Robust Hypothesis Generation: LLM-Automated Language Bias for Inductive Logic Programming

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.21486v1
• Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 17:53:38 GMT
• Title: Robust Hypothesis Generation: LLM-Automated Language Bias for Inductive Logic Programming
• Authors: Yang Yang, Jiemin Wu, Yutao Yue,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a novel framework integrating a multi-agent system, powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), with Inductive Logic Programming (ILP)<n>Our system's LLM agents autonomously define a structured symbolic vocabulary (predicates) and relational templates.<n>Experiments in diverse, challenging scenarios validate superior performance, paving a new path for automated, explainable, and verifiable hypothesis generation.
• Score: 3.641087660577424
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Automating robust hypothesis generation in open environments is pivotal for AI cognition. We introduce a novel framework integrating a multi-agent system, powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), with Inductive Logic Programming (ILP). Our system's LLM agents autonomously define a structured symbolic vocabulary (predicates) and relational templates , i.e., \emph{language bias} directly from raw textual data. This automated symbolic grounding (the construction of the language bias), traditionally an expert-driven bottleneck for ILP, then guides the transformation of text into facts for an ILP solver, which inductively learns interpretable rules. This approach overcomes traditional ILP's reliance on predefined symbolic structures and the noise-sensitivity of pure LLM methods. Extensive experiments in diverse, challenging scenarios validate superior performance, paving a new path for automated, explainable, and verifiable hypothesis generation.

Related papers

• From Language to Logic: A Bi-Level Framework for Structured Reasoning [6.075080928704587]
  Structured reasoning over natural language inputs remains a core challenge in artificial intelligence.<n>We propose a novel framework that maps language to logic through a two-stage process: high-level task abstraction and low-level logic generation.<n>Our approach significantly outperforms existing baselines in accuracy, with accuracy gains reaching as high as 40%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T11:24:09Z)
• Do LLMs Dream of Discrete Algorithms? [0.7646713951724011]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly transformed the landscape of artificial intelligence.<n>Their reliance on probabilistic inference limits their effectiveness in domains requiring strict logical reasoning.<n>This paper proposes a neurosymbolic approach that augments LLMs with logic-based reasoning modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-29T22:03:01Z)
• Say It Another Way: Auditing LLMs with a User-Grounded Automated Paraphrasing Framework [9.162876771766513]
  We introduce AUGMENT, a framework for generating controlled, realistic prompt paraphrases based on linguistic structure and user demographics.<n>AUGMENT ensures paraphrase quality through a combination of semantic, stylistic, and instruction-following criteria.<n>Our findings highlight the need for more representative and structured approaches to prompt variation in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-06T14:17:30Z)
• LatentQA: Teaching LLMs to Decode Activations Into Natural Language [72.87064562349742]
  We introduce LatentQA, the task of answering open-ended questions about model activations in natural language.<n>We propose Latent Interpretation Tuning (LIT), which finetunes a decoder LLM on a dataset of activations and associated question-answer pairs.<n>Our decoder also specifies a differentiable loss that we use to control models, such as debiasing models on stereotyped sentences and controlling the sentiment of generations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T18:59:33Z)
• Proof of Thought : Neurosymbolic Program Synthesis allows Robust and Interpretable Reasoning [1.3003982724617653]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing, yet they struggle with inconsistent reasoning. This research introduces Proof of Thought, a framework that enhances the reliability and transparency of LLM outputs. Key contributions include a robust type system with sort management for enhanced logical integrity, explicit representation of rules for clear distinction between factual and inferential knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-25T18:35:45Z)
• Large Language Models are Interpretable Learners [53.56735770834617]
  In this paper, we show a combination of Large Language Models (LLMs) and symbolic programs can bridge the gap between expressiveness and interpretability. The pretrained LLM with natural language prompts provides a massive set of interpretable modules that can transform raw input into natural language concepts. As the knowledge learned by LSP is a combination of natural language descriptions and symbolic rules, it is easily transferable to humans (interpretable) and other LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T02:18:15Z)
• DECIDER: A Dual-System Rule-Controllable Decoding Framework for Language Generation [57.07295906718989]
  Constrained decoding approaches aim to control the meaning or style of text generated by pre-trained large language (Ms also PLMs) for various tasks at inference time.<n>These methods often guide plausible continuations by greedily and explicitly selecting targets.<n>Inspired by cognitive dual-process theory, we propose a novel decoding framework DECIDER.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T11:49:08Z)
• Automating Knowledge Acquisition for Content-Centric Cognitive Agents Using LLMs [0.0]
  The paper describes a system that uses large language model (LLM) technology to support the automatic learning of new entries in an intelligent agent's semantic lexicon. The process is bootstrapped by an existing non-toy lexicon and a natural language generator that converts formal, ontologically-grounded representations of meaning into natural language sentences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-27T02:31:51Z)
• CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
  We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark. In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship. We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z)
• Language Models can be Logical Solvers [99.40649402395725]
  We introduce LoGiPT, a novel language model that directly emulates the reasoning processes of logical solvers. LoGiPT is fine-tuned on a newly constructed instruction-tuning dataset derived from revealing and refining the invisible reasoning process of deductive solvers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-10T16:23:50Z)
• Towards LogiGLUE: A Brief Survey and A Benchmark for Analyzing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models [56.34029644009297]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to overcome various limitations of formal Knowledge Representation (KR) systems. LLMs excel most in abductive reasoning, followed by deductive reasoning, while they are least effective at inductive reasoning. We study single-task training, multi-task training, and "chain-of-thought" knowledge distillation fine-tuning technique to assess the performance of model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T01:00:50Z)
• Logical Natural Language Generation from Open-Domain Tables [107.04385677577862]
  We propose a new task where a model is tasked with generating natural language statements that can be emphlogically entailed by the facts. To facilitate the study of the proposed logical NLG problem, we use the existing TabFact dataset citechen 2019tabfact featured with a wide range of logical/symbolic inferences. The new task poses challenges to the existing monotonic generation frameworks due to the mismatch between sequence order and logical order.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-22T06:03:10Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.