MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892225984 · doi:10.5075/epfl-thesis-10642

Infusing structured knowledge priors in neural models for sample-efficient symbolic reasoning

2024· dissertation· en· W6892225984 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInfoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoInstitute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction
KeywordsGeneralizationArtificial neural networkPrior probabilityRepresentation (politics)Commonsense knowledgePlan (archaeology)Knowledge representation and reasoningCommonsense reasoningQualitative reasoning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to reason, plan and solve highly abstract problems is a hallmark of human intelligence. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, propelled by deep neural networks, have revolutionized disciplines like computer vision and natural language processing. However, in spite of the amazing progress that we are witnessing, the challenge of creating models that can acquire human-level reasoning abilities sample efficiently persists. To make a step forward, it is crucial to acknowledge that all models inherently carry inductive biases and that human-level intelligence cannot be general and requires the incorporation of appropriate knowledge priors. Following this chain of thought, this study aims to scrutinize and enhance the reasoning abilities of neural networks by incorporating proper knowledge priors and biasing learning through structured representations. Due to the complexity of the problem at hand, we aim to investigate it through multiple lenses. The thesis unfolds into three main parts, each focusing on distinct tasks and perspectives. In the first part of the thesis, our research revolves around reasoning and planning in interactive textual environments. We introduce novel environments for evaluating commonsense reasoning skills and decision-making abilities of neural agents. Then, we investigate whether graph-structured representations can serve as appropriate inductive biases for knowledge representation and reasoning with neural agents. We propose agents that use graphs both as a source of prior knowledge and as a model of the state of the world, showing that they act more sample efficiently. Further, we introduce a general algorithm inspired by case-based reasoning to train on-policy agents, improving their planning and out-of-distribution generalization abilities. In the second part, we isolate core factual reasoning challenges and investigate how language models can reason and benefit from prior knowledge. We delve into language-understanding tasks and introduce an efficient method to navigate large-scale knowledge graphs and answer natural language questions requiring complex logical reasoning and robustness to distributional shifts. Then, we introduce a method to enhance language models with prior knowledge in entity-linking tasks, showing improvements by infusing appropriate structure in the latent space. Finally, driving inspiration from developmental science, we focus on the core knowledge priors of human intelligence, concentrating our efforts on geometry and topology priors. We introduce a variant of the transformer model that incorporates lattice symmetry priors, showing that it is 2 orders of magnitude more sample efficient than standard transformers on fundamental geometric reasoning. The contributions of this thesis span several fronts. We achieve state-of-the-art results on several benchmarks, including popular textual environments, standard question answering and entity linking datasets, as well as geometric reasoning tasks. Our text-based neural agents are more sample efficient and resilient to distributional shifts than the baselines. The proposed question answering model is orders of magnitude more scalable than competitive approaches and achieves compositional generalization out of the training distribution. Our entity linking method achieves results comparable to large generative models with 18 times more parameters.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne)Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207