David Penz

Christian Ganhör, David Penz, Navid Rekabsaz et al.

Collaborative filtering algorithms capture underlying consumption patterns, including the ones specific to particular demographics or protected information of users, e.g. gender, race, and location. These encoded biases can influence the decision of a recommendation system (RS) towards further separation of the contents provided to various demographic subgroups, and raise privacy concerns regarding the disclosure of users' protected attributes. In this work, we investigate the possibility and challenges of removing specific protected information of users from the learned interaction representations of a RS algorithm, while maintaining its effectiveness. Specifically, we incorporate adversarial training into the state-of-the-art MultVAE architecture, resulting in a novel model, Adversarial Variational Auto-Encoder with Multinomial Likelihood (Adv-MultVAE), which aims at removing the implicit information of protected attributes while preserving recommendation performance. We conduct experiments on the MovieLens-1M and LFM-2b-DemoBias datasets, and evaluate the effectiveness of the bias mitigation method based on the inability of external attackers in revealing the users' gender information from the model. Comparing with baseline MultVAE, the results show that Adv-MultVAE, with marginal deterioration in performance (w.r.t. NDCG and recall), largely mitigates inherent biases in the model on both datasets.

Alexander Beiser, David Penz, Nysret Musliu

Large language models (LLMs) achieve astonishing results on a wide range of tasks. However, their formal reasoning ability still lags behind. A promising approach is Neurosymbolic LLM reasoning. It works by using LLMs as translators from natural to formal languages and symbolic solvers for deriving correct results. Still, it remains unclear what the contributing factors to the success of Neurosymbolic LLM reasoning are. This paper shows that one important factor is the choice of the formal language. By comparing 4 formal languages on 3 datasets over 6 LLMs, we show that the choice of formal language affects both the syntactic and the semantic reasoning capability. Thereby, we introduce the intermediate language challenge, which is the challenge of picking a suitable formal language for neurosymbolic reasoning. Further, we compare the effects of using different in-context-learning examples in an ablation study. We conclude that on average, context-aware encodings help LLMs to reason, while there is no apparent effect of using comments or markdown syntax.

Alexander Beiser, David Penz, Nysret Musliu

Large language models (LLMs) achieve astonishing results on a wide range of tasks. However, their formal reasoning ability still lags behind. A promising approach is Neurosymbolic LLM reasoning. It works by using LLMs as translators from natural to formal languages and symbolic solvers for deriving correct results. Still, the contributing factors to the success of Neurosymbolic LLM reasoning remain unclear. This paper demonstrates that one previously overlooked factor is the choice of the formal language. We introduce the intermediate language challenge: selecting a suitable formal language for neurosymbolic reasoning. By comparing four formal languages across three datasets and seven LLMs, we show that the choice of formal language affects both syntactic and semantic reasoning capabilities. We also discuss the varying effects across different LLMs.