Is neuro-symbolic AI meeting its promises in natural language processing? A structured review

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 go...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Semantic Web 2024-01, Vol.15 (4), p.1265-1306
Hauptverfasser: Hamilton, Kyle, Nayak, Aparna, Božić, Bojan, Longo, Luca
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1306
container_issue 4
container_start_page 1265
container_title Semantic Web
container_volume 15
creator Hamilton, Kyle
Nayak, Aparna
Božić, Bojan
Longo, Luca
description 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.11 https://github.com/kyleiwaniec/neuro-symbolic-ai-systematic-review
doi_str_mv 10.3233/SW-223228
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3112808526</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3112808526</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-141f8d4d68770e6a1b0231bdb4eed600763cc4779d70ce532c8aaa395b1aab463</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkM1KAzEUhYMoWGoXvkHAlYtocpOZpCspxZ9CwUWV7gyZzG1JmZ-azCh9G5_FJ3NKPZuzOB_nXg4h14LfSZDyfrVmABLAnJERgOBMTXNzTkYi05xxo9QlmaS044MykUuTjcjHItEG-9iydKiLtgqezha0RuxCs6WhS3Qf2zokTDQ0tHFdH11FK9dse7fFY-gxpYF9oLPfn9TF3g8IljTiV8DvK3KxcVXCyb-PyfvT49v8hS1fnxfz2ZJ5AOiYUGJjSlXmRmuOuRMFBymKslCIZc65zqX3SutpqbnHTII3zjk5zQrhXKFyOSY3p97hoc8eU2d3bR-b4aSVQoDhJoMjdXuifGxTirix-xhqFw9WcHtc0K7W9rSg_APJ-mP5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3112808526</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Is neuro-symbolic AI meeting its promises in natural language processing? A structured review</title><source>Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ)</source><creator>Hamilton, Kyle ; Nayak, Aparna ; Božić, Bojan ; Longo, Luca</creator><contributor>Ebrahimi, Monireh ; Stepanova, Daria ; Hitzler, Pascal ; Kamruzzaman Sarker, Md</contributor><creatorcontrib>Hamilton, Kyle ; Nayak, Aparna ; Božić, Bojan ; Longo, Luca ; Ebrahimi, Monireh ; Stepanova, Daria ; Hitzler, Pascal ; Kamruzzaman Sarker, Md</creatorcontrib><description>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.11 https://github.com/kyleiwaniec/neuro-symbolic-ai-systematic-review</description><identifier>ISSN: 1570-0844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2210-4968</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3233/SW-223228</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: IOS Press BV</publisher><subject>Artificial intelligence ; Deep learning ; Impact analysis ; Knowledge representation ; Machine learning ; Natural language processing ; Neural networks ; Reasoning</subject><ispartof>Semantic Web, 2024-01, Vol.15 (4), p.1265-1306</ispartof><rights>Copyright IOS Press BV 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-141f8d4d68770e6a1b0231bdb4eed600763cc4779d70ce532c8aaa395b1aab463</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-141f8d4d68770e6a1b0231bdb4eed600763cc4779d70ce532c8aaa395b1aab463</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Ebrahimi, Monireh</contributor><contributor>Stepanova, Daria</contributor><contributor>Hitzler, Pascal</contributor><contributor>Kamruzzaman Sarker, Md</contributor><creatorcontrib>Hamilton, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nayak, Aparna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Božić, Bojan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longo, Luca</creatorcontrib><title>Is neuro-symbolic AI meeting its promises in natural language processing? A structured review</title><title>Semantic Web</title><description>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.11 https://github.com/kyleiwaniec/neuro-symbolic-ai-systematic-review</description><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Deep learning</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Knowledge representation</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Natural language processing</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Reasoning</subject><issn>1570-0844</issn><issn>2210-4968</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNotkM1KAzEUhYMoWGoXvkHAlYtocpOZpCspxZ9CwUWV7gyZzG1JmZ-azCh9G5_FJ3NKPZuzOB_nXg4h14LfSZDyfrVmABLAnJERgOBMTXNzTkYi05xxo9QlmaS044MykUuTjcjHItEG-9iydKiLtgqezha0RuxCs6WhS3Qf2zokTDQ0tHFdH11FK9dse7fFY-gxpYF9oLPfn9TF3g8IljTiV8DvK3KxcVXCyb-PyfvT49v8hS1fnxfz2ZJ5AOiYUGJjSlXmRmuOuRMFBymKslCIZc65zqX3SutpqbnHTII3zjk5zQrhXKFyOSY3p97hoc8eU2d3bR-b4aSVQoDhJoMjdXuifGxTirix-xhqFw9WcHtc0K7W9rSg_APJ-mP5</recordid><startdate>20240101</startdate><enddate>20240101</enddate><creator>Hamilton, Kyle</creator><creator>Nayak, Aparna</creator><creator>Božić, Bojan</creator><creator>Longo, Luca</creator><general>IOS Press BV</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240101</creationdate><title>Is neuro-symbolic AI meeting its promises in natural language processing? A structured review</title><author>Hamilton, Kyle ; Nayak, Aparna ; Božić, Bojan ; Longo, Luca</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-141f8d4d68770e6a1b0231bdb4eed600763cc4779d70ce532c8aaa395b1aab463</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Deep learning</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Knowledge representation</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Natural language processing</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Reasoning</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hamilton, Kyle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nayak, Aparna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Božić, Bojan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longo, Luca</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Semantic Web</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hamilton, Kyle</au><au>Nayak, Aparna</au><au>Božić, Bojan</au><au>Longo, Luca</au><au>Ebrahimi, Monireh</au><au>Stepanova, Daria</au><au>Hitzler, Pascal</au><au>Kamruzzaman Sarker, Md</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Is neuro-symbolic AI meeting its promises in natural language processing? A structured review</atitle><jtitle>Semantic Web</jtitle><date>2024-01-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1265</spage><epage>1306</epage><pages>1265-1306</pages><issn>1570-0844</issn><eissn>2210-4968</eissn><abstract>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.11 https://github.com/kyleiwaniec/neuro-symbolic-ai-systematic-review</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>IOS Press BV</pub><doi>10.3233/SW-223228</doi><tpages>42</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1570-0844
ispartof Semantic Web, 2024-01, Vol.15 (4), p.1265-1306
issn 1570-0844
2210-4968
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3112808526
source Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ)
subjects Artificial intelligence
Deep learning
Impact analysis
Knowledge representation
Machine learning
Natural language processing
Neural networks
Reasoning
title Is neuro-symbolic AI meeting its promises in natural language processing? A structured review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T07%3A39%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Is%20neuro-symbolic%20AI%20meeting%20its%20promises%20in%20natural%20language%20processing?%20A%C2%A0structured%20review&rft.jtitle=Semantic%20Web&rft.au=Hamilton,%20Kyle&rft.date=2024-01-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1265&rft.epage=1306&rft.pages=1265-1306&rft.issn=1570-0844&rft.eissn=2210-4968&rft_id=info:doi/10.3233/SW-223228&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3112808526%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3112808526&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true