptual input into a conceptual vocabulary, on which a classical reasoning algorithm is applied to generate output. A key limitation is that such neural-to-symbolic models can only be trained end-to-end for tasks where the output space is symbolic. In this paper, we study neural-symbolic-neural models for reasoning tasks that require a conversion from an image input (e.g., a partially filled sudoku) to an image output (e.g., the image of the completed sudoku). While designing such a three-step hybrid architecture may be straightforward, the key technical challenge is end-to-end training -- how to backpropagate without intermediate supervision through the symbolic component. We propose NSNnet, an architecture that combines an image reconstruction loss with a novel output encoder to generate a supervisory signal, develops update algorithms that leverage policy gradient methods for supervision, and optimizes loss using a novel subsampling heuristic. We experiment on problem settings where symbolic algorithms are easily specified: a visual maze solving task and a visual Sudoku solver where the supervision is in image form. Experiments show high accuracy with significantly less data compared to purely neural approaches.

Despite recent successes of large pre-trained language models in solving reasoning tasks, their inference capabilities remain opaque. We posit that such models can be made more interpretable by explicitly generating interim inference rules, and using them to guide the generation of task-specific textual outputs. In this paper we present COINS, a recursive inference framework that i) iteratively reads context sentences, ii) dynamically generates contextualized inference rules, encodes them, and iii) uses them to guide task-specific output generation. We apply COINS to a Narrative Story Completion task that asks a model to complete a story with missing sentences, to produce a coherent story with plausible logical connections, causal relationships, and temporal dependencies. By modularizing inference and sentence generation steps in a recurrent model, we aim to make reasoning steps and their effects on next sentence generation transparent. Our automatic and manual evaluations show that the model generates better story sentences than SOTA baselines, especially in terms of coherence. We further demonstrate improved performance over strong pre-trained LMs in generating commonsense inference rules. The recursive nature of COINS holds the potential for controlled generation of longer sequences.

In this work we study how to learn good algorithms for selecting reasoning steps in theorem proving. We explore this in the connection tableau calculus implemented by leanCoP where the partial tableau provides a clean and compact notion of a state to which a limited number of inferences can be applied. We start by incorporating a state-of-the-art learning algorithm -- a graph neural network (GNN) -- into the plCoP theorem prover. Then we use it to observe the system's behaviour in a reinforcement learning setting, i.e., when learning inference guidance from successful Monte-Carlo tree searches on many problems. Despite its better pattern matching capability, the GNN initially performs worse than a simpler previously used learning algorithm. We observe that the simpler algorithm is less confident, i.e., its recommendations have higher entropy. This leads us to explore how the entropy of the inference selection implemented via the neural network influences the proof search. This is related to research in human decision-making under uncertainty, and in particular the probability matching theory. Our main result shows that a proper entropy regularisation, i.e., training the GNN not to be overconfident, greatly improves plCoP's performance on a large mathematical corpus.

Decision-making policies for agents are often synthesized with the constraint that a formal specification of behaviour is satisfied. Here we focus on infinite-horizon properties. On the one hand, Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) is a popular example of a formalism for qualitative specifications. On the other hand, Steady-State Policy Synthesis (SSPS) has recently received considerable attention as it provides a more quantitative and more behavioural perspective on specifications, in terms of the frequency with which states are visited. Finally, rewards provide a classic framework for quantitative properties. In this paper, we study Markov decision processes (MDP) with the specification combining all these three types. The derived policy maximizes the reward among all policies ensuring the LTL specification with the given probability and adhering to the steady-state constraints. To this end, we provide a unified solution reducing the multi-type specification to a multi-dimensional long-run average reward. This is enabled by Limit-Deterministic B\"uchi Automata (LDBA), recently studied in the context of LTL model checking on MDP, and allows for an elegant solution through a simple linear programme. The algorithm also extends to the general $\omega$-regular properties and runs in time polynomial in the sizes of the MDP as well as the LDBA.

Recent years have witnessed a renewed interest in Boolean function in explaining binary classifiers in the field of explainable AI (XAI). The standard approach of Boolean function is propositional logic. We present a modal language of a ceteris paribus nature which supports reasoning about binary classifiers and their properties. We study families of decision models for binary classifiers, axiomatize them and show completeness of our axiomatics. Moreover, we prove that the variant of our modal language with finite propositional atoms interpreted over these models is NP-complete. We leverage the language to formalize counterfactual conditional as well as a bunch of notions of explanation such as abductive, contrastive and counterfactual explanations, and biases. Finally, we present two extensions of our language: a dynamic extension by the notion of assignment enabling classifier change and an epistemic extension in which the classifier's uncertainty about the actual input can be represented.

Temporal logic inference is the process of extracting formal descriptions of system behaviors from data in the form of temporal logic formulas. The existing temporal logic inference methods mostly neglect uncertainties in the data, which results in limited applicability of such methods in real-world deployments. In this paper, we first investigate the uncertainties associated with trajectories of a system and represent such uncertainties in the form of interval trajectories. We then propose two uncertainty-aware signal temporal logic (STL) inference approaches to classify the undesired behaviors and desired behaviors of a system. Instead of classifying finitely many trajectories, we classify infinitely many trajectories within the interval trajectories. In the first approach, we incorporate robust semantics of STL formulas with respect to an interval trajectory to quantify the margin at which an STL formula is satisfied or violated by the interval trajectory. The second approach relies on the first learning algorithm and exploits the decision tree to infer STL formulas to classify behaviors of a given system. The proposed approaches also work for non-separable data by optimizing the worst-case robustness in inferring an STL formula. Finally, we evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms in two case studies, where the proposed algorithms show reductions in the computation time by up to four orders of magnitude in comparison with the sampling-based baseline algorithms (for a dataset with 800 sampled trajectories in total).

Examining a 20th-century Scandinavian legal theoretical tradition, we can extract an ontological naturalistic, a logical empiristic, and a modern idealistic rationale. We introduce the mathematical syntactic figure present in the `logical empiricism' in a contemporary mathematical logic. A new formal framework for describing explicit purchase statutes (Sweden) is gradually developed and subsequently proposed. This new framework is based on a many-sorted first-order logic (MFOL) approach, where the semantics are grounded in concrete `physical' objects and situations with a legal relevance. Specifically, we present a concrete formal syntactic translation of one of the central statutes of Swedish legislation for the purchase of immovable property. Additionally, we discuss the potential implications that a subsequent development of such formalisations would have for constructing artificial agents (e.g., software) that can be used as `co-creative' legal assistance for solving highly complex legal issues concerning the transfer of property, among others.

SMT solvers generally tackle quantifiers by instantiating their variables with tuples of terms from the ground part of the formula. Recent enumerative approaches for quantifier instantiation consider tuples of terms in some heuristic order. This paper studies different strategies to order such tuples and their impact on performance. We decouple the ordering problem into two parts. First is the order of the sequence of terms to consider for each quantified variable, and second is the order of the instantiation tuples themselves. While the most and least preferred tuples, i.e. those with all variables assigned to the most or least preferred terms, are clear, the combinations in between allow flexibility in an implementation. We look at principled strategies of complete enumeration, where some strategies are more fair, meaning they treat all the variables the same but some strategies may be more adventurous, meaning that they may venture further down the preference list. We further describe new techniques for discarding irrelevant instantiations which are crucial for the performance of these strategies in practice. These strategies are implemented in the SMT solver cvc5, where they contribute to the diversification of the solver's configuration space, as shown by our experimental results.

Approximation fixpoint theory (AFT) provides an algebraic framework for the study of fixpoints of operators on bilattices and has found its applications in characterizing semantics for various classes of logic programs and nonmonotonic languages. In this paper, we show one more application of this kind: the alternating fixpoint operator by Knorr et al. for the study of the well-founded semantics for hybrid MKNF knowledge bases is in fact an approximator of AFT in disguise, which, thanks to the power of abstraction of AFT, characterizes not only the well-founded semantics but also two-valued as well as three-valued semantics for hybrid MKNF knowledge bases. Furthermore, we show an improved approximator for these knowledge bases, of which the least stable fixpoint is information richer than the one formulated from Knorr et al.'s construction. This leads to an improved computation for the well-founded semantics. This work is built on an extension of AFT that supports consistent as well as inconsistent pairs in the induced product bilattice, to deal with inconsistencies that arise in the context of hybrid MKNF knowledge bases. This part of the work can be considered generalizing the original AFT from symmetric approximators to arbitrary approximators.

We introduce novel methods for encoding acyclicity and s-t-reachability constraints for propositional formulas with underlying directed graphs. They are based on vertex elimination graphs, which makes them suitable for cases where the underlying graph is sparse. In contrast to solvers with ad hoc constraint propagators for acyclicity and reachability constraints such as GraphSAT, our methods encode these constraints as standard propositional clauses, making them directly applicable with any SAT solver. An empirical study demonstrates that our methods together with an efficient SAT solver can outperform both earlier encodings of these constraints as well as GraphSAT, particularly when underlying graphs are sparse.