Mark Law

Zlatina Mileva, Antonis Bikakis, Fabio Aurelio D'Asaro et al.

Argumentation is a very active research field of Artificial Intelligence concerned with the representation and evaluation of arguments used in dialogues between humans and/or artificial agents. Acceptability semantics of formal argumentation systems define the criteria for the acceptance or rejection of arguments. Several software systems, known as argumentation solvers, have been developed to compute the accepted/rejected arguments using such criteria. These include systems that learn to identify the accepted arguments using non-interpretable methods. In this paper we present a novel framework, which uses an Inductive Logic Programming approach to learn the acceptability semantics for several abstract and structured argumentation frameworks in an interpretable way. Through an empirical evaluation we show that our framework outperforms existing argumentation solvers, thus opening up new future research directions in the area of formal argumentation and human-machine dialogues.

Daniel Cunnington, Mark Law, Jorge Lobo et al.

Neuro-Symbolic AI (NeSy) holds promise to ensure the safe deployment of AI systems, as interpretable symbolic techniques provide formal behaviour guarantees. The challenge is how to effectively integrate neural and symbolic computation, to enable learning and reasoning from raw data. Existing pipelines that train the neural and symbolic components sequentially require extensive labelling, whereas end-to-end approaches are limited in terms of scalability, due to the combinatorial explosion in the symbol grounding problem. In this paper, we leverage the implicit knowledge within foundation models to enhance the performance in NeSy tasks, whilst reducing the amount of data labelling and manual engineering. We introduce a new architecture, called NeSyGPT, which fine-tunes a vision-language foundation model to extract symbolic features from raw data, before learning a highly expressive answer set program to solve a downstream task. Our comprehensive evaluation demonstrates that NeSyGPT has superior accuracy over various baselines, and can scale to complex NeSy tasks. Finally, we highlight the effective use of a large language model to generate the programmatic interface between the neural and symbolic components, significantly reducing the amount of manual engineering required.

Mark Law

The goal of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) is to learn a program that explains a set of examples. Until recently, most research on ILP targeted learning Prolog programs. The ILASP system instead learns Answer Set Programs (ASP). Learning such expressive programs widens the applicability of ILP considerably; for example, enabling preference learning, learning common-sense knowledge, including defaults and exceptions, and learning non-deterministic theories. Early versions of ILASP can be considered meta-level ILP approaches, which encode a learning task as a logic program and delegate the search to an ASP solver. More recently, ILASP has shifted towards a new method, inspired by conflict-driven SAT and ASP solvers. The fundamental idea of the approach, called Conflict-driven ILP (CDILP), is to iteratively interleave the search for a hypothesis with the generation of constraints which explain why the current hypothesis does not cover a particular example. These coverage constraints allow ILASP to rule out not just the current hypothesis, but an entire class of hypotheses that do not satisfy the coverage constraint. This paper formalises the CDILP approach and presents the ILASP3 and ILASP4 systems for CDILP, which are demonstrated to be more scalable than previous ILASP systems, particularly in the presence of noise. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

Daniel Cunnington, Alessandra Russo, Mark Law et al.

Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) systems learn generalised, interpretable rules in a data-efficient manner utilising existing background knowledge. However, current ILP systems require training examples to be specified in a structured logical format. Neural networks learn from unstructured data, although their learned models may be difficult to interpret and are vulnerable to data perturbations at run-time. This paper introduces a hybrid neural-symbolic learning framework, called NSL, that learns interpretable rules from labelled unstructured data. NSL combines pre-trained neural networks for feature extraction with FastLAS, a state-of-the-art ILP system for rule learning under the answer set semantics. Features extracted by the neural components define the structured context of labelled examples and the confidence of the neural predictions determines the level of noise of the examples. Using the scoring function of FastLAS, NSL searches for short, interpretable rules that generalise over such noisy examples. We evaluate our framework on propositional and first-order classification tasks using the MNIST dataset as raw data. Specifically, we demonstrate that NSL is able to learn robust rules from perturbed MNIST data and achieve comparable or superior accuracy when compared to neural network and random forest baselines whilst being more general and interpretable.

Mark Law, Alessandra Russo, Krysia Broda

The goal of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) is to learn a program that explains a set of examples in the context of some pre-existing background knowledge. Until recently, most research on ILP targeted learning Prolog programs. Our own ILASP system instead learns Answer Set Programs, including normal rules, choice rules and hard and weak constraints. Learning such expressive programs widens the applicability of ILP considerably; for example, enabling preference learning, learning common-sense knowledge, including defaults and exceptions, and learning non-deterministic theories. In this paper, we first give a general overview of ILASP's learning framework and its capabilities. This is followed by a comprehensive summary of the evolution of the ILASP system, presenting the strengths and weaknesses of each version, with a particular emphasis on scalability.

Daniel Furelos-Blanco, Mark Law, Alessandra Russo et al.

In this work we present ISA, a novel approach for learning and exploiting subgoals in reinforcement learning (RL). Our method relies on inducing an automaton whose transitions are subgoals expressed as propositional formulas over a set of observable events. A state-of-the-art inductive logic programming system is used to learn the automaton from observation traces perceived by the RL agent. The reinforcement learning and automaton learning processes are interleaved: a new refined automaton is learned whenever the RL agent generates a trace not recognized by the current automaton. We evaluate ISA in several gridworld problems and show that it performs similarly to a method for which automata are given in advance. We also show that the learned automata can be exploited to speed up convergence through reward shaping and transfer learning across multiple tasks. Finally, we analyze the running time and the number of traces that ISA needs to learn an automata, and the impact that the number of observable events has on the learner's performance.

Andrew Cropper, Richard Evans, Mark Law

General game playing (GGP) is a framework for evaluating an agent's general intelligence across a wide range of tasks. In the GGP competition, an agent is given the rules of a game (described as a logic program) that it has never seen before. The task is for the agent to play the game, thus generating game traces. The winner of the GGP competition is the agent that gets the best total score over all the games. In this paper, we invert this task: a learner is given game traces and the task is to learn the rules that could produce the traces. This problem is central to inductive general game playing (IGGP). We introduce a technique that automatically generates IGGP tasks from GGP games. We introduce an IGGP dataset which contains traces from 50 diverse games, such as Sudoku, Sokoban, and Checkers. We claim that IGGP is difficult for existing inductive logic programming (ILP) approaches. To support this claim, we evaluate existing ILP systems on our dataset. Our empirical results show that most of the games cannot be correctly learned by existing systems. The best performing system solves only 40% of the tasks perfectly. Our results suggest that IGGP poses many challenges to existing approaches. Furthermore, because we can automatically generate IGGP tasks from GGP games, our dataset will continue to grow with the GGP competition, as new games are added every year. We therefore think that the IGGP problem and dataset will be valuable for motivating and evaluating future research.

Mark Law, Alessandra Russo, Krysia Broda

In recent years, non-monotonic Inductive Logic Programming has received growing interest. Specifically, several new learning frameworks and algorithms have been introduced for learning under the answer set semantics, allowing the learning of common-sense knowledge involving defaults and exceptions, which are essential aspects of human reasoning. In this paper, we present a noise-tolerant generalisation of the learning from answer sets framework. We evaluate our ILASP3 system, both on synthetic and on real datasets, represented in the new framework. In particular, we show that on many of the datasets ILASP3 achieves a higher accuracy than other ILP systems that have previously been applied to the datasets, including a recently proposed differentiable learning framework.