Abstract:Recent years have witnessed the rapid development of Neuro-Symbolic (NeSy) AI systems, which integrate symbolic reasoning into deep neural networks. However, most of the existing benchmarks for NeSy AI fail to provide long-horizon reasoning tasks with complex multi-agent interactions. Furthermore, they are usually constrained by fixed and simplistic logical rules over limited entities, making them far from real-world complexities. To address these crucial gaps, we introduce LogiCity, the first simulator based on customizable first-order logic (FOL) for an urban-like environment with multiple dynamic agents. LogiCity models diverse urban elements using semantic and spatial concepts, such as IsAmbulance(X) and IsClose(X, Y). These concepts are used to define FOL rules that govern the behavior of various agents. Since the concepts and rules are abstractions, they can be universally applied to cities with any agent compositions, facilitating the instantiation of diverse scenarios. Besides, a key feature of LogiCity is its support for user-configurable abstractions, enabling customizable simulation complexities for logical reasoning. To explore various aspects of NeSy AI, LogiCity introduces two tasks, one features long-horizon sequential decision-making, and the other focuses on one-step visual reasoning, varying in difficulty and agent behaviors. Our extensive evaluation reveals the advantage of NeSy frameworks in abstract reasoning. Moreover, we highlight the significant challenges of handling more complex abstractions in long-horizon multi-agent scenarios or under high-dimensional, imbalanced data. With its flexible design, various features, and newly raised challenges, we believe LogiCity represents a pivotal step forward in advancing the next generation of NeSy AI. All the code and data are open-sourced at our website.
Abstract:Advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have spurred a wave of LLM library learning systems for mathematical reasoning. These systems aim to learn a reusable library of tools, such as formal Isabelle lemmas or Python programs that are tailored to a family of tasks. Many of these systems are inspired by the human structuring of knowledge into reusable and extendable concepts, but do current methods actually learn reusable libraries of tools? We study two library learning systems for mathematics which both reported increased accuracy: LEGO-Prover and TroVE. We find that function reuse is extremely infrequent on miniF2F and MATH. Our followup ablation experiments suggest that, rather than reuse, self-correction and self-consistency are the primary drivers of the observed performance gains. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/ikb-a/curious-case
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) have become increasingly capable of handling diverse tasks with the aid of well-crafted prompts and integration of external tools, but as task complexity rises, the workflow involving LLMs can be complicated and thus challenging to implement and maintain. To address this challenge, we propose APPL, A Prompt Programming Language that acts as a bridge between computer programs and LLMs, allowing seamless embedding of prompts into Python functions, and vice versa. APPL provides an intuitive and Python-native syntax, an efficient parallelized runtime with asynchronous semantics, and a tracing module supporting effective failure diagnosis and replaying without extra costs. We demonstrate that APPL programs are intuitive, concise, and efficient through three representative scenarios: Chain-of-Thought with self-consistency (CoT-SC), ReAct tool use agent, and multi-agent chat. Experiments on three parallelizable workflows further show that APPL can effectively parallelize independent LLM calls, with a significant speedup ratio that almost matches the estimation.
Abstract:Autoformalization involves automatically translating informal math into formal theorems and proofs that are machine-verifiable. Euclidean geometry provides an interesting and controllable domain for studying autoformalization. In this paper, we introduce a neuro-symbolic framework for autoformalizing Euclidean geometry, which combines domain knowledge, SMT solvers, and large language models (LLMs). One challenge in Euclidean geometry is that informal proofs rely on diagrams, leaving gaps in texts that are hard to formalize. To address this issue, we use theorem provers to fill in such diagrammatic information automatically, so that the LLM only needs to autoformalize the explicit textual steps, making it easier for the model. We also provide automatic semantic evaluation for autoformalized theorem statements. We construct LeanEuclid, an autoformalization benchmark consisting of problems from Euclid's Elements and the UniGeo dataset formalized in the Lean proof assistant. Experiments with GPT-4 and GPT-4V show the capability and limitations of state-of-the-art LLMs on autoformalizing geometry problems. The data and code are available at https://github.com/loganrjmurphy/LeanEuclid.
Abstract:Iteratively improving and repairing source code with large language models (LLMs), known as refinement, has emerged as a popular way of generating programs that would be too complex to construct in one shot. Given a bank of test cases, together with a candidate program, an LLM can improve that program by being prompted with failed test cases. But it remains an open question how to best iteratively refine code, with prior work employing simple greedy or breadth-first strategies. We show here that refinement exposes an explore-exploit tradeoff: exploit by refining the program that passes the most test cases, or explore by refining a lesser considered program. We frame this as an arm-acquiring bandit problem, which we solve with Thompson Sampling. The resulting LLM-based program synthesis algorithm is broadly applicable: Across loop invariant synthesis, visual reasoning puzzles, and competition programming problems, we find that our new method can solve more problems using fewer language model calls.
Abstract:Specifications play a crucial role in neural network verification. They define the precise input regions we aim to verify, typically represented as L-infinity norm balls. While recent research suggests using neural activation patterns (NAPs) as specifications for verifying unseen test set data, it focuses on computing the most refined NAPs, often limited to very small regions in the input space. In this paper, we study the following problem: Given a neural network, find a minimal (coarsest) NAP that is sufficient for formal verification of the network's robustness. Finding the minimal NAP specification not only expands verifiable bounds but also provides insights into which neurons contribute to the model's robustness. To address this problem, we propose several exact and approximate approaches. Our exact approaches leverage the verification tool to find minimal NAP specifications in either a deterministic or statistical manner. Whereas the approximate methods efficiently estimate minimal NAPs using adversarial examples and local gradients, without making calls to the verification tool. This allows us to inspect potential causal links between neurons and the robustness of state-of-the-art neural networks, a task for which existing verification frameworks fail to scale. Our experimental results suggest that minimal NAP specifications require much smaller fractions of neurons compared to the most refined NAP specifications, yet they can significantly expand the verifiable boundaries to several orders of magnitude larger.
Abstract:Bridging logical reasoning and deep learning is crucial for advanced AI systems. In this work, we present a new framework that addresses this goal by generating interpretable and verifiable logical rules through differentiable learning, without relying on pre-specified logical structures. Our approach builds upon SATNet, a differentiable MaxSAT solver that learns the underlying rules from input-output examples. Despite its efficacy, the learned weights in SATNet are not straightforwardly interpretable, failing to produce human-readable rules. To address this, we propose a novel specification method called "maximum equality", which enables the interchangeability between the learned weights of SATNet and a set of propositional logical rules in weighted MaxSAT form. With the decoded weighted MaxSAT formula, we further introduce several effective verification techniques to validate it against the ground truth rules. Experiments on stream transformations and Sudoku problems show that our decoded rules are highly reliable: using exact solvers on them could achieve 100% accuracy, whereas the original SATNet fails to give correct solutions in many cases. Furthermore, we formally verify that our decoded logical rules are functionally equivalent to the ground truth ones.
Abstract:Graph neural networks (GNNs) have recently emerged as a promising approach for solving the Boolean Satisfiability Problem (SAT), offering potential alternatives to traditional backtracking or local search SAT solvers. However, despite the growing volume of literature in this field, there remains a notable absence of a unified dataset and a fair benchmark to evaluate and compare existing approaches. To address this crucial gap, we present G4SATBench, the first benchmark study that establishes a comprehensive evaluation framework for GNN-based SAT solvers. In G4SATBench, we meticulously curate a large and diverse set of SAT datasets comprising 7 problems with 3 difficulty levels and benchmark a broad range of GNN models across various prediction tasks, training objectives, and inference algorithms. To explore the learning abilities and comprehend the strengths and limitations of GNN-based SAT solvers, we also compare their solving processes with the heuristics in search-based SAT solvers. Our empirical results provide valuable insights into the performance of GNN-based SAT solvers and further suggest that existing GNN models can effectively learn a solving strategy akin to greedy local search but struggle to learn backtracking search in the latent space.
Abstract:The recent introduction of ChatGPT has drawn significant attention from both industry and academia due to its impressive capabilities in solving a diverse range of tasks, including language translation, text summarization, and computer programming. Its capability for writing, modifying, and even correcting code together with its ease of use and access is already dramatically impacting computer science education. This paper aims to explore how well ChatGPT can perform in an introductory-level functional language programming course. In our systematic evaluation, we treated ChatGPT as one of our students and demonstrated that it can achieve a grade B- and its rank in the class is 155 out of 314 students overall. Our comprehensive evaluation provides valuable insights into ChatGPT's impact from both student and instructor perspectives. Additionally, we identify several potential benefits that ChatGPT can offer to both groups. Overall, we believe that this study significantly clarifies and advances our understanding of ChatGPT's capabilities and potential impact on computer science education.
Abstract:Solving Constrained Horn Clauses (CHCs) is a fundamental challenge behind a wide range of verification and analysis tasks. Data-driven approaches show great promise in improving CHC solving without the painstaking manual effort of creating and tuning various heuristics. However, a large performance gap exists between data-driven CHC solvers and symbolic reasoning-based solvers. In this work, we develop a simple but effective framework, "Chronosymbolic Learning", which unifies symbolic information and numerical data points to solve a CHC system efficiently. We also present a simple instance of Chronosymbolic Learning with a data-driven learner and a BMC-styled reasoner. Despite its great simplicity, experimental results show the efficacy and robustness of our tool. It outperforms state-of-the-art CHC solvers on a dataset consisting of 288 benchmarks, including many instances with non-linear integer arithmetics.