Logical Neural Networks
Open accessAbstract
We propose a novel framework seamlessly providing key properties of both neural nets (learning) and symbolic logic (knowledge and reasoning). Every neuron has a meaning as a component of a formula in a weighted real-valued logic, yielding a highly intepretable disentangled representation. Inference is omnidirectional rather than focused on predefined target variables, and corresponds to logical reasoning, including classical first-order logic theorem proving as a special case. The model is end-to-end differentiable, and learning minimizes a novel loss function capturing logical contradiction, yielding resilience to inconsistent knowledge. It also enables the open-world assumption by maintaining bounds on truth values which can have probabilistic semantics, yielding resilience to incomplete knowledge.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
LNN is a neural network architecture in which neurons model a rigorously defined notion of weighted fuzzy or classical first-order logic.
“LNN is a neural network architecture in which neurons model a rigorously defined notion of weighted fuzzy or classical first-order logic.”
From A Semantic Parsing and Reasoning-Based Approach to Knowledge Base Question Answering (2021) · cites this paper as Riegel et al. 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [1][1] S. H. Bach, M. Broecheler, B. Huang, and L. Getoor. Hinge-loss markov random fields and probabilistic soft logic. The Journal of Machine Learning Research , 18(1):3846-3912, 2017. -
- [5][5] H. Dong, J. Mao, T. Lin, C. Wang, L. Li, and D. Zhou. Neural logic machines. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.11694 , 2019. - · arXiv
- [6][6] R. Evans and E. Grefenstette. Learning explanatory rules from noisy data. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , 61:1-64, 2018. -
- [7][7] R. Fagin and E. L. Wimmers. A formula for incorporating weights into scoring rules. Theoretical Computer Science , 239(2):309-338, 2000. -
- [8][8] M. Frank and P. Wolfe. An algorithm for quadratic programming. Naval research logistics quarterly , 3(1-2):95-110, 1956. -
- [9][9] A. S. d. Garcez and G. Zaverucha. The connectionist inductive learning and logic programming system. Applied Intelligence , 11(1):59-77, 1999. -
- [10][10] Y. Guo, Z. Pan, and J. Heflin. Lubm: A benchmark for owl knowledge base systems. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web , 3(2-3):158-182, 2005. -
- [11][11] P. Hájek. Metamathematics of fuzzy logic , volume 4. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. -
- [12][12] M. Jaggi. Revisiting frank-wolfe: Projection-free sparse convex optimization. In Proceedings of the 30th international conference on machine learning , pages 427-435, 2013. -
- [13][13] W. S. McCulloch and W. Pitts. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics , 5:115-133, 1943. -
- [15][15] M. Richardson and P. Domingos. Markov logic networks. Machine learning , 62(1-2):107-136, 2006. -
- [17][17] T. Rocktäschel and S. Riedel. End-to-end differentiable proving. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 3788-3800, 2017. -
- [18][18] S. Russell and P. Norvig. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , chapter 9, pages 322-325. Prentice Hall Press, USA, 3 edition, 2009. -
- [19][19] L. Serafini and A. d. Garcez. Logic tensor networks: Deep learning and logical reasoning from data and knowledge. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.04422 , 2016. - · arXiv
- [21][21] G. Sutcliffe. The tptp problem library and associated infrastructure. Journal of Automated Reasoning , 43(4):337, 2009. -
- [22][22] G. G. Towell and J. W. Shavlik. Knowledge-based artificial neural networks. Artificial intelligence , 70(1-2):119-165, 1994. -
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review of some techniques for inclusion of domain-knowledge into deep neural networks
Dash, T., Chitlangia, S., Ahuja, A., & Srinivasan, A. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-04590-0 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
“Template-based construction of deep network structure can be also seen in Logical Neural Networks (LNNs: [102]).”
A Semantic Parsing and Reasoning-Based Approach to Knowledge Base Question Answering
Abdelaziz, I., Ravishankar, S., Kapanipathi, P., Roukos, S., & Gray, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v35i18.17988 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“Finally, the logic forms are used by Logical Neural Network (LNN) (Riegel et al. 2020), a neuro-symbolic reasoner that enables DTQA to perform different types of reasoning.”
MethodSelf-citationReliable Natural Language Understanding with Large Language Models and Answer Set Programming
Rajasekharan, A., Zeng, Y., Padalkar, P., & Gupta, G. (2023) · Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science · doi:10.4204/eptcs.385.27 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Riegel, R., Gray, A., Luus, F., Khan, N., Makondo, N., Akhalwaya, I. Y., Qian, H., Fagin, R., Barahona, F., Sharma, U., Ikbal, S., Karanam, H., Neelam, S., Likhyani, A., & Srivastava, S.
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2006.13155
- OpenAlex
- W3036143115
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Algebra and Logic
- Keywords
- logical neural networks, symbolic reasoning, interpretable representations, inconsistent knowledge, open world assumption, probabilistic semantics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
