We present an approach to map utterances in conversation to logical forms, which will be executed on a large-scale knowledge base. To handle enormous ellipsis phenomena in conversation, we introduce dialog memory management to manipulate historical entities, predicates, and logical forms when inferring the logical form of current utterances. Dialog memory management is embodied in a generative model, in which a logical form is interpreted in a top-down manner following a small and flexible grammar. We learn the model from denotations without explicit annotation of logical forms, and evaluate it on a large-scale dataset consisting of 200K dialogs over 12.8M entities. Results verify the benefits of modeling dialog memory, and show that our semantic parsing-based approach outperforms a memory network based encoder-decoder model by a huge margin.

We present an approach to map utterances in conversation to logical forms, which will be executed on a large-scale knowledge base. To handle enormous ellipsis phenomena in conversation, we introduce dialog memory management to manipulate historical entities, predicates, and logical forms when inferring the logical form of current utterances. Dialog memory management is embodied in a generative model, in which a logical form is interpreted in a top-down manner following a small and flexible grammar. We learn the model from denotations without explicit annotation of logical forms, and evaluate it on a large-scale dataset consisting of 200K dialogs over 12.8M entities. Results verify the benefits of modeling dialog memory, and show that our semantic parsing-based approach outperforms a memory network based encoder-decoder model by a huge margin.

We consider the problem of mapping conversational natural language questions to formal representations (e.g., logical form) of their underlying meanings, which would be executed to produce the

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Efficient retrieval of external knowledge bases and web pages is crucial for enhancing the reasoning abilities of LLMs. Previous works on training LLMs to leverage external retrievers for solving complex problems have predominantly employed end-to-end reinforcement learning. However, these approaches neglect supervision over the reasoning process, making it difficult to guarantee logical coherence and rigor. To address these limitations, we propose Thinker, a hierarchical thinking model for deep search through multi-turn interaction, making the reasoning process supervisable and verifiable. It decomposes complex problems into independently solvable sub-problems, each dually represented in both natural language and an equivalent logical function to support knowledge base and web searches. Concurrently, dependencies between sub-problems are passed as parameters via these logical functions, enhancing the logical coherence of the problem-solving process. To avoid unnecessary external searches, we perform knowledge boundary determination to check if a sub-problem is within the LLM's intrinsic knowledge, allowing it to answer directly. Experimental results indicate that with as few as several hundred training samples, the performance of Thinker is competitive with established baselines. Furthermore, when scaled to the full training set, Thinker significantly outperforms these methods across various datasets and model sizes. The source code is available at https://github.com/OpenSPG/KAG-Thinker.

Humans understand new combinations of words encountered if they are combinations of words recognized from different contexts, an ability called Compositional Generalization. The COGS benchmark (Kim and Linzen, 2020) arXiv:2010.05465 reports 0% accuracy for Transformer models on some structural generalizations. We use (Weiss et al., 2021) arXiv:2106.06981's Restricted Access Sequence Processing (RASP), a Transformer-equivalent programming language, to demonstrate that a Transformer Encoder-Decoder can perform COGS and the semantically equivalent ReCOGS_pos (Wu et al., 2024) arXiv:2303.13716 systematically and compositionally: Our RASP models attain near perfect scores on structural generalization splits on COGS (exact match) and ReCOGS_pos (semantic exact match). Our RASP models show the (Re)COGS tasks do not require a hierarchical or tree-structured solution (contrary to (Kim and Linzen, 2020) arXiv:2010.05465, (Yao and Koller, 2022) arXiv:2210.13050, (Murty et al., 2022) arXiv:2211.01288, (Liu et al., 2021) arXiv:2107.06516): we use word-level tokens with an "embedding" layer that tags with possible part of speech, applying just once per encoder pass 19 attention-head compatible flat pattern-matching rules (easily identified with specific training examples), shown using grammar coverage (Zeller et al., 2023) to cover the non-recursive aspects of the input grammar, plus masking out prepositional phrases ("pp noun") and/or sentential complements (cp) when recognizing grammar patterns and extracting nouns related to the main verb in the sentence, and output the next logical form (LF) token (repeating until the LF is complete). The models do not apply recursive, tree-structured rules like "np_det pp np -> np_pp -> np", but score near perfect semantic and string exact match on both COGS and ReCOGS pp recursion, cp recursion using the decoder loop.

Graph-matching metrics such as Smatch are the de facto standard for evaluating neural semantic parsers, yet they capture surface overlap rather than logical equivalence. We reassess evaluation by pairing graph-matching with automated theorem proving. We compare two approaches to building parsers: supervised fine-tuning (T5-Small/Base) and few-shot in-context learning (GPT-4o/4.1/5), under normalized and unnormalized targets. We evaluate outputs using graph-matching, bidirectional entailment between source and target formulas with a first-order logic theorem prover, and well-formedness. Across settings, we find that models performing well on graph-matching often fail to produce logically equivalent formulas. Normalization reduces incidental target variability, improves well-formedness, and strengthens logical adequacy. Error analysis shows performance degrades with increasing formula complexity and with coordination, prepositional phrases, and passive voice; the dominant failures involve variable binding and indexing, and predicate naming. These findings highlight limits of graph-based metrics for reasoning-oriented applications and motivate logic-sensitive evaluation and training objectives together with simplified, normalized target representations. All code and data for our experiments are publicly available.

Recent advances in Bayesian probability theory and its application to cognitive science in combination with the development of a new generation of computational tools and methods for probabilistic computation have led to a 'probabilistic turn' in pragmatics and semantics. In particular, the framework of Rational Speech Act theory has been developed to model broadly Gricean accounts of pragmatic phenomena in Bayesian terms, starting with fairly simple reference games and covering ever more complex communicative exchanges such as verbal syllogistic reasoning. This paper explores in which way a similar Bayesian approach might be applied to relevance-theoretic pragmatics (Sperber & Wilson, 1995) by study a paradigmatic pragmatic phenomenon: the communication of implicit meaning by ways of (conversational) implicatures.

General logical reasoning, defined as the ability to reason deductively on domain-agnostic tasks, continues to be a challenge for large language models (LLMs). Current LLMs fail to reason deterministically and are not interpretable. As such, there has been a recent surge in interest in neurosymbolic AI, which attempts to incorporate logic into neural networks. We first identify two main neurosymbolic approaches to improving logical reasoning: (i) the integrative approach comprising models where symbolic reasoning is contained within the neural network, and (ii) the hybrid approach comprising models where a symbolic solver, separate from the neural network, performs symbolic reasoning. Both contain AI systems with promising results on domain-specific logical reasoning benchmarks. However, their performance on domain-agnostic benchmarks is understudied. To the best of our knowledge, there has not been a comparison of the contrasting approaches that answers the following question: Which approach is more promising for developing general logical reasoning? To analyze their potential, the following best-in-class domain-agnostic models are introduced: Logic Neural Network (LNN), which uses the integrative approach, and LLM-Symbolic Solver (LLM-SS), which uses the hybrid approach. Using both models as case studies and representatives of each approach, our analysis demonstrates that the hybrid approach is more promising for developing general logical reasoning because (i) its reasoning chain is more interpretable, and (ii) it retains the capabilities and advantages of existing LLMs. To support future works using the hybrid approach, we propose a generalizable framework based on LLM-SS that is modular by design, model-agnostic, domain-agnostic, and requires little to no human input.