CDI also offers a plausible approach for automatically making sense of competing arguments in a way that accords with the features enumerated here. This paper is part of an argument that it is now feasible to computationally instantiate a reasonable approximation of a coherence theory of truth [64]: the recent benchmark [12] provides additional quantitative evidence in this direction. By "hard-coding" acceptance of conclusively established propositions, this theory can furthermore be anchored in a correspondence theory of truth [65]. In other words, coherence computations can be required to incorporate privileged information that also coheres with observed reality. While it is easy to imagine attempts to try the same thing with privileged information that does not cohere with observed reality, lies cannot persist when they can easily be unraveled. Even with flawless technology (which this will not be), obstacles will be manifold. For example, in a pluralistic society, legal coherence may actually require sacrificing fairness in some ways [66]. Ultimately, people must decide matters for themselves. It is only reasonable to hope that technology can serve as a reliable tool to help people make their decisions more coherent.

Large language models (LLMs) can compile weighted graphs on natural language data to enable automatic coherence-driven inference (CDI) relevant to red and blue team operations in cybersecurity. This represents an early application of automatic CDI that holds near- to medium-term promise for decision-making in cybersecurity and eventually also for autonomous blue team operations.

We devise an algorithm to generate sets of propositions that objectively instantiate graphs that support coherence-driven inference. We then benchmark the ability of large language models (LLMs) to reconstruct coherence graphs from (a straightforward transformation of) propositions expressed in natural language, with promising results from a single prompt to models optimized for reasoning. Combining coherence-driven inference with consistency evaluations by neural models may advance the state of the art in machine cognition.

Machine-Generated Text (MGT) detection, a task that discriminates MGT from Human-Written Text (HWT), plays a crucial role in preventing misuse of text generative models, which excel in mimicking human writing style recently. Latest proposed detectors usually take coarse text sequences as input and fine-tune pretrained models with standard cross-entropy loss. However, these methods fail to consider the linguistic structure of texts. Moreover, they lack the ability to handle the low-resource problem which could often happen in practice considering the enormous amount of textual data online. In this paper, we present a coherence-based contrastive learning model named CoCo to detect the possible MGT under low-resource scenario. To exploit the linguistic feature, we encode coherence information in form of graph into text representation. To tackle the challenges of low data resource, we employ a contrastive learning framework and propose an improved contrastive loss for preventing performance degradation brought by simple samples. The experiment results on two public datasets and two self-constructed datasets prove our approach outperforms the state-of-art methods significantly. Also, we surprisingly find that MGTs originated from up-to-date language models could be easier to detect than these from previous models, in our experiments. And we propose some preliminary explanations for this counter-intuitive phenomena. All the codes and datasets are open-sourced.

In this paper we formulate the problem of inference under incomplete information in very general terms. This includes modelling the process responsible for the incompleteness, which we call the incompleteness process. We allow the process behaviour to be partly unknown. Then we use Walleys theory of coherent lower previsions, a generalisation of the Bayesian theory to imprecision, to derive the rule to update beliefs under incompleteness that logically follows from our assumptions, and that we call conservative inference rule. This rule has some remarkable properties: it is an abstract rule to update beliefs that can be applied in any situation or domain; it gives us the opportunity to be neither too optimistic nor too pessimistic about the incompleteness process, which is a necessary condition to draw reliable while strong enough conclusions; and it is a coherent rule, in the sense that it cannot lead to inconsistencies. We give examples to show how the new rule can be applied in expert systems, in parametric statistical inference, and in pattern classification, and discuss more generally the view of incompleteness processes defended here as well as some of its consequences.

In this paper we formulate the problem of inference under incomplete information in very general terms. This includes modelling the process responsible for the incompleteness, which we call the incompleteness process. We allow the process' behaviour to be partly unknown. Then we use Walley's theory of coherent lower previsions, a generalisation of the Bayesian theory to imprecision, to derive the rule to update beliefs under incompleteness that logically follows from our assumptions, and that we call conservative inference rule. This rule has some remarkable properties: it is an abstract rule to update beliefs that can be applied in any situation or domain; it gives us the opportunity to be neither too optimistic nor too pessimistic about the incompleteness process, which is a necessary condition to draw reliable while strong enough conclusions; and it is a coherent rule, in the sense that it cannot lead to inconsistencies. We give examples to show how the new rule can be applied in expert systems, in parametric statistical inference, and in pattern classification, and discuss more generally the view of incompleteness processes defended here as well as some of its consequences.