No Arabic abstract
In this paper, we consider the problem of learning a first-order theorem prover that uses a representation of beliefs in mathematical claims to construct proofs. The inspiration for doing so comes from the practices of human mathematicians where plausible reasoning is applied in addition to deductive reasoning to find proofs. Towards this end, we introduce a representation of beliefs that assigns probabilities to the exhaustive and mutually exclusive first-order possibilities found in Hintikkas theory of distributive normal forms. The representation supports Bayesian update, induces a distribution on statements that does not enforce that logically equivalent statements are assigned the same probability, and suggests an embedding of statements into an associated Hilbert space. We then examine conjecturing as model selection and an alternating-turn game of determining consistency. The game is amenable (in principle) to self-play training to learn beliefs and derive a prover that is complete when logical omniscience is attained and sound when beliefs are reasonable. The representation has super-exponential space requirements as a function of quantifier depth so the ideas in this paper should be taken as theoretical. We will comment on how abstractions can be used to control the space requirements at the cost of completeness.
Automated theorem provers have traditionally relied on manually tuned heuristics to guide how they perform proof search. Deep reinforcement learning has been proposed as a way to obviate the need for such heuristics, however, its deployment in automated theorem proving remains a challenge. In this paper we introduce TRAIL, a system that applies deep reinforcement learning to saturation-based theorem proving. TRAIL leverages (a) a novel neural representation of the state of a theorem prover and (b) a novel characterization of the inference selection process in terms of an attention-based action policy. We show through systematic analysis that these mechanisms allow TRAIL to significantly outperform previous reinforcement-learning-based theorem provers on two benchmark datasets for first-order logic automated theorem proving (proving around 15% more theorems).
A major challenge in applying machine learning to automated theorem proving is the scarcity of training data, which is a key ingredient in training successful deep learning models. To tackle this problem, we propose an approach that relies on training with synthetic theorems, generated from a set of axioms. We show that such theorems can be used to train an automated prover and that the learned prover transfers successfully to human-generated theorems. We demonstrate that a prover trained exclusively on synthetic theorems can solve a substantial fraction of problems in TPTP, a benchmark dataset that is used to compare state-of-the-art heuristic provers. Our approach outperforms a model trained on human-generated problems in most axiom sets, thereby showing the promise of using synthetic data for this task.
There is a wide gap between symbolic reasoning and deep learning. In this research, we explore the possibility of using deep learning to improve symbolic reasoning. Briefly, in a reasoning system, a deep feedforward neural network is used to guide rewriting processes after learning from algebraic reasoning examples produced by humans. To enable the neural network to recognise patterns of algebraic expressions with non-deterministic sizes, reduced partial trees are used to represent the expressions. Also, to represent both top-down and bottom-up information of the expressions, a centralisation technique is used to improve the reduced partial trees. Besides, symbolic association vectors and rule application records are used to improve the rewriting processes. Experimental results reveal that the algebraic reasoning examples can be accurately learnt only if the feedforward neural network has enough hidden layers. Also, the centralisation technique, the symbolic association vectors and the rule application records can reduce error rates of reasoning. In particular, the above approaches have led to 4.6% error rate of reasoning on a dataset of linear equations, differentials and integrals.
Standard approaches to probabilistic reasoning require that one possesses an explicit model of the distribution in question. But, the empirical learning of models of probability distributions from partial observations is a problem for which efficient algorithms are generally not known. In this work we consider the use of bounded-degree fragments of the sum-of-squares logic as a probability logic. Prior work has shown that we can decide refutability for such fragments in polynomial-time. We propose to use such fragments to answer queries about whether a given probability distribution satisfies a given system of constraints and bounds on expected values. We show that in answering such queries, such constraints and bounds can be implicitly learned from partial observations in polynomial-time as well. It is known that this logic is capable of deriving many bounds that are useful in probabilistic analysis. We show here that it furthermore captures useful polynomial-time fragments of resolution. Thus, these fragments are also quite expressive.
When faced with learning challenging new tasks, humans often follow sequences of steps that allow them to incrementally build up the necessary skills for performing these new tasks. However, in machine learning, models are most often trained to solve the target tasks directly.Inspired by human learning, we propose a novel curriculum learning approach which decomposes challenging tasks into sequences of easier intermediate goals that are used to pre-train a model before tackling the target task. We focus on classification tasks, and design the intermediate tasks using an automatically constructed label hierarchy. We train the model at each level of the hierarchy, from coarse labels to fine labels, transferring acquired knowledge across these levels. For instance, the model will first learn to distinguish animals from objects, and then use this acquired knowledge when learning to classify among more fine-grained classes such as cat, dog, car, and truck. Most existing curriculum learning algorithms for supervised learning consist of scheduling the order in which the training examples are presented to the model. In contrast, our approach focuses on the output space of the model. We evaluate our method on several established datasets and show significant performance gains especially on classification problems with many labels. We also evaluate on a new synthetic dataset which allows us to study multiple aspects of our method.