Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Formal Explanations for Neuro-Symbolic AI

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.14219 v1 pith:YNPOFSMO submitted 2024-10-18 cs.AI cs.LGcs.LO

classification cs.AIcs.LGcs.LO
keywords neuralapproachformalneuro-symbolicexplanationssystemsartificialexplanation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Despite the practical success of Artificial Intelligence (AI), current neural AI algorithms face two significant issues. First, the decisions made by neural architectures are often prone to bias and brittleness. Second, when a chain of reasoning is required, neural systems often perform poorly. Neuro-symbolic artificial intelligence is a promising approach that tackles these (and other) weaknesses by combining the power of neural perception and symbolic reasoning. Meanwhile, the success of AI has made it critical to understand its behaviour, leading to the development of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). While neuro-symbolic AI systems have important advantages over purely neural AI, we still need to explain their actions, which are obscured by the interactions of the neural and symbolic components. To address the issue, this paper proposes a formal approach to explaining the decisions of neuro-symbolic systems. The approach hinges on the use of formal abductive explanations and on solving the neuro-symbolic explainability problem hierarchically. Namely, it first computes a formal explanation for the symbolic component of the system, which serves to identify a subset of the individual parts of neural information that needs to be explained. This is followed by explaining only those individual neural inputs, independently of each other, which facilitates succinctness of hierarchical formal explanations and helps to increase the overall performance of the approach. Experimental results for a few complex reasoning tasks demonstrate practical efficiency of the proposed approach, in comparison to purely neural systems, from the perspective of explanation size, explanation time, training time, model sizes, and the quality of explanations reported.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Towards Verified and Targeted Explanations through Formal Methods

    cs.LG 2026-04 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    ViTaX certifies targeted semifactual robustness: a minimal feature subset can be perturbed by ε without flipping a neural network from class y to a user-specified high-risk class t.

  2. On the Promise for Assurance of Differentiable Neurosymbolic Reasoning Paradigms

    cs.AI 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A systematic comparison finds that differentiable neurosymbolic systems offer better assurance mainly in arithmetic-like reasoning tasks, not across the board, and interpretable shortcuts can increase adversarial risk.

Pith tools