This paper proposes an integration of temporal logical reasoning and Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDPs) to achieve interpretable decision-making under uncertainty with macro-actions. Our method leverages a fragment of Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) based on Event Calculus (EC) to generate \emph{persistent} (i.e., constant) macro-actions, which guide Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS)-based POMDP solvers over a time horizon, significantly reducing inference time while ensuring robust performance. Such macro-actions are learnt via Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) from a few traces of execution (belief-action pairs), thus eliminating the need for manually designed heuristics and requiring only the specification of the POMDP transition model. In the Pocman and Rocksample benchmark scenarios, our learned macro-actions demonstrate increased expressiveness and generality when compared to time-independent heuristics, indeed offering substantial computational efficiency improvements.
Weak supervision allows machine learning models to learn from limited or noisy labels, but it introduces challenges in interpretability and reliability - particularly in multi-instance partial label learning (MI-PLL), where models must resolve both ambiguous labels and uncertain instance-label mappings. We propose a semantics for neuro-symbolic framework that integrates Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) to improve MI-PLL by providing structured relational constraints that guide learning. Within our semantic characterization, ILP defines a logical hypothesis space for label transitions, clarifies classifier semantics, and establishes interpretable performance standards. This hybrid approach improves robustness, transparency, and accountability in weakly supervised settings, ensuring neural predictions align with domain knowledge. By embedding weak supervision into a logical framework, we enhance both interpretability and learning, making weak supervision more suitable for real-world, high-stakes applications.
Recent inductive logic programming (ILP) approaches learn optimal hypotheses. An optimal hypothesis minimises a given cost function on the training data. There are many cost functions, such as minimising training error, textual complexity, or the description length of hypotheses. However, selecting an appropriate cost function remains a key question. To address this gap, we extend a constraint-based ILP system to learn optimal hypotheses for seven standard cost functions. We then empirically compare the generalisation error of optimal hypotheses induced under these standard cost functions. Our results on over 20 domains and 1000 tasks, including game playing, program synthesis, and image reasoning, show that, while no cost function consistently outperforms the others, minimising training error or description length has the best overall performance. Notably, our results indicate that minimising the size of hypotheses does not always reduce generalisation error.
Pre-trained language models (PLMs) have made significant advances in natural language inference (NLI) tasks, however their sensitivity to textual perturbations and dependence on large datasets indicate an over-reliance on shallow heuristics. In contrast, inductive logic programming (ILP) excels at inferring logical relationships across diverse, sparse and limited datasets, but its discrete nature requires the inputs to be precisely specified, which limits their application. This paper proposes a bridge between the two approaches: neuro-symbolic contrastive learning. This allows for smooth and differentiable optimisation that improves logical accuracy across an otherwise discrete, noisy, and sparse topological space of logical functions. We show that abstract logical relationships can be effectively embedded within a neuro-symbolic paradigm, by representing data as logic programs and sets of logic rules. The embedding space captures highly varied textual information with similar semantic logical relations, but can also separate similar textual relations that have dissimilar logical relations. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly improves the inference capabilities of the models in terms of generalisation and reasoning.
Since the first conference In Marseille in 1982, the International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP) has been the premier international event for presenting research in logic programming. These proceedings include technical communications about, and abstracts for presentations given at the 40th ICLP held October 14-17, in Dallas Texas, USA. The papers and abstracts in this volume include the following areas and topics. Formal and operational semantics: including non-monotonic reasoning, probabilistic reasoning, argumentation, and semantic issues of combining logic with neural models. Language design and programming methodologies such as answer set programming. inductive logic programming, and probabilistic programming. Program analysis and logic-based validation of generated programs. Implementation methodologies including constraint implementation, tabling, Logic-based prompt engineering, and the interaction of logic programming with LLMs.
The increasing level of autonomy of robots poses challenges of trust and social acceptance, especially in human-robot interaction scenarios. This requires an interpretable implementation of robotic cognitive capabilities, possibly based on formal methods as logics for the definition of task specifications. However, prior knowledge is often unavailable in complex realistic scenarios. In this paper, we propose an offline algorithm based on inductive logic programming from noisy examples to extract task specifications (i.e., action preconditions, constraints and effects) directly from raw data of few heterogeneous (i.e., not repetitive) robotic executions. Our algorithm leverages on the output of any unsupervised action identification algorithm from video-kinematic recordings. Combining it with the definition of very basic, almost task-agnostic, commonsense concepts about the environment, which contribute to the interpretability of our methodology, we are able to learn logical axioms encoding preconditions of actions, as well as their effects in the event calculus paradigm. Since the quality of learned specifications depends mainly on the accuracy of the action identification algorithm, we also propose an online framework for incremental refinement of task knowledge from user feedback, guaranteeing safe execution. Results in a standard manipulation task and benchmark for user training in the safety-critical surgical robotic scenario, show the robustness, data- and time-efficiency of our methodology, with promising results towards the scalability in more complex domains.
This paper presents a novel approach combining inductive logic programming with reinforcement learning to improve training performance and explainability. We exploit inductive learning of answer set programs from noisy examples to learn a set of logical rules representing an explainable approximation of the agent policy at each batch of experience. We then perform answer set reasoning on the learned rules to guide the exploration of the learning agent at the next batch, without requiring inefficient reward shaping and preserving optimality with soft bias. The entire procedure is conducted during the online execution of the reinforcement learning algorithm. We preliminarily validate the efficacy of our approach by integrating it into the Q-learning algorithm for the Pac-Man scenario in two maps of increasing complexity. Our methodology produces a significant boost in the discounted return achieved by the agent, even in the first batches of training. Moreover, inductive learning does not compromise the computational time required by Q-learning and learned rules quickly converge to an explanation of the agent policy.
We present High-Throughput Hypothesis Evaluation in Description Logic (HT-HEDL). HT-HEDL is a high-performance hypothesis evaluation engine that accelerates hypothesis evaluation computations for inductive logic programming (ILP) learners using description logic (DL) for their knowledge representation; in particular, HT-HEDL targets accelerating computations for the $\mathcal{ALCQI}^{\mathcal{(D)}}$ DL language. HT-HEDL aggregates the computing power of multi-core CPUs with multi-GPUs to improve hypothesis computations at two levels: 1) the evaluation of a single hypothesis and 2) the evaluation of multiple hypotheses (i.e., batch of hypotheses). In the first level, HT-HEDL uses a single GPU or a vectorized multi-threaded CPU to evaluate a single hypothesis. In vectorized multi-threaded CPU evaluation, classical (scalar) CPU multi-threading is combined with CPU's extended vector instructions set to extract more CPU-based performance. The experimental results revealed that HT-HEDL increased performance using CPU-based evaluation (on a single hypothesis): from 20.4 folds using classical multi-threading to $\sim85$ folds using vectorized multi-threading. In the GPU-based evaluation, HT-HEDL achieved speedups of up to $\sim38$ folds for single hypothesis evaluation using a single GPU. To accelerate the evaluation of multiple hypotheses, HT-HEDL combines, in parallel, GPUs with multi-core CPUs to increase evaluation throughput (number of evaluated hypotheses per second). The experimental results revealed that HT-HEDL increased evaluation throughput by up to 29.3 folds using two GPUs and up to $\sim44$ folds using two GPUs combined with a CPU's vectorized multi-threaded evaluation.
Formally verifying the correctness of mathematical proofs is more accessible than ever, however, the learning curve remains steep for many of the state-of-the-art interactive theorem provers (ITP). Deriving the most appropriate subsequent proof step, and reasoning about it, given the multitude of possibilities, remains a daunting task for novice users. To improve the situation, several investigations have developed machine learning based guidance for tactic selection. Such approaches struggle to learn non-trivial relationships between the chosen tactic and the structure of the proof state and represent them as symbolic expressions. To address these issues we (i) We represent the problem as an Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) task, (ii) Using the ILP representation we enriched the feature space by encoding additional, computationally expensive properties as background knowledge predicates, (iii) We use this enriched feature space to learn rules explaining when a tactic is applicable to a given proof state, (iv) we use the learned rules to filter the output of an existing tactic selection approach and empirically show improvement over the non-filtering approaches.
Current trends in Machine Learning prefer explainability even when it comes at the cost of performance. Therefore, explainable AI methods are particularly important in the field of Fraud Detection. This work investigates the applicability of Differentiable Inductive Logic Programming (DILP) as an explainable AI approach to Fraud Detection. Although the scalability of DILP is a well-known issue, we show that with some data curation such as cleaning and adjusting the tabular and numerical data to the expected format of background facts statements, it becomes much more applicable. While in processing it does not provide any significant advantage on rather more traditional methods such as Decision Trees, or more recent ones like Deep Symbolic Classification, it still gives comparable results. We showcase its limitations and points to improve, as well as potential use cases where it can be much more useful compared to traditional methods, such as recursive rule learning.
One of the fundamental challenges in reinforcement learning (RL) is to take a complex task and be able to decompose it to subtasks that are simpler for the RL agent to learn. In this paper, we report on our work that would identify subtasks by using some given positive and negative trajectories for solving the complex task. We assume that the states are represented by first-order predicate logic using which we devise a novel algorithm to identify the subtasks. Then we employ a Large Language Model (LLM) to generate first-order logic rule templates for achieving each subtask. Such rules were then further fined tuned to a rule-based policy via an Inductive Logic Programming (ILP)-based RL agent. Through experiments, we verify the accuracy of our algorithm in detecting subtasks which successfully detect all of the subtasks correctly. We also investigated the quality of the common-sense rules produced by the language model to achieve the subtasks. Our experiments show that our LLM-guided rule template generation can produce rules that are necessary for solving a subtask, which leads to solving complex tasks with fewer assumptions about predefined first-order logic predicates of the environment.
This work presents a novel systematic methodology to analyse the capabilities and limitations of Large Language Models (LLMs) with feedback from a formal inference engine, on logic theory induction. The analysis is complexity-graded w.r.t. rule dependency structure, allowing quantification of specific inference challenges on LLM performance. Integrating LLMs with formal methods is a promising frontier in the Natural Language Processing field, as an important avenue for improving model inference control and explainability. In particular, inductive learning over complex sets of facts and rules, poses unique challenges for current autoregressive models, as they lack explicit symbolic grounding. While they can be complemented by formal systems, the properties delivered by LLMs regarding inductive learning, are not well understood and quantified. Empirical results indicate that the largest LLMs can achieve competitive results against a SOTA Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) system baseline, but also that tracking long predicate relationship chains is a more difficult obstacle than theory complexity for LLMs.
This paper presents PROB-IRM, an approach that learns robust reward machines (RMs) for reinforcement learning (RL) agents from noisy execution traces. The key aspect of RM-driven RL is the exploitation of a finite-state machine that decomposes the agent's task into different subtasks. PROB-IRM uses a state-of-the-art inductive logic programming framework robust to noisy examples to learn RMs from noisy traces using the Bayesian posterior degree of beliefs, thus ensuring robustness against inconsistencies. Pivotal for the results is the interleaving between RM learning and policy learning: a new RM is learned whenever the RL agent generates a trace that is believed not to be accepted by the current RM. To speed up the training of the RL agent, PROB-IRM employs a probabilistic formulation of reward shaping that uses the posterior Bayesian beliefs derived from the traces. Our experimental analysis shows that PROB-IRM can learn (potentially imperfect) RMs from noisy traces and exploit them to train an RL agent to solve its tasks successfully. Despite the complexity of learning the RM from noisy traces, agents trained with PROB-IRM perform comparably to agents provided with handcrafted RMs.
We introduce a novel approach to program synthesis that decomposes complex functional tasks into simpler relational synthesis sub-tasks. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach using an off-the-shelf inductive logic programming (ILP) system on three challenging datasets. Our results show that (i) a relational representation can outperform a functional one, and (ii) an off-the-shelf ILP system with a relational encoding can outperform domain-specific approaches.
Many inductive logic programming (ILP) methods are incapable of learning programs from probabilistic background knowledge, e.g. coming from sensory data or neural networks with probabilities. We propose Propper, which handles flawed and probabilistic background knowledge by extending ILP with a combination of neurosymbolic inference, a continuous criterion for hypothesis selection (BCE) and a relaxation of the hypothesis constrainer (NoisyCombo). For relational patterns in noisy images, Propper can learn programs from as few as 8 examples. It outperforms binary ILP and statistical models such as a Graph Neural Network.
In this chapter, we address the problem of rule mining, beginning with essential background information, including measures of rule quality. We then explore various rule mining methodologies, categorized into three groups: inductive logic programming, path sampling and generalization, and linear programming. Following this, we delve into neurosymbolic methods, covering topics such as the integration of deep learning with rules, the use of embeddings for rule learning, and the application of large language models in rule learning.
Abstraction is key to human and artificial intelligence as it allows one to see common structure in otherwise distinct objects or situations and as such it is a key element for generality in AI. Anti-unification (or generalization) is \textit{the} part of theoretical computer science and AI studying abstraction. It has been successfully applied to various AI-related problems, most importantly inductive logic programming. Up to this date, anti-unification is studied only from a syntactic perspective in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to initiate an algebraic (i.e. semantic) theory of anti-unification within general algebras. This is motivated by recent applications to similarity and analogical proportions.
We introduce AutoCoder, the first Large Language Model to surpass GPT-4 Turbo (April 2024) and GPT-4o in pass@1 on the Human Eval benchmark test ($\mathbf{90.9\%}$ vs. $\mathbf{90.2\%}$). In addition, AutoCoder offers a more versatile code interpreter compared to GPT-4 Turbo and GPT-4o. It's code interpreter can install external packages instead of limiting to built-in packages. AutoCoder's training data is a multi-turn dialogue dataset created by a system combining agent interaction and external code execution verification, a method we term \textbf{\textsc{AIEV-Instruct}} (Instruction Tuning with Agent-Interaction and Execution-Verified). Compared to previous large-scale code dataset generation methods, \textsc{AIEV-Instruct} reduces dependence on proprietary large models and provides execution-validated code dataset. The code and the demo video is available in \url{https://github.com/bin123apple/AutoCoder}.
The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) is a general artificial intelligence benchmark that is currently unsolvable by any Machine Learning method, including Large Language Models (LLMs). It demands strong generalization and reasoning capabilities which are known to be weaknesses of Neural Network based systems. In this work, we propose a Program Synthesis system that uses Inductive Logic Programming (ILP), a branch of Symbolic AI, to solve ARC. We have manually defined a simple Domain Specific Language (DSL) that corresponds to a small set of object-centric abstractions relevant to ARC. This is the Background Knowledge used by ILP to create Logic Programs that provide reasoning capabilities to our system. The full system is capable of generalize to unseen tasks, since ILP can create Logic Program(s) from few examples, in the case of ARC: pairs of Input-Output grids examples for each task. These Logic Programs are able to generate Objects present in the Output grid and the combination of these can form a complete program that transforms an Input grid into an Output grid. We randomly chose some tasks from ARC that dont require more than the small number of the Object primitives we implemented and show that given only these, our system can solve tasks that require each, such different reasoning.
Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDPs) are a powerful framework for planning under uncertainty. They allow to model state uncertainty as a belief probability distribution. Approximate solvers based on Monte Carlo sampling show great success to relax the computational demand and perform online planning. However, scaling to complex realistic domains with many actions and long planning horizons is still a major challenge, and a key point to achieve good performance is guiding the action-selection process with domain-dependent policy heuristics which are tailored for the specific application domain. We propose to learn high-quality heuristics from POMDP traces of executions generated by any solver. We convert the belief-action pairs to a logical semantics, and exploit data- and time-efficient Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) to generate interpretable belief-based policy specifications, which are then used as online heuristics. We evaluate thoroughly our methodology on two notoriously challenging POMDP problems, involving large action spaces and long planning horizons, namely, rocksample and pocman. Considering different state-of-the-art online POMDP solvers, including POMCP, DESPOT and AdaOPS, we show that learned heuristics expressed in Answer Set Programming (ASP) yield performance superior to neural networks and similar to optimal handcrafted task-specific heuristics within lower computational time. Moreover, they well generalize to more challenging scenarios not experienced in the training phase (e.g., increasing rocks and grid size in rocksample, incrementing the size of the map and the aggressivity of ghosts in pocman).