Using Large Language Models for (De-)Formalization and Natural Argumentation Exercises for Beginner's Students
2304.06186
0
0
š¬
Abstract
We describe two systems currently being developed that use large language models for the automatized correction of (i) exercises in translating back and forth between natural language and the languages of propositional logic and first-order predicate logic and (ii) exercises in writing simple arguments in natural language in non-mathematical scenarios.
Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:
Overview
ā¢ Two systems are being developed that use large language models to automatically correct exercises. ā¢ The first system deals with translating between natural language and the languages of propositional logic and first-order predicate logic. ā¢ The second system helps with writing simple arguments in natural language for non-mathematical scenarios.
Plain English Explanation
These new systems aim to make it easier for people to learn and practice formal logic. Translating between natural language and the specialized languages of propositional logic and first-order predicate logic can be challenging. The first system is designed to automatically check and correct these translation exercises, providing feedback to help students improve.
Similarly, crafting logical arguments in plain language for non-mathematical situations is a valuable skill, but can be tricky to master. The second system is intended to assist with that process, automatically evaluating simple arguments and offering guidance to refine them.
Both systems leverage the power of large language models - AI systems trained on massive amounts of text data. These models can understand and generate human-like language, allowing them to analyze the logic and reasoning in the exercises. By automating the correction and feedback process, these systems could make it more accessible for people to develop their skills in formal logic and argumentation.
Technical Explanation
The paper describes the development of two prototype systems that utilize large language models for automated exercise correction. The first system is designed for exercises that involve translating between natural language and the symbolic languages of propositional logic and first-order predicate logic.
The second system targets exercises where students are asked to construct simple arguments in natural language for non-mathematical scenarios. Both systems employ large language models trained on vast corpora of text data, allowing them to understand and evaluate the logical structure and reasoning presented in the exercises.
The authors detail the architecture and training process for these systems, as well as the experimental setups used to validate their performance. Key insights from the research include the capabilities and limitations of current language models in handling logical reasoning tasks, as well as potential avenues for further improving the systems' abilities.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a promising approach to leveraging large language models for automatically correcting logical reasoning exercises. However, the authors acknowledge several caveats and limitations to the current systems. For instance, the models may struggle with more complex logical constructs or corner cases that require deeper reasoning abilities.
Additionally, the paper focuses on relatively simple non-mathematical arguments, leaving open questions about the systems' performance on more sophisticated logical reasoning tasks. Further research would be needed to explore the scalability and robustness of these techniques across a broader range of logical reasoning challenges.
It's also worth considering the potential biases and limitations inherent in the language models themselves, which could inadvertently influence the feedback and guidance provided to students. Careful monitoring and validation would be crucial to ensure these systems do not reinforce undesirable biases or oversimplify the nuances of logical reasoning.
Conclusion
Overall, the development of these automated systems for correcting logical reasoning exercises represents an exciting application of large language models. By reducing the burdens of manual grading and feedback, these tools have the potential to make the learning and practice of formal logic more accessible and engaging for students.
However, the research also highlights the need for continued advancements in the capabilities of language models to handle more complex logical reasoning tasks. As these systems evolve, it will be important to carefully evaluate their performance, limitations, and potential biases to ensure they are truly enhancing logical reasoning education in a meaningful and equitable way.
Related Papers
š¬
Argumentative Large Language Models for Explainable and Contestable Decision-Making
Gabriel Freedman, Adam Dejl, Deniz Gorur, Xiang Yin, Antonio Rago, Francesca Toni
0
0
The diversity of knowledge encoded in large language models (LLMs) and their ability to apply this knowledge zero-shot in a range of settings makes them a promising candidate for use in decision-making. However, they are currently limited by their inability to reliably provide outputs which are explainable and contestable. In this paper, we attempt to reconcile these strengths and weaknesses by introducing a method for supplementing LLMs with argumentative reasoning. Concretely, we introduce argumentative LLMs, a method utilising LLMs to construct argumentation frameworks, which then serve as the basis for formal reasoning in decision-making. The interpretable nature of these argumentation frameworks and formal reasoning means that any decision made by the supplemented LLM may be naturally explained to, and contested by, humans. We demonstrate the effectiveness of argumentative LLMs experimentally in the decision-making task of claim verification. We obtain results that are competitive with, and in some cases surpass, comparable state-of-the-art techniques.
5/6/2024
š¬
Improving the Diproche CNL through Autoformalization via Large Language Models
Merlin Carl (Europa-Universitat Flensburg)
0
0
The Diproche system is an automated proof checker for texts written in a controlled fragment of German, designed for didactical applications in classes introducing students to proofs for the first time. The first version of the system used a controlled natural language for which a Prolog formalization routine was written. In this paper, we explore the possibility of prompting large language models for autoformalization in the context of Diproche, with encouraging first results.
4/11/2024
Lemur: Integrating Large Language Models in Automated Program Verification
Haoze Wu, Clark Barrett, Nina Narodytska
0
0
The demonstrated code-understanding capability of LLMs raises the question of whether they can be used for automated program verification, a task that demands high-level abstract reasoning about program properties that is challenging for verification tools. We propose a general methodology to combine the power of LLMs and automated reasoners for automated program verification. We formally describe this methodology as a set of transition rules and prove its soundness. We instantiate the calculus as a sound automated verification procedure and demonstrate practical improvements on a set of synthetic and competition benchmarks.
4/26/2024
Towards Logically Consistent Language Models via Probabilistic Reasoning
Diego Calanzone, Stefano Teso, Antonio Vergari
0
0
Large language models (LLMs) are a promising venue for natural language understanding and generation tasks. However, current LLMs are far from reliable: they are prone to generate non-factual information and, more crucially, to contradict themselves when prompted to reason about beliefs of the world. These problems are currently addressed with large scale fine-tuning or by delegating consistent reasoning to external tools. In this work, we strive for a middle ground and introduce a training objective based on principled probabilistic reasoning that teaches a LLM to be consistent with external knowledge in the form of a set of facts and rules. Fine-tuning with our loss on a limited set of facts enables our LLMs to be more logically consistent than previous baselines and allows them to extrapolate to unseen but semantically similar factual knowledge more systematically.
4/22/2024