Analyzing Differentiable Fuzzy Implications

Combining symbolic and neural approaches has gained considerable attention in the AI community, as it is often argued that the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches are complementary. One such trend in the literature are weakly supervised learning techniques that employ operators from fuzzy logics. In particular, they use prior background knowledge described in such logics to help the training of a neural network from unlabeled and noisy data. By interpreting logical symbols using neural networks (or grounding them), this background knowledge can be added to regular loss functions, hence making reasoning a part of learning. In this paper, we investigate how implications from the fuzzy logic literature behave in a differentiable setting. In such a setting, we analyze the differences between the formal properties of these fuzzy implications. It turns out that various fuzzy implications, including some of the most well-known, are highly unsuitable for use in a differentiable learning setting. A further finding shows a strong imbalance between gradients driven by the antecedent and the consequent of the implication. Furthermore, we introduce a new family of fuzzy implications (called sigmoidal implications) to tackle this phenomenon. Finally, we empirically show that it is possible to use Differentiable Fuzzy Logics for semi-supervised learning, and show that sigmoidal implications outperform other choices of fuzzy implications.Comment: 10 pages, 10 figures, accepted to 17th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2020). arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2002.0610

Reduced Implication-bias Logic Loss for Neuro-Symbolic Learning

Integrating logical reasoning and machine learning by approximating logical inference with differentiable operators is a widely used technique in Neuro-Symbolic systems. However, some differentiable operators could bring a significant bias during backpropagation and degrade the performance of Neuro-Symbolic learning. In this paper, we reveal that this bias, named \textit{Implication Bias} is common in loss functions derived from fuzzy logic operators. Furthermore, we propose a simple yet effective method to transform the biased loss functions into \textit{Reduced Implication-bias Logic Loss (RILL)} to address the above problem. Empirical study shows that RILL can achieve significant improvements compared with the biased logic loss functions, especially when the knowledge base is incomplete, and keeps more robust than the compared methods when labelled data is insufficient.Comment: ACML'2023 Journal Track(Accepted by Machine Learning Journal

Differentiable Logics for Neural Network Training and Verification

The rising popularity of neural networks (NNs) in recent years and their increasing prevalence in real-world applications have drawn attention to the importance of their verification. While verification is known to be computationally difficult theoretically, many techniques have been proposed for solving it in practice. It has been observed in the literature that by default neural networks rarely satisfy logical constraints that we want to verify. A good course of action is to train the given NN to satisfy said constraint prior to verifying them. This idea is sometimes referred to as continuous verification, referring to the loop between training and verification. Usually training with constraints is implemented by specifying a translation for a given formal logic language into loss functions. These loss functions are then used to train neural networks. Because for training purposes these functions need to be differentiable, these translations are called differentiable logics (DL). This raises several research questions. What kind of differentiable logics are possible? What difference does a specific choice of DL make in the context of continuous verification? What are the desirable criteria for a DL viewed from the point of view of the resulting loss function? In this extended abstract we will discuss and answer these questions.Comment: FOMLAS'22 pape

Grounding LTLf specifications in images

A critical challenge in neurosymbolic approaches is to handle the symbol grounding problem without direct supervision. That is mapping high-dimensional raw data into an interpretation over a finite set of abstract concepts with a known meaning, without using labels. In this work, we ground symbols into sequences of images by exploiting symbolic logical knowledge in the form of Linear Temporal Logic over finite traces (LTLf) formulas, and sequence-level labels expressing if a sequence of images is compliant or not with the given formula. Our approach is based on translating the LTLf formula into an equivalent deterministic finite automaton (DFA) and interpreting the latter in fuzzy logic. Experiments show that our system outperforms recurrent neural networks in sequence classification and can reach high image classification accuracy without being trained with any single-image label

Deep Learning with Logical Constraints

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in exploiting logically specified background knowledge in order to obtain neural models (i) with a better performance, (ii) able to learn from less data, and/or (iii) guaranteed to be compliant with the background knowledge itself, e.g., for safety-critical applications. In this survey, we retrace such works and categorize them based on (i) the logical language that they use to express the background knowledge and (ii) the goals that they achieve.Comment: Survey paper. IJCAI 202