Despite their tremendous success in many applications, large language models often fall short of consistent reasoning and planning in various (language, embodied, and social) scenarios, due to inherent limitations in their inference, learning, and modeling capabilities. In this position paper, we present a new perspective of machine reasoning, LAW, that connects the concepts of Language models, Agent models, and World models, for more robust and versatile reasoning capabilities. In particular, we propose that world and agent models are a better abstraction of reasoning, that introduces the crucial elements of deliberate human-like reasoning, including beliefs about the world and other agents, anticipation of consequences, goals/rewards, and strategic planning. Crucially, language models in LAW serve as a backend to implement the system or its elements and hence provide the computational power and adaptability. We review the recent studies that have made relevant progress and discuss future research directions towards operationalizing the LAW framework.

We introduce algebraic machine reasoning, a new reasoning framework that is well-suited for abstract reasoning. Effectively, algebraic machine reasoning reduces the difficult process of novel problem-solving to routine algebraic computation. The fundamental algebraic objects of interest are the ideals of some suitably initialized polynomial ring. We shall explain how solving Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPMs) can be realized as computational problems in algebra, which combine various well-known algebraic subroutines that include: Computing the Gr\"obner basis of an ideal, checking for ideal containment, etc. Crucially, the additional algebraic structure satisfied by ideals allows for more operations on ideals beyond set-theoretic operations. Our algebraic machine reasoning framework is not only able to select the correct answer from a given answer set, but also able to generate the correct answer with only the question matrix given. Experiments on the I-RAVEN dataset yield an overall $93.2\%$ accuracy, which significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art accuracy of $77.0\%$ and exceeds human performance at $84.4\%$ accuracy.

Artificial intelligence has altered the way businesses use data. The problem is that many people still don't comprehend the differences between AI technology types and the distinct advantages they offer. Despite their distinctions and specialized use cases, the phrases machine learning, machine reasoning, and AI are frequently used interchangeably. Most significantly, individuals frequently misinterpret the crucial distinction between machine learning and machine reasoning, that is, identifying patterns vs comprehending relationships. Each has a specific function in the analytical process and, while they are distinct, are equally crucial in extracting the greatest value from the other.

With deep support from the C-suite and the right mix of skillsets and strategies, enterprises can move to the next stage of AI development. Decades ago, artificial intelligence arrived with huge expectations for significant increases in efficiency and productivity. However, despite billions spent on technology, project after project stalled--mainly because challenges with company strategies, technical hurdles, and cultures kept the potential power of AI unrealized. Over the last decade, enterprises have migrated en masse to online platforms and cloud providers. This evolution has paved the way for computing capabilities to handle much more data while simultaneously generating troves of new data that these systems can now analyze.

During the past decade, the RL has envisioned and built the ARIES (ARtificial Intelligence for Environment and Sustainability) platform, a technology that integrates network-available data and model components through semantics and machine reasoning. Its underlying open-source software (k.LAB) handles the full end-to-end process of integrating data and with multiple model integration types to predict complex change. It also supports selection of the most appropriate data and models using cloud technology and following an open data paradigm: the resulting insight remains open and available to society at large, and becomes a base for further computations, contributing to an ever-increasing knowledge base. For the first time, it is possible to consistently characterize and publish data and models for their integration in predictive models, building and field-testing technologies that have eluded researchers to date. We are looking for an individual who can support strategic activities related to integrated data science and collaborative, integrated modelling on the semantic web (semantic meta-modelling).

As a field of AI, Machine Reasoning (MR) uses largely symbolic means to formalize and emulate abstract reasoning. Studies in early MR have notably started inquiries into Explainable AI (XAI) -- arguably one of the biggest concerns today for the AI community. Work on explainable MR as well as on MR approaches to explainability in other areas of AI has continued ever since. It is especially potent in modern MR branches, such as argumentation, constraint and logic programming, planning. We hereby aim to provide a selective overview of MR explainability techniques and studies in hopes that insights from this long track of research will complement well the current XAI landscape. This document reports our work in-progress on MR explainability.

The conversation around Artificial Intelligence usually revolves around technology-focused topics: machine learning, conversational interfaces, autonomous agents, and other aspects of data science, math, and implementation. However, the history and evolution of AI is more than just a technology story. The story of AI is also inextricably linked with waves of innovation and research breakthroughs that run headfirst into economic and technology roadblocks. There seems to be a continuous pattern of discovery, innovation, interest, investment, cautious optimism, boundless enthusiasm, realization of limitations, technological roadblocks, withdrawal of interest, and retreat of AI research back to academic settings. These waves of advance and retreat seem to be as consistent as the back and forth of sea waves on the shore. This pattern of interest, investment, hype, then decline, and rinse-and-repeat is particularly vexing to technologists and investors because it doesn't follow the usual technology adoption lifecycle.

The conversation around Artificial Intelligence usually revolves around technology-focused topics: machine learning, conversational interfaces, autonomous agents, and other aspects of data science, math, and implementation. However, the history and evolution of AI is more than just a technology story. The story of AI is also inextricably linked with waves of innovation and research breakthroughs that run headfirst into economic and technology roadblocks. There seems to be a continuous pattern of discovery, innovation, interest, investment, cautious optimism, boundless enthusiasm, realization of limitations, technological roadblocks, withdrawal of interest, and retreat of AI research back to academic settings. These waves of advance and retreat seem to be as consistent as the back and forth of sea waves on the shore. This pattern of interest, investment, hype, then decline, and rinse-and-repeat is particularly vexing to technologists and investors because it doesn't follow the usual technology adoption lifecycle.

The conversation around Artificial Intelligence usually revolves around technology-focused topics: machine learning, conversational interfaces, autonomous agents, and other aspects of data science, math, and implementation. However, the history and evolution of AI is more than just a technology story. The story of AI is also inextricably linked with waves of innovation and research breakthroughs that run headfirst into economic and technology roadblocks. There seems to be a continuous pattern of discovery, innovation, interest, investment, cautious optimism, boundless enthusiasm, realization of limitations, technological roadblocks, withdrawal of interest, and retreat of AI research back to academic settings. These waves of advance and retreat seem to be as consistent as the back and forth of sea waves on the shore.

We hear a lot these days about the potential dangers of "AI bias." If a machine learning system is based upon a data set that is somehow biased by age, gender, race, ethnicity, income, education, geography, or some other factor, the system's outputs will tend to reflect those biases. As the inner workings of ML systems are often impossible for an outsider to fully understand, any such biases can appear to be hidden, making them seem especially sinister. But before getting too alarmed, ask yourself this. Over the long run, which decision-making model is likely to be more objective: human or machine reasoning?