Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 32 references

RNN Generalization to Omega-Regular Languages

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A recurrent network trained on finite prefixes from a deterministic Büchi automaton can recognize the omega-regular language on sequences up to eight times the training length.

desk verdict First solid feasibility study on RNN recognition of omega-regular languages via ultimately periodic encodings, with a real soft spot in the single-seed and biased test generation. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.02491 v1 pith:VLG6YYXU submitted 2025-09-02 cs.LG cs.FLcs.LO

Charles Pert , Dalal Alrajeh , Alessandra Russo This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LGcs.FLcs.LO MSC 68Q4568Q6068T07
keywords recurrentneuralnetworksomega-regularlanguageslineartemporallogicBüchiautomatalengthgeneralizationultimatelyperiodicwordsneurosymbolicverificationsequenceclassification
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks whether a recurrent neural network can learn to recognize an omega-regular language, a set of infinite sequences defined by a linear temporal logic specification, from finite training examples alone. Its answer is yes, on the evidence of 27 LTL-derived tasks with deterministic Büchi automata of 3 to 105 states: after training only on ultimately periodic words of length 2 to 64, the networks reached a mean out-of-distribution accuracy of 98.4% on sequences up to length 512, with 92.6% of tasks achieving perfect or near-perfect generalization. This matters because omega-regular languages are the specification language of reactive-system verification, and a network that generalizes across lengths could serve as a differentiable substitute for explicit automata in neurosymbolic verification tools. The paper restricts its claim to the tested length range and to deterministic automata, and it explicitly reports two tasks that failed to generalize.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the encoding of an ultimately periodic omega-word $uv^\omega$ as the finite word $u$v$, which a known result shows forms a regular language in bijection with the original omega-regular language — so an RNN trained to classify these strings is, in principle, learning a canonical finite projection of the Büchi automaton from which the automaton can be reconstructed. The second component is the data-generation pipeline: sample $u$ and $v$ as uniform paths through the DBA, apply targeted rebalancing to counteract accepting and rejecting sink states, and label exactly by simulating the DBA, computing the transition matrix of $v$ and exponentiating it to check reachability of an accepting cycle. Together these pieces make infinite acceptance conditions finite and balanced enough for gradient training.

What would settle it

Train the same model on one small DBA, then test it on an exhaustive enumeration of all distinct ultimately periodic words up to length 512 rather than on a sample of 512 sequences; if exhaustive accuracy falls far below the sampled accuracy, the sampling distribution, not the network, would be doing the work.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the acceptance behavior of a deterministic Büchi automaton can be learned by a vanilla RNN from finite encodings of infinite words. The paper represents an omega-word $uv^\omega$ as the finite string $u$v$, relying on the fact that ultimately periodic words uniquely characterize an omega-regular language and stand in bijection with a derived regular language. Simulating DBA runs with matrix exponentiation supplies exact labels during data generation, and balanced path-based sampling prevents acceptance biases from dominating the dataset. Under this protocol, the trained networks reach 100% in-distribution accuracy on all 27 tasks and 100% out-of-distribution accuracy on 23 tasks, with an overall out-of-distribution mean of 98.4%. The paper further reports that the trained models' parameter norms correlate strongly with DBA state count ($r = 0.880$), which it reads as evidence that the networks internalize something like the automaton's structural complexity rather than merely memorizing the training set.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on the assumption that the balanced, path-based sampling of sequences produces a test distribution that fairly represents the full omega-regular language, so that high accuracy on the sample really means generalization to the language itself rather than only to the sampled paths.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, recurrent networks trained on $u$v$ encodings can be reused as approximate recognizers for their target omega-regular language in the tested length range, without maintaining the explicit Büchi automaton during inference.
  • The strong correlation between DBA state count and model parameter norm suggests that a model's learned complexity tracks the specification's structural complexity, which could help diagnose under- or over-parameterization in verification tasks.
  • The two failure cases show that perfect in-distribution accuracy does not guarantee length generalization; unstable validation accuracy during training is an early warning signal, and accepting sink states are a suspected source of difficulty.
  • Because the method is restricted to deterministic Büchi automata, the demonstrated capability covers recurrence properties but leaves persistence properties and non-deterministic Büchi automata open for future work.
  • The finite encoding preserves enough information to reconstruct the original DBA, so a learned recognizer of this kind could in principle be combined with automata-extraction or formal-verification routines to check what the network actually learned.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension: the $u$v$ encoding and exact labeling procedure are architecture-agnostic, so the same data generator could train transformers or state-space models, making the paper's protocol a reusable benchmark for length generalization on omega-regular languages.
  • The failure cases suggest a targeted intervention: train on sequences whose suffixes must remain in accepting sink states for long stretches, which would directly test whether the hypothesized sink-state memory limitation explains the observed performance collapse.
  • If the parameter-norm correlation with DBA state count is genuine, one could predict which specifications need larger or smaller networks before training, using only the automaton's structure.
  • The paper does not establish that the trained RNN actually implements a Büchi acceptance condition; extracting an automaton from the trained network and comparing it with the original DBA would settle whether the network approximates the language or merely fits the sampled distribution.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper trains single-layer vanilla RNNs to classify ultimately periodic omega-words u v^omega encoded as u$v, where the target language is the omega-regular language of a deterministic Büchi automaton (DBA) constructed by Spot from LTL formulas. Training sequences have lengths 2-64; test sequences have lengths 2-512, with out-of-distribution (OOD) defined as lengths 65-512. Across 27 LTL benchmarks (alaska_lift and acacia_example), the authors report mean OOD accuracy of 98.4%, with 92.6% of tasks achieving perfect or near-perfect accuracy, and they observe a strong positive correlation between DBA state count and the L2 norm of trained RNN parameters. The paper concludes that RNNs can generalize to omega-regular languages up to 8x the training length.

Significance. If the reported results are robust, this is a useful and original empirical contribution: it is the first study to show length generalization for RNNs on the ultimately periodic encoding of omega-regular languages, it covers non-toy DBAs up to 105 states, and the code is released. The paper is commendable for using Spot-derived DBAs as ground truth (avoiding circularity), for explicitly considering the bijection between UP-words and the derived regular language, and for diagnosing two failure cases. However, the significance is conditional on the evaluation being representative of the target language; the sampling bias described below currently undermines the central claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [2, 'Sampling' and 3, 'Experiments'] The rejection sampling in Section 2 (item (3)) removes, from the rejected sequences, all suffix strings v that contain a transition into an accepting state. This deletes exactly the hard negative cases in which v visits an accepting state but the limit cycle of v^omega does not contain an accepting state, i.e., the cases that require the full Büchi cycle condition instead of a simple reachability check. Since the test data in Section 3 is generated with the same pipeline, the OOD accuracy reported in Table 1 cannot currently distinguish genuine recognition of the omega-regular language from learning the simpler regular property 'the suffix never enters an accepting state.' The authors should either re-evaluate on an unbiased or independently generated test set (for instance, sampling DBA paths uniformly without the filtering constraint, or explicitly including hard negatives where v enters an accepting state but the eventual cycle is non-accepting), or provide a formal argument that the excluded sequences have negligible impact on language-level accuracy. As written, the central claim is not established.
  2. [3.1, Table 1] All reported accuracies are point estimates from a single training seed, and no error bars or confidence intervals are provided. Given that two of the 27 tasks exhibit validation collapse during training (Figure 3), the claim that 92.6% of tasks reach perfect or near-perfect generalization is not robustly supported; the percentage could shift substantially under different initializations. The authors should run multiple seeds at least on the tasks with apparent instability, or clearly frame the results as single-run evidence rather than a stable estimate.
minor comments (4)
  1. [2, near the alphabet definition] The sentence 'The alphabet size of a DBA is 2|P| + 1' should be typeset as 2^{|P|} + 1; the exponent notation is missing and the current rendering is ambiguous.
  2. [Figure 1] The transition label '¬ba∧ ¬b' appears malformed; please check the LaTeX and render it correctly, likely as '¬b ∧ a ∧ ¬b' or a similarly intended conjunction.
  3. [2, 'Sampling'] The sentence 'It is still possible to sample equivalent rejected sequences as this constraint is not applied to u' is unclear; consider rephrasing to explain what 'equivalent' means here, for example that the rejection constraint is only enforced on the v part while u may still pass through accepting states.
  4. [3, 'Experiments'] The sentence 'The test data was balanced for the lift formulas and for 20 of the acacia_example formulas. However, the training data was not balanced for the lift formulas and the 3 acacia_example formulas with unbalanced test data' is confusing; clarify which formulas have unbalanced test data and why the training data for them is also unbalanced.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: target labels are external DBA ground truth, and OOD accuracy is a measured quantity rather than a fitted or self-referential prediction.

full rationale

This paper is an empirical study rather than a derivation, and its central claim is a measured generalization accuracy. Ground-truth labels are computed by simulating the Spot-constructed DBA on the u$v encoding, using matrix exponentiation to check reachability of a cycle containing an accepting state (Section 2). The RNN is trained to reproduce this externally defined target function, and test sequences are evaluated against the same independent DBA ground truth. Nothing is fitted to the OOD test results, and no predicted quantity reduces by construction to a training input. The u$v encoding and its bijection with ultimately periodic words are cited to the external, parameter-free result of Calbrix et al. [13], not to the authors' own work; self-citations play no load-bearing role. One validity caveat should be noted even though it is not circularity: Section 2's sampling rule for rejected sequences excludes suffixes v that transition to accepting states, and the test data is described as produced by the same balancing pipeline, so high OOD accuracy may reflect a shortcut on a constrained distribution rather than full language-level generalization. That is a distribution-coverage or shortcut concern, not a case where the derivation is equivalent to its own inputs. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard automata theory (UP characterization), a tooling assumption (Spot correctness), and an unvalidated sampling assumption. No new entities are posited. The free parameters are fixed hyperparameters chosen by hand; no parameter fitting to target labels occurs.

free parameters (1)
  • Training hyperparameters (hidden size 256, batch size 256, steps 1e5, warmup schedule, L2 weight 5e-4) = chosen by hand, not tuned per task
    All results depend on this fixed configuration; no sensitivity analysis or hyperparameter search is reported.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Every omega-regular language is uniquely characterized by the set of ultimately periodic words it contains (Calbrix et al. [13]).
    Used to justify the u$v encoding in Section 2; accepted theorem from the literature.
  • domain assumption Spot's DBA construction and acceptance simulation are correct for the LTL formulas used.
    Tooling assumption; the ground-truth labels for training and evaluation come from Spot [14].
  • ad hoc to paper Uniform random path sampling of DBA paths, with the described balancing filters, yields a representative distribution over the target language.
    This is the weakest assumption: the sampling choices in Section 2 are introduced by the authors and are not validated against uniform sampling over all UP words.
  • domain assumption A single-layer vanilla RNN with 256 hidden units can represent each target language sufficiently for the length range tested.
    The paper empirically demonstrates this for most tasks, but the assumption is needed for interpreting failures (Acacia 13, 22) as optimization issues rather than representational limits.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of RNN Generalization to Omega-Regular Languages." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VLG6YYXU

@misc{pith2026250902491,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: RNN Generalization to Omega-Regular Languages},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VLG6YYXU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.02491}
}
abstract

B\"uchi automata (BAs) recognize $\omega$-regular languages defined by formal specifications like linear temporal logic (LTL) and are commonly used in the verification of reactive systems. However, BAs face scalability challenges when handling and manipulating complex system behaviors. As neural networks are increasingly used to address these scalability challenges in areas like model checking, investigating their ability to generalize beyond training data becomes necessary. This work presents the first study investigating whether recurrent neural networks (RNNs) can generalize to $\omega$-regular languages derived from LTL formulas. We train RNNs on ultimately periodic $\omega$-word sequences to replicate target BA behavior and evaluate how well they generalize to out-of-distribution sequences. Through experiments on LTL formulas corresponding to deterministic automata of varying structural complexity, from 3 to over 100 states, we show that RNNs achieve high accuracy on their target $\omega$-regular languages when evaluated on sequences up to $8 \times$ longer than training examples, with $92.6\%$ of tasks achieving perfect or near-perfect generalization. These results establish the feasibility of neural approaches for learning complex $\omega$-regular languages, suggesting their potential as components in neurosymbolic verification methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.02491 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A DBA associated with the LTL formula G(𝑎 → F𝑏) ∧ 𝑎 (i.e., whenever 𝑎 is true, it must eventually be followed by 𝑏, and 𝑎 is initially true). Accepting states are double-circled. Transitions are labeled with propositional formulas. Input sequences, 𝜔-words, are composed of symbols that represent assignments to the propositions. For example, the word (𝑎 ∧ 𝑏) 𝜔 is accepted. While existing model checking tools like Spo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Diamond and circle markers distinguish between alaska_lift and acacia_example benchmarks. We now examine the two tasks that exhibited poor generalization to understand their failure modes. During training, both tasks demonstrate unstable validation patterns that predict their generalization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Validation accuracy and length generalization for tasks with poor generalization. 4. Conclusion and Future Work Our experiments demonstrate that RNNs generalize to the recognition of 𝜔-regular languages from short UP 𝜔-words. Across 27 tasks with a diverse range of system behaviors, we achieved perfect or near-perfect generalization in 92.6% of cases when testing on sequences up to 8 times longer than training examp… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Pnueli, The Temporal Logic of Programs, in: 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1977), 1977, pp

    A. Pnueli, The Temporal Logic of Programs, in: 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1977), 1977, pp. 46–57. doi:10.1109/SFCS.1977.32

    doi:10.1109/sfcs.1977.32 1977

  2. [2]

    J. R. Büchi, On a Decision Method in Restricted Second Order Arithmetic, 1990, pp. 425–435. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-8928-6\_23

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-8928-6 1990

  3. [3]

    URL: https://mitpress

    Baier, Christel and Katoen, Joost-Pieter, Principles of Model Checking, 2008. URL: https://mitpress. mit.edu/9780262026499/principles-of-model-checking/

    arXiv 2008

  4. [4]

    Mirco Giacobbe and Daniel Kroening and Abhinandan Pal and Michael Tautschnig, Neural Model Checking, in: The Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems,

    work page

  5. [5]

    URL: https://openreview

    Alexandra Butoi and Ghazal Khalighinejad and Anej Svete and Josef Valvoda and Ryan Cotterell and Brian DuSell, Training Neural Networks as Recognizers of Formal Languages, in: The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025. URL: https://openreview. net/forum?id=aWLQTbfFgV

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Delétang, A

    G. Delétang, A. Ruoss, J. Grau-Moya, T. Genewein, L. K. Wenliang, E. Catt, C. Cundy, M. Hutter, S. Legg, J. Veness, P. A. Ortega, Neural Networks and the Chomsky Hierarchy, in: 11th International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    4118–4135

    Svete, Anej and Chan, Robin and Cotterell, Ryan, On Efficiently Representing Regular Languages as RNNs, in: Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2024, pp. 4118–4135. URL: https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-acl. 244/. doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.244

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.244 2024

  8. [8]

    Merrill, William and Weiss, Gail and Goldberg, Yoav and Schwartz, Roy and Smith, Noah A. and Yahav, Eran, A Formal Hierarchy of RNN Architectures, in: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguis- tics, 2020, pp. 443–459. URL: https://aclanthology.org/2020.acl-main.43/. doi:...

    doi:10.18653/v1/2020 2020

Show all 32 references
  1. [9]

    Stammet, Christophe and Dotti, Prisca and Ultes-Nitsche, Ulrich and Fischer, Andreas, Analyzing Büchi Automata with Graph Neural Networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.09619 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Stammet, Christophe and Ultes-Nitsche, Ulrich and Fischer, Andreas, Universality of Büchi Automata: Analysis with Graph Neural Networks, IEEE Access 11 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    C. Hahn, F. Schmitt, J. U. Kreber, M. N. Rabe, B. Finkbeiner, Teaching Temporal Logics to Neural Networks, in: International Conference on Learning Representations, 2021. URL: https://openreview.net/forum?id=dOcQK-f4byz

    2021

  4. [12]

    Vaswani, N

    A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, L. u. Kaiser, I. Polosukhin, Attention Is All You Need, in: Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, volume 30, 2017. URL: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/ 3f5ee24354...

    2017

  5. [13]

    Calbrix, Hugues and Nivat, Maurice and Podelski, Andreas, Ultimately Periodic Words of Rational 𝜔-Languages, in: Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, 1994, pp. 554–566

    1994

  6. [14]

    Duret-Lutz, E

    A. Duret-Lutz, E. Renault, M. Colange, F. Renkin, A. G. Aisse, P. Schlehuber-Caissier, T. Medioni, A. Martin, J. Dubois, C. Gillard, H. Lauko, From Spot 2.0 to Spot 2.10: What’s New?, in: Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV’22),...

    2022 doi

  7. [15]

    Manna, A

    Z. Manna, A. Pnueli, A Hierarchy of Temporal Properties (invited paper, 1989), in: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC ’90, 1990, p. 377–410. doi:10.1145/93385.93442

    1989

  8. [16]

    Schmitt, C

    F. Schmitt, C. Hahn, M. N. Rabe, B. Finkbeiner, Neural Circuit Synthesis from Specification Patterns, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol- ume 34, 2021, pp. 15408–15420. URL: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2021/file/ 8230bea7d54bcdf99cd...

    2021

  9. [17]

    De Giacomo, M

    G. De Giacomo, M. Y. Vardi, Linear Temporal Logic and Linear Dynamic Logic on Finite Traces, in: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI ’13, 2013, p. 854–860

    2013

  10. [18]

    ACM Softw

    Luo, Weilin and Han, Tingchen and Qiu, Junming and Wan, Hai and Du, Jianfeng and Peng, Bo and Xiao, Guohui and Liu, Yanan, NADA: Neural Acceptance-Driven Approximate Specification Mining, Proc. ACM Softw. Eng. 2 (2025). URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3728956. doi:10.1145/3728956

    2025 doi

  11. [19]

    H. Wan, P. Liang, J. Du, W. Luo, R. Ye, B. Peng, End-to-End Learning of LTLf Formulae by Faithful LTLf Encoding, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 38 (2024). URL: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/28757. doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i8.28757

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    W. Luo, P. Liang, J. Du, H. Wan, B. Peng, D. Zhang, Bridging LTLf Inference to GNN Inference for Learning LTLf Formulae, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 36 (2022). URL: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/21221. doi:10.1609/aaai.v36i9. 21221

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    Walke, D

    H. Walke, D. Ritter, C. Trimbach, M. Littman, Learning Finite Linear Temporal Logic Specifications with a Specialized Neural Operator, arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.04147 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  14. [22]

    M. D. Wulf, L. Doyen, N. Maquet, J. Raskin, Antichains: Alternative Algorithms for LTL Sat- isfiability and Model-Checking, in: Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, volume 4963 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 2008, pp. 63–77. doi: 10.1007/ ...

    2008

  15. [23]

    Schuppan, Towards a Notion of Unsatisfiable and Unrealizable Cores for LTL, Science of Computer Programming - SCP 77 (2012)

    V. Schuppan, Towards a Notion of Unsatisfiable and Unrealizable Cores for LTL, Science of Computer Programming - SCP 77 (2012). doi:10.1016/j.scico.2010.11.004

    2012 doi

  16. [24]

    Filiot, Emmanuel and Jin, Naiyong and Raskin, Jean-François, An Antichain Algorithm for LTL Realizability, in: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV ’09, 2009, p. 263–277. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02658-4_22

    2009 doi

  17. [25]

    Schuppan, Viktor and Darmawan, Luthfi, Evaluating LTL Satisfiability Solvers, in: Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis, 2011, pp. 397–413

    2011

  18. [26]

    J. L. Elman, Finding Structure in Time, Cognitive Science 14 (1990) 179–211. doi: https://doi. org/10.1207/s15516709cog1402\_1

    1990 doi

  19. [27]

    D. S. Kalra, M. Barkeshli, Why Warmup the Learning Rate? Underlying Mecha- nisms and Improvements, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol- ume 37, 2024, pp. 111760–111801. URL: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/file/ ca98452d4e9ecbc18c40...

    2024

  20. [28]

    S. J. Reddi, S. Kale, S. Kumar, On the Convergence of Adam and Beyond, in: International Conference on Learning Representations, 2018. URL: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ryQu7f-RZ

    2018

  21. [29]

    Freedman, R

    D. Freedman, R. Pisani, R. Purves, Statistics, 4th ed., 2007. URL: https://wwnorton.co.uk/books/ 9780393930436-statistics

    2007

  22. [30]

    Merrill, N

    W. Merrill, N. Tsilivis, Extracting Finite Automata from RNNs Using State Merging, CoRR abs/2201.12451 (2022). URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.12451

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    5247–5256

    Weiss, Gail and Goldberg, Yoav and Yahav, Eran, Extracting Automata from Recurrent Neural Networks Using Queries and Counterexamples, in: Proceedings of the 35th International Confer- ence on Machine Learning, PMLR, 2018, pp. 5247–5256. URL: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v80/ ...

    2018

  24. [2024]

    URL: https://openreview.net/forum?id=dJ9KzkQ0oH

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.