54,636 research outputs found

    Neurons and Symbols: A Manifesto

    Get PDF
    We discuss the purpose of neural-symbolic integration including its principles, mechanisms and applications. We outline a cognitive computational model for neural-symbolic integration, position the model in the broader context of multi-agent systems, machine learning and automated reasoning, and list some of the challenges for the area of neural-symbolic computation to achieve the promise of effective integration of robust learning and expressive reasoning under uncertainty

    The Grand Challenges and Myths of Neural-Symbolic Computation

    Get PDF
    The construction of computational cognitive models integrating the connectionist and symbolic paradigms of artificial intelligence is a standing research issue in the field. The combination of logic-based inference and connectionist learning systems may lead to the construction of semantically sound computational cognitive models in artificial intelligence, computer and cognitive sciences. Over the last decades, results regarding the computation and learning of classical reasoning within neural networks have been promising. Nonetheless, there still remains much do be done. Artificial intelligence, cognitive and computer science are strongly based on several non-classical reasoning formalisms, methodologies and logics. In knowledge representation, distributed systems, hardware design, theorem proving, systems specification and verification classical and non-classical logics have had a great impact on theory and real-world applications. Several challenges for neural-symbolic computation are pointed out, in particular for classical and non-classical computation in connectionist systems. We also analyse myths about neural-symbolic computation and shed new light on them considering recent research advances

    Automated Reasoning and Presentation Support for Formalizing Mathematics in Mizar

    Full text link
    This paper presents a combination of several automated reasoning and proof presentation tools with the Mizar system for formalization of mathematics. The combination forms an online service called MizAR, similar to the SystemOnTPTP service for first-order automated reasoning. The main differences to SystemOnTPTP are the use of the Mizar language that is oriented towards human mathematicians (rather than the pure first-order logic used in SystemOnTPTP), and setting the service in the context of the large Mizar Mathematical Library of previous theorems,definitions, and proofs (rather than the isolated problems that are solved in SystemOnTPTP). These differences poses new challenges and new opportunities for automated reasoning and for proof presentation tools. This paper describes the overall structure of MizAR, and presents the automated reasoning systems and proof presentation tools that are combined to make MizAR a useful mathematical service.Comment: To appear in 10th International Conference on. Artificial Intelligence and Symbolic Computation AISC 201

    End-to-End Differentiable Proving

    Get PDF
    We introduce neural networks for end-to-end differentiable proving of queries to knowledge bases by operating on dense vector representations of symbols. These neural networks are constructed recursively by taking inspiration from the backward chaining algorithm as used in Prolog. Specifically, we replace symbolic unification with a differentiable computation on vector representations of symbols using a radial basis function kernel, thereby combining symbolic reasoning with learning subsymbolic vector representations. By using gradient descent, the resulting neural network can be trained to infer facts from a given incomplete knowledge base. It learns to (i) place representations of similar symbols in close proximity in a vector space, (ii) make use of such similarities to prove queries, (iii) induce logical rules, and (iv) use provided and induced logical rules for multi-hop reasoning. We demonstrate that this architecture outperforms ComplEx, a state-of-the-art neural link prediction model, on three out of four benchmark knowledge bases while at the same time inducing interpretable function-free first-order logic rules.Comment: NIPS 2017 camera-ready, NIPS 201
    • …
    corecore