Identifying Implicit Premises for Logical Reconstruction of Argument Graphs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18821v1
• Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 11:23:12 GMT
• Title: Identifying Implicit Premises for Logical Reconstruction of Argument Graphs
• Abstract summary: We propose a neuro-symbolic pipeline that uses large language models (LLMs) to generate implicit premises that are translated into logical formulae.<n>Our approach is evaluated on the Microtext Argumentative Corpus.
• Score: 8.171594942398334
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The logical reconstruction of argument graphs from natural language text is challenging because of the prevalence of enthymemes (i.e., arguments with implicit premises). There are natural language processing methods for identifying enthymemes in text, and there are symbolic methods based on abduction for identifying missing premises in a logical representation of enthymemes. However, there is a need for methods to generate implicit premises to logically show a known entailment or contradiction relationship between a pair of statements. To address this, we propose a neuro-symbolic pipeline that uses large language models (LLMs) to generate intermediate implicit premises that are translated into logical formulae and used with logical formulae representing explicit premises and explicit claims to show the logical relationships between them (entailment, contradiction, or neutrality). Our approach is evaluated on the Microtext Argumentative Corpus.

Related papers

• Making Implicit Premises Explicit in Logical Understanding of Enthymemes [8.171594942398334]
  Real-world arguments in text and dialogues are normally enthymemes (i.e. some of their premises and/or claims are implicit)<n>Natural language processing (NLP) methods for handling enthymemes can potentially identify enthymemes in text but they do not decode their underlying logic.<n>We propose a pipeline that integrates: (1) a large language model (LLM) to generate intermediate implicit premises based on the explicit premise and claim; (2) another LLM to translate the natural language into logical formulas; and (3) a neuro-symbolic reasoner based on a SAT solver to determine entailment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T10:12:10Z)
• Are Language Models Efficient Reasoners? A Perspective from Logic Programming [109.47572890883248]
  Modern language models (LMs) exhibit strong deductive reasoning capabilities, yet standard evaluations emphasize correctness while overlooking a key aspect of human-like reasoning: efficiency.<n>We propose a framework for assessing LM reasoning efficiency through the lens of logic programming.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-29T15:30:31Z)
• A Reduction of Input/Output Logics to SAT [51.82266520875928]
  Deontic logics are formalisms for reasoning over norms, obligations, permissions and prohibitions.<n>In this paper, an automation approach for I/O logics is presented that makes use of suitable reductions to propositional satisfiability problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T09:22:26Z)
• Reasoning is about giving reasons [55.56111618153049]
  We show that we can identify and extract the logical structure of natural language arguments in three popular reasoning datasets with high accuracies.<n>Our approach supports all forms of reasoning that depend on the logical structure of the natural language argument.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T07:26:53Z)
• Dialogue-based Explanations for Logical Reasoning using Structured Argumentation [0.06138671548064355]
  We identify structural weaknesses of the state-of-the-art and propose a generic argumentation-based approach to address these problems.<n>Our work provides dialogue models as dialectic-proof procedures to compute and explain a query answer.<n>This allows us to construct dialectical proof trees as explanations, which are more expressive and arguably more intuitive than existing explanation formalisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T22:26:18Z)
• TabVer: Tabular Fact Verification with Natural Logic [11.002475880349452]
  We propose a set-theoretic interpretation of numerals and arithmetic functions in the context of natural logic. We leverage large language models to generate arithmetic expressions by generating questions about salient parts of a claim which are answered by executing functions on tables. In a few-shot setting on FEVEROUS, we achieve an accuracy of 71.4, outperforming both fully neural and symbolic reasoning models by 3.4 points.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T00:36:34Z)
• Understanding Enthymemes in Argument Maps: Bridging Argument Mining and Logic-based Argumentation [11.633929083694388]
  In this paper, we assume that an argument map contains the premises and claims of arguments, and support and attack relationships between them. To understand and to automatically analyse that argument map, it would be desirable to instantiate that argument map with logical arguments. We address this need by using classical logic for representing the explicit information in the text, and using default logic for representing the implicit information in the text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-16T10:30:30Z)
• 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)
• Modeling Hierarchical Reasoning Chains by Linking Discourse Units and Key Phrases for Reading Comprehension [80.99865844249106]
  We propose a holistic graph network (HGN) which deals with context at both discourse level and word level, as the basis for logical reasoning. Specifically, node-level and type-level relations, which can be interpreted as bridges in the reasoning process, are modeled by a hierarchical interaction mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T07:34:27Z)
• Discourse-Aware Graph Networks for Textual Logical Reasoning [142.0097357999134]
  Passage-level logical relations represent entailment or contradiction between propositional units (e.g., a concluding sentence) We propose logic structural-constraint modeling to solve the logical reasoning QA and introduce discourse-aware graph networks (DAGNs) The networks first construct logic graphs leveraging in-line discourse connectives and generic logic theories, then learn logic representations by end-to-end evolving the logic relations with an edge-reasoning mechanism and updating the graph features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-04T14:38:49Z)

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.