Solving Quantified Modal Logic Problems by Translation to Classical Logics
0
๐
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper evaluates the performance of Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems on problems from the QMLTP library of first-order modal logic problems.
- The problems are translated to both typed first-order and higher-order logic in the TPTP language using an embedding approach.
- First-order and higher-order logic ATP systems and model finders are used to solve the translated problems.
- The results from native modal logic ATP systems are also considered and compared to the embedding approach.
Plain English Explanation
The paper investigates how well automated theorem proving (ATP) systems can solve problems in first-order modal logic. Modal logic is a type of mathematical logic that can express concepts like necessity and possibility. The researchers took a set of modal logic problems from the QMLTP library and translated them into two different forms: typed first-order logic and higher-order logic. They then used various ATP systems and model finders to try to solve these translated problems.
The key findings are:
- The translation process is reliable and successful when using state-of-the-art ATP systems as the backend reasoners.
- The first-order and higher-order translations perform similarly in terms of solving the problems.
- The native modal logic ATP systems have comparable performance to the classical systems using the translation approach for proving theorems.
- However, the native modal logic ATP systems are outperformed by the translation approach for disproving conjectures.
- The translation approach can handle a wider range of modal logics than the native modal systems that were tested.
Overall, the research shows that translating modal logic problems to classical logic is an effective way to leverage powerful ATP systems for solving problems in modal logic. This could be useful for automating the verification of advanced logic programs or enabling large language models to engage with more formalized knowledge.
Technical Explanation
The paper evaluates the performance of Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems on problems from the QMLTP library of first-order modal logic problems. The researchers translated the modal logic problems to both typed first-order and higher-order logic in the TPTP language using an embedding approach. They then used first-order and higher-order logic ATP systems and model finders to solve the translated problems. Additionally, the results from native modal logic ATP systems were considered and compared to the embedding approach.
The key findings are:
- The embedding process is reliable and successful when state-of-the-art ATP systems are used as backend reasoners.
- The first-order and higher-order embeddings perform similarly in terms of solving the problems.
- The native modal logic ATP systems have comparable performance to classical systems using the embedding for proving theorems.
- However, the native modal logic ATP systems are outperformed by the embedding approach for disproving conjectures.
- The embedding approach can cope with a wider range of modal logics than the native modal systems considered.
The researchers note that this work could be useful for automating the verification of advanced logic programs or enabling large language models to engage with more formalized knowledge. The translation approach allows powerful classical ATP systems to be leveraged for solving problems in modal logic, which could lead to better ways of fine-tuning large language models on more formalized content.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thorough evaluation of the embedding approach for solving modal logic problems using classical ATP systems. The researchers acknowledge the limitations of the native modal logic ATP systems and demonstrate the advantages of the embedding approach, including its ability to handle a wider range of modal logics.
However, the paper does not explore the potential challenges of multi-agent planning under collaboration or the implications of this work for teaching higher-order logic. Additionally, the paper could have discussed the computational cost and scalability of the embedding approach, as well as any potential biases or limitations in the QMLTP library of problems.
Overall, the research presents a compelling approach for leveraging powerful classical ATP systems for solving problems in modal logic. The findings could have important implications for fields like automated reasoning, program verification, and the integration of formal and natural language processing.
Conclusion
This paper evaluates the performance of Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems on problems from the QMLTP library of first-order modal logic problems. The researchers translated the modal logic problems to both typed first-order and higher-order logic, and used a variety of ATP systems and model finders to solve the translated problems. They found that the embedding process is reliable and successful when using state-of-the-art ATP systems, and that the first-order and higher-order embeddings perform similarly. The native modal logic ATP systems had comparable performance to the classical systems using the embedding for proving theorems, but were outperformed by the embedding approach for disproving conjectures. The embedding approach was also able to handle a wider range of modal logics than the native modal systems.
These findings suggest that translating modal logic problems to classical logic is an effective way to leverage powerful ATP systems for solving problems in modal logic. This could have important implications for automating the verification of advanced logic programs, enabling large language models to engage with more formalized knowledge, and improving the way we teach and work with higher-order logic.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
๐
0
Solving Quantified Modal Logic Problems by Translation to Classical Logics
Alexander Steen, Geoff Sutcliffe, Christoph Benzmuller
This article describes an evaluation of Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems on problems taken from the QMLTP library of first-order modal logic problems. Principally, the problems are translated to both typed first-order and higher-order logic in the TPTP language using an embedding approach, and solved using first-order resp. higher-order logic ATP systems and model finders. Additionally, the results from native modal logic ATP systems are considered, and compared with the results from the embedding approach. The findings are that the embedding process is reliable and successful when state-of-the-art ATP systems are used as backend reasoners, The first-order and higher-order embeddings perform similarly, native modal logic ATP systems have comparable performance to classical systems using the embedding for proving theorems, native modal logic ATP systems are outperformed by the embedding approach for disproving conjectures, and the embedding approach can cope with a wider range of modal logics than the native modal systems considered.
Read more4/30/2024
0
Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning
Lachlan McGinness, Peter Baumgartner
In this paper we demonstrate how logic programming systems and Automated first-order logic Theorem Provers (ATPs) can improve the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) for logical reasoning tasks where the baseline performance is given by direct LLM solutions. We first evaluate LLM reasoning on steamroller problems using the PRONTOQA benchmark. We show how accuracy can be improved with a neuro-symbolic architecture where the LLM acts solely as a front-end for translating a given problem into a formal logic language and an automated reasoning engine is called for solving it. However, this approach critically hinges on the correctness of the LLM translation. To assess this translation correctness, we secondly define a framework of syntactic and semantic error categories. We implemented the framework and used it to identify errors that LLMs make in the benchmark domain. Based on these findings, we thirdly extended our method with capabilities for automatically correcting syntactic and semantic errors. For semantic error correction we integrate first-order logic ATPs, which is our main and novel contribution. We demonstrate that this approach reduces semantic errors significantly and further increases the accurracy of LLM logical reasoning.
Read more8/9/2024
0
Steamroller Problems: An Evaluation of LLM Reasoning Capability with Automated Theorem Prover Strategies
Lachlan McGinness, Peter Baumgartner
This study presents the first examination of the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to follow reasoning strategies that are used to guide Automated Theorem Provers (ATPs). We evaluate the performance of GPT4, GPT3.5 Turbo and Google's recent Gemini model on problems from a steamroller domain. In addition to determining accuracy we make use of the Natural Language Processing library spaCy to explore new methods of investigating LLM's reasoning capabilities. This led to one alarming result, the low correlation between correct reasoning and correct answers for any of the tested models. We found that the models' performance when using the ATP reasoning strategies was comparable to one-shot chain of thought and observe that attention to uncertainty in the accuracy results is critical when drawing conclusions about model performance. Consistent with previous speculation we confirm that LLMs have a preference for, and are best able to follow, bottom up reasoning processes. However, the reasoning strategies can still be beneficial for deriving small and relevant sets of formulas for external processing by a trusted inference engine.
Read more7/31/2024
๐งช
0
Scaling Synthetic Logical Reasoning Datasets with Context-Sensitive Declarative Grammars
Damien Sileo
Logical reasoning remains a challenge for natural language processing, but it can be improved by training language models to mimic theorem provers on procedurally generated problems. Previous work used domain-specific proof generation algorithms, which biases reasoning toward specific proof traces and limits auditability and extensibility. We present a simpler and more general declarative framework with flexible context-sensitive rules binding multiple languages (specifically, simplified English and the TPTP theorem-proving language). We construct first-order logic problems by selecting up to 32 premises and one hypothesis. We demonstrate that using semantic constraints during generation and careful English verbalization of predicates enhances logical reasoning without hurting natural English tasks. We use relatively small DeBERTa-v3 models to achieve state-of-the-art accuracy on the FOLIO human-authored logic dataset, surpassing GPT-4 in accuracy with or without an external solver by 12%.
Read more6/18/2024