What properties of a first-order search space support/hinder inference? What kinds of facts would be most effective to learn? Answering these questions is essential for understanding the dynamics of deductive reasoning and creating large-scale knowledge-based learning systems that support efficient inference. We address these questions by developing a model of how the distribution of ground facts affects inference performance in search spaces. Experiments suggest that uniform search spaces are suitable for larger KBs whereas search spaces with skewed degree distribution show better performance in smaller KBs. A sharp transition in Q/A performance is seen in some cases, suggesting that analysis of the structure of search spaces with existing knowledge should be used to guide the acquisition of new ground facts in learning systems.

Dual Horn clauses mirror key properties of Horn clauses. This paper explores the "other side of the looking glass" to reveal some expected and unexpected symmetries and their practical uses. We revisit Dual Horn clauses as enablers of a form of constructive negation that supports goal-driven forward reasoning and is valid both intuitionistically and classically. In particular, we explore the ability to falsify a counterfactual hypothesis in the context of a background theory expressed as a Dual Horn clause program. With Dual Horn clause programs, by contrast to negation as failure, the variable bindings in their computed answers provide explanations for the reasons why a statement is successfully falsified. Moreover, in the propositional case, by contrast to negation as failure as implemented with stable models semantics in ASP systems, and similarly to Horn clause programs, Dual Horn clause programs have polynomial complexity. After specifying their execution model with a metainterpreter, we devise a compilation scheme from Dual Horn clause programs to Horn clause programs, ensuring their execution with no performance penalty and we design the embedded SymLP language to support combined Horn clause and Dual Horn clause programs. As a (motivating) application, we cast LLM reasoning chains into propositional Horn and Dual Horn clauses that work together to constructively prove and disprove goals and enhance Generative AI with explainability of reasoning chains. Keywords: Dual Horn clauses; constructive negation; counterfactual reasoning; theory falsification; LLM generated logic programs; metainterpretation and compilation to Prolog.

We propose a novel way of assessing and fusing noisy dynamic data using a Tsetlin Machine. Our approach consists in monitoring how explanations in form of logical clauses that a TM learns changes with possible noise in dynamic data. This way TM can recognize the noise by lowering weights of previously learned clauses, or reflect it in the form of new clauses. We also perform a comprehensive experimental study using notably different datasets that demonstrated high performance of the proposed approach.

We propose an efficient interpretable neuro-symbolic model to solve Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) problems. In this model, which is built from a set of meta-rules organised in a hierarchical structure, first-order rules are invented by learning embeddings to match facts and body predicates of a meta-rule. To instantiate it, we specifically design an expressive set of generic meta-rules, and demonstrate they generate a consequent fragment of Horn clauses. During training, we inject a controlled \pw{Gumbel} noise to avoid local optima and employ interpretability-regularization term to further guide the convergence to interpretable rules. We empirically validate our model on various tasks (ILP, visual genome, reinforcement learning) against several state-of-the-art methods.

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 $k$.

TMs are a pattern recognition approach that uses finite state machines for learning and propositional logic to represent patterns. In addition to being natively interpretable, they have provided competitive accuracy for various tasks. In this paper, we increase the computing power of TMs by proposing a first-order logic-based framework with Herbrand semantics. The resulting TM is relational and can take advantage of logical structures appearing in natural language, to learn rules that represent how actions and consequences are related in the real world. The outcome is a logic program of Horn clauses, bringing in a structured view of unstructured data. In closed-domain question-answering, the first-order representation produces 10x more compact KBs, along with an increase in answering accuracy from 94.83% to 99.48%. The approach is further robust towards erroneous, missing, and superfluous information, distilling the aspects of a text that are important for real-world understanding.

Continuing on in our series on exotic programming ideas, we're going to explore the topic of logic programming and a particular form known as datalog. Datalog is executed by a query processor that given these two inputs, finds all instance of facts implied by both the databased and rules. For our examples we're going to be coding our examples in the Souffle language. The namesake of the language is an acronym for the Systematic, Ontological, Undiscovered Fact Finding Logic Engine. Souffle is a minimalist datalog system designed for complex queries over large data sets, such as those encountered in the context of doing static program analysis over large codebases.

Advice giving has been long explored in artificial intelligence to build robust learning algorithms. We consider advice giving in relational domains where the noise is systematic. The advice is provided as logical statements that are then explicitly considered by the learning algorithm at every update. Our empirical evidence proves that human advice can effectively accelerate learning in noisy structured domains where so far humans have been merely used as labelers or as designers of initial structure of the model.

In classical, AGM-style belief change, it is assumed that the underlying logic contains classical propositional logic. This is clearly a limiting assumption, particularly in Artificial Intelligence. Consequently there has been recent interest in studying belief change in approaches where the full expressivity of classical propositional logic is not obtained. In this paper we investigate belief contraction in Horn knowledge bases. We point out that the obvious extension to the Horn case, involving Horn remainder sets as a starting point, is problematic. Not only do Horn remainder sets have undesirable properties, but also some desirable Horn contraction functions are not captured by this approach. For Horn belief set contraction, we develop an account in terms of a model-theoretic characterisation involving weak remainder sets. Maxichoice and partial meet Horn contraction is specified, and we show that the problems arising with earlier work are resolved by these approaches. As well, constructions of the specific operators and sets of postulates are provided, and representation results are obtained. We also examine Horn package contraction, or contraction by a set of formulas. Again, we give a construction and postulate set, linking them via a representation result. Last, we investigate the closely-related notion of forgetting in Horn clauses. This work is arguably interesting since Horn clauses have found widespread use in AI; as well, the results given here may potentially be extended to other areas which make use of Horn-like reasoning, such as logic programming, rule-based systems, and description logics. Finally, since Horn reasoning is weaker than classical reasoning, this work sheds light on the foundations of belief change

Rewriting-based approaches for answering queries over an OWL 2 DL ontology have so far been developed mainly for Horn fragments of OWL 2 DL. In this paper, we study the possibilities of answering queries over non-Horn ontologies using datalog rewritings. We prove that this is impossible in general even for very simple ontology languages, and even if PTIME = NP. Furthermore, we present a resolution-based procedure for $\SHI$ ontologies that, in case it terminates, produces a datalog rewriting of the ontology. Our procedure necessarily terminates on DL-Lite_{bool}^H ontologies---an extension of OWL 2 QL with transitive roles and Boolean connectives.