Generative models trained on finite data face a fundamental tension: their score-matching or next-token objective converges to the empirical training distribution rather than the population distribution we seek to learn. Using rule-valid synthetic tasks, we trace this tension across two training timescales: $τ_{\mathrm{rule}}$, the step at which generations first become rule-valid, and $τ_{\mathrm{mem}}$, the step at which models begin reproducing training samples. Focusing on parity and extending to other binary rules and combinatorial puzzles, we characterize how these two clocks, $τ_{\mathrm{rule}}$ and $τ_{\mathrm{mem}}$, depend on key aspects of the learning setup. Specifically, we show that $τ_{\mathrm{rule}}$ increases with rule complexity and decreases with model capacity, while $τ_{\mathrm{mem}}$ is approximately invariant to the rule and scales nearly linearly with dataset size $N$. We define the \emph{innovation window} as the interval $[τ_{\mathrm{rule}}, τ_{\mathrm{mem}}]$. This window widens with increasing $N$ and narrows with rule complexity, and may vanish entirely when $τ_{\mathrm{rule}} \geq τ_{\mathrm{mem}}$. The same two-clock structure arises in both diffusion (DiT) and autoregressive (GPT) models, with architecture-dependent offsets. Dissecting the learned score of DiT models reveals a corresponding evolution of the optimization landscapes, where rule-valid samples' basins expand substantially around $τ_{\mathrm{rule}}$, while training samples' basins begin to dominate around $τ_{\mathrm{mem}}$. Together, these results yield a unified and predictive account of when and how generative models exhibit genuine innovation.

Exploring the integration of if-then logic rules within neural network architectures presents an intriguing area. This integration seamlessly transforms the rule learning task into neural network training using backpropagation and stochastic gradient descent. From a well-trained sparse and shallow neural network, one can interpret each layer and neuron through the language of logic rules, and a global explanatory rule set can be directly extracted. However, ensuring interpretability may impose constraints on the flexibility, depth, and width of neural networks. In this paper, we propose HyperLogic: a novel framework leveraging hypernetworks to generate weights of the main network.

Advancing machine visual reasoning requires a deeper understanding of how Vision-Language Models (VLMs) process and interpret complex visual patterns. This work introduces a novel, cognitively-inspired evaluation framework to systematically analyze VLM reasoning on natural image-based Bongard Problems. We propose three structured paradigms -- Direct Visual Rule Learning, Deductive Rule Learning, and Componential Analysis -- designed to progressively enforce step-wise reasoning and disentangle the interplay between perception and reasoning. Our evaluation shows that advanced, closed-source VLMs (GPT-4o and Gemini 2.0) achieve near-superhuman performance, particularly when provided with high-quality image descriptions, while open-source models exhibit a significant performance bottleneck due to deficiencies in perception. An ablation study further confirms that perception, rather than reasoning, is the primary limiting factor, as open-source models apply extracted rules effectively when given accurate descriptions. These findings underscore the critical role of robust multimodal perception in enhancing generalizable visual reasoning and highlight the importance of structured, step-wise reasoning paradigms for advancing machine intelligence.

State-of-the-art results in typical classification tasks are mostly achieved by unexplainable machine learning methods, like deep neural networks, for instance. Contrarily, in this paper, we investigate the application of rule learning methods in such a context. Thus, classifications become based on comprehensible (first-order) rules, explaining the predictions made. In general, however, rule-based classifications are less accurate than state-of-the-art results (often significantly). As main contribution, we introduce a voting approach combining both worlds, aiming to achieve comparable results as (unexplainable) state-of-the-art methods, while still providing explanations in the form of deterministic rules. Considering a variety of benchmark data sets including a use case of significant interest to insurance industries, we prove that our approach not only clearly outperforms ordinary rule learning methods, but also yields results on a par with state-of-the-art outcomes.

Machine learning models, and in particular language models, are being applied to various tasks that require reasoning. While such models are good at capturing patterns their ability to reason in a trustable and controlled manner is frequently questioned. On the other hand, logic-based rule systems allow for controlled inspection and already established verification methods. However it is well-known that creating such systems manually is time-consuming and prone to errors. We explore the capability of transformers to translate sentences expressing rules in natural language into logical rules. We see reasoners as the most reliable tools for performing logical reasoning and focus on translating language into the format expected by such tools. We perform experiments using the DKET dataset from the literature and create a dataset for language to logic translation based on the Atomic knowledge bank.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained the ability to assimilate human knowledge and facilitate natural language interactions with both humans and other LLMs. However, despite their impressive achievements, LLMs have not made significant advancements in the realm of graph machine learning. This limitation arises because graphs encapsulate distinct relational data, making it challenging to transform them into natural language that LLMs understand. In this paper, we bridge this gap with a novel framework, GraphText, that translates graphs into natural language. GraphText derives a graph-syntax tree for each graph that encapsulates both the node attributes and inter-node relationships. Traversal of the tree yields a graph text sequence, which is then processed by an LLM to treat graph tasks as text generation tasks. Notably, GraphText offers multiple advantages. It introduces training-free graph reasoning: even without training on graph data, GraphText with ChatGPT can achieve on par with, or even surpassing, the performance of supervised-trained graph neural networks through in-context learning (ICL). Furthermore, GraphText paves the way for interactive graph reasoning, allowing both humans and LLMs to communicate with the model seamlessly using natural language. These capabilities underscore the vast, yet-to-be-explored potential of LLMs in the domain of graph machine learning.

Knowledge graphs are powerful tools for representing and organising complex biomedical data. Several knowledge graph embedding algorithms have been proposed to learn from and complete knowledge graphs. However, a recent study demonstrates the limited efficacy of these embedding algorithms when applied to biomedical knowledge graphs, raising the question of whether knowledge graph embeddings have limitations in biomedical settings. This study aims to apply state-of-the-art knowledge graph embedding models in the context of a recent biomedical knowledge graph, BioKG, and evaluate their performance and potential downstream uses. We achieve a three-fold improvement in terms of performance based on the HITS@10 score over previous work on the same biomedical knowledge graph. Additionally, we provide interpretable predictions through a rule-based method. We demonstrate that knowledge graph embedding models are applicable in practice by evaluating the best-performing model on four tasks that represent real-life polypharmacy situations. Results suggest that knowledge learnt from large biomedical knowledge graphs can be transferred to such downstream use cases. Our code is available at https://github.com/aryopg/biokge.

There has been an immense progress in the field of machine learning in the last years. In particular, deep learning has led to the development of very complex models which yield highly accurate results but lack explainability and interpretability. To overcome this defect, the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI for short, see for example [1-3]) has recently significantly increased momentum.

Logical rules are a popular knowledge representation language in many domains, representing background knowledge and encoding information that can be derived from given facts in a compact form. However, rule formulation is a complex process that requires deep domain expertise, and is further challenged by today's often large, heterogeneous, and incomplete knowledge graphs. Several approaches for learning rules automatically, given a set of input example facts, have been proposed over time, including, more recently, neural systems. Yet, the area is missing adequate datasets and evaluation approaches: existing datasets often resemble toy examples that neither cover the various kinds of dependencies between rules nor allow for testing scalability. We present a tool for generating different kinds of datasets and for evaluating rule learning systems.