论文标题

神经符号AI是否在自然语言处理中符合其承诺?结构化的评论

Is Neuro-Symbolic AI Meeting its Promise in Natural Language Processing? A Structured Review

论文作者

Hamilton, Kyle, Nayak, Aparna, Božić, Bojan, Longo, Luca

论文摘要

主张神经符号人工智能(NESY)断言,将深度学习与象征性推理相结合将导致AI更强大,而不是任何一个范式。像深度学习一样成功,人们普遍认为,即使我们最好的深度学习系统也不是很擅长抽象推理。而且,由于推理与语言密不可分,因此具有直觉的意义,即自然语言处理(NLP)将是NESY特别适合的候选人。我们对实施NLP的NESY进行的研究进行了结构化综述,目的是回答Nesy是否确实符合其承诺的问题:推理,分布式概括,解释性,学习和从小数据中的学习和推理以及向新领域的转移性。我们研究了知识表示的影响,例如规则和语义网络,语言结构和关系结构,以及隐式还是明确的推理是否有助于更高的承诺分数。我们发现,将逻辑编译到神经网络中的系统会导致满足最NESY的目标,而其他因素(例如知识表示或神经体系结构的类型)与实现目标没有明确的相关性。我们发现在推理的定义方式上,特别是与人类级别的推理有关的许多差异,这会影响有关模型架构的决策并推动结论,这些结论在整个研究中并不总是一致的。因此,我们倡导采取更有条理的方法来应用人类推理的理论以及适当的基准的发展,我们希望这可以更好地理解该领域的进步。我们在GitHub上提供数据和代码以进行进一步分析。

Advocates for Neuro-Symbolic Artificial Intelligence (NeSy) assert that combining deep learning with symbolic reasoning will lead to stronger AI than either paradigm on its own. As successful as deep learning has been, it is generally accepted that even our best deep learning systems are not very good at abstract reasoning. And since reasoning is inextricably linked to language, it makes intuitive sense that Natural Language Processing (NLP), would be a particularly well-suited candidate for NeSy. We conduct a structured review of studies implementing NeSy for NLP, with the aim of answering the question of whether NeSy is indeed meeting its promises: reasoning, out-of-distribution generalization, interpretability, learning and reasoning from small data, and transferability to new domains. We examine the impact of knowledge representation, such as rules and semantic networks, language structure and relational structure, and whether implicit or explicit reasoning contributes to higher promise scores. We find that systems where logic is compiled into the neural network lead to the most NeSy goals being satisfied, while other factors such as knowledge representation, or type of neural architecture do not exhibit a clear correlation with goals being met. We find many discrepancies in how reasoning is defined, specifically in relation to human level reasoning, which impact decisions about model architectures and drive conclusions which are not always consistent across studies. Hence we advocate for a more methodical approach to the application of theories of human reasoning as well as the development of appropriate benchmarks, which we hope can lead to a better understanding of progress in the field. We make our data and code available on github for further analysis.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源