Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant strides in various intelligent tasks but still struggle with complex action reasoning tasks that require systematic search. To address this limitation, we propose a method that bridges the natural language understanding capabilities of LLMs with the symbolic reasoning strengths of action languages. Our approach, termed LLM+AL, leverages the LLM's strengths in semantic parsing and commonsense knowledge generation alongside the action language's proficiency in automated reasoning based on encoded knowledge. We compare LLM+AL against state-of-the-art LLMs, including ChatGPT-4, Claude 3 Opus, Gemini Ultra 1.0, and o1-preview, using benchmarks for complex reasoning about actions. Our findings indicate that, although all methods exhibit errors, LLM+AL, with relatively minimal human corrections, consistently leads to correct answers, whereas standalone LLMs fail to improve even with human feedback. LLM+AL also contributes to automated generation of action languages.

Causal and temporal reasoning about video dynamics is a challenging problem. While neuro-symbolic models that combine symbolic reasoning with neural-based perception and prediction have shown promise, they exhibit limitations, especially in answering counterfactual questions. This paper introduces a method to enhance a neuro-symbolic model for counterfactual reasoning, leveraging symbolic reasoning about causal relations among events. We define the notion of a causal graph to represent such relations and use Answer Set Programming (ASP), a declarative logic programming method, to find how to coordinate perception and simulation modules. We validate the effectiveness of our approach on two benchmarks, CLEVRER and CRAFT. Our enhancement achieves state-of-the-art performance on the CLEVRER challenge, significantly outperforming existing models. In the case of the CRAFT benchmark, we leverage a large pre-trained language model, such as GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, as a proxy for a dynamics simulator. Our findings show that this method can further improve its performance on counterfactual questions by providing alternative prompts instructed by symbolic causal reasoning.

Large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-3 and GPT-4, have demonstrated exceptional performance in various natural language processing tasks and have shown the ability to solve certain reasoning problems. However, their reasoning capabilities are limited and relatively shallow, despite the application of various prompting techniques. In contrast, formal logic is adept at handling complex reasoning, but translating natural language descriptions into formal logic is a challenging task that non-experts struggle with. This paper proposes a neuro-symbolic method that combines the strengths of large language models and answer set programming. Specifically, we employ an LLM to transform natural language descriptions of logic puzzles into answer set programs. We carefully design prompts for an LLM to convert natural language descriptions into answer set programs in a step by step manner. Surprisingly, with just a few in-context learning examples, LLMs can generate reasonably complex answer set programs. The majority of errors made are relatively simple and can be easily corrected by humans, thus enabling LLMs to effectively assist in the creation of answer set programs.

We present NeurASP, a simple extension of answer set programs by embracing neural networks. By treating the neural network output as the probability distribution over atomic facts in answer set programs, NeurASP provides a simple and effective way to integrate sub-symbolic and symbolic computation. We demonstrate how NeurASP can make use of a pre-trained neural network in symbolic computation and how it can improve the neural network's perception result by applying symbolic reasoning in answer set programming. Also, NeurASP can make use of ASP rules to train a neural network better so that a neural network not only learns from implicit correlations from the data but also from the explicit complex semantic constraints expressed by the rules.