Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional performance across a variety of tasks, yet they are often affected by hallucinations and the timeliness of knowledge. Leveraging knowledge graphs (KGs) as external knowledge sources has emerged as a viable solution, but existing methods for LLM-based knowledge graph question answering (KGQA) are often limited by step-by-step decision-making on KGs, restricting the global planning and reasoning capabilities of LLMs, or they require fine-tuning or pre-training on specific KGs. To address these challenges, we propose Knowledge graph Assisted Reasoning Path Aggregation (KARPA), a novel framework that harnesses the global planning abilities of LLMs for efficient and accurate KG reasoning. KARPA operates in three steps: pre-planning relation paths using the LLM's global planning capabilities, matching semantically relevant paths via an embedding model, and reasoning over these paths to generate answers. Unlike existing KGQA methods, KARPA avoids stepwise traversal, requires no additional training, and is adaptable to various LLM architectures. Extensive experimental results show that KARPA achieves state-of-the-art performance in KGQA tasks, delivering both high efficiency and accuracy. Our code will be available on Github.

ChatGPT is impressive, but it's missing a vital component. That's according to Ehud Karpas, a squad director at AI21 Labs, which develops generative AI for text. It does things that are really mind-blowing," Karpas told The New Stack. "I think I should say this: A good text needs to be fluent, and it needs to be engaging. But I don't think that's the whole story.

Agents operating in a multi-agent environment must consider not just their own actions, but also those of the other agents in the system. Artificial social systems are a well known means for coordinating a set of agents, without requiring centralized planning or online negotiation between agents. Artificial social systems enact a social law which restricts the agents from performing some actions under some circumstances. A good social law prevents the agents from interfering with each other, but does not prevent them from achieving their goals. However, designing good social laws, or even checking whether a proposed social law is good, are hard questions. In this paper, we take a first step towards automating these processes, by formulating criteria for good social laws in a multi-agent planning framework. We then describe an automated technique for verifying if a proposed social law meets these criteria, based on a compilation to classical planning.