Datasets:
File size: 107,127 Bytes
03185c4 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 2165 2166 2167 2168 2169 2170 2171 2172 2173 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 2181 2182 2183 2184 2185 2186 2187 2188 2189 2190 2191 2192 2193 2194 2195 2196 2197 2198 2199 2200 2201 2202 2203 2204 2205 2206 2207 2208 2209 2210 2211 2212 2213 2214 2215 2216 2217 2218 2219 2220 2221 2222 2223 2224 2225 2226 2227 2228 2229 2230 2231 2232 2233 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 2255 2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 2275 2276 2277 2278 2279 2280 2281 2282 2283 2284 2285 2286 2287 2288 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 | [
{
"type": "text",
"text": "SLASH: EMBRACING PROBABILISTIC CIRCUITS INTO NEURAL ANSWER SET PROGRAMMING ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
98,
823,
146
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Anonymous authors Paper under double-blind review ",
"bbox": [
183,
170,
398,
198
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "ABSTRACT ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
454,
234,
544,
251
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The goal of combining the robustness of neural networks and the expressivity of symbolic methods has rekindled the interest in Neuro-Symbolic AI. Recent advancements in Neuro-Symbolic AI often consider specifically-tailored architectures consisting of disjoint neural and symbolic components, and thus do not exhibit desired gains that can be achieved by integrating them into a unifying framework. We introduce SLASH – a novel deep probabilistic programming language (DPPL). At its core, SLASH consists of Neural-Probabilistic Predicates (NPPs) and logical programs which are united via answer set programming. The probability estimates resulting from NPPs act as the binding element between the logical program and raw input data, thereby allowing SLASH to answer task-dependent logical queries. This allows SLASH to elegantly integrate the symbolic and neural components in a unified framework. We evaluate SLASH on the benchmark data of MNIST addition as well as novel tasks for DPPLs such as missing data prediction and set prediction with state-of-the-art performance, thereby showing the effectiveness and generality of our method. ",
"bbox": [
232,
267,
766,
474
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "1 INTRODUCTION ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
502,
336,
518
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In recent years, Neuro-Symbolic AI approaches to learning (Hudson & Manning, 2019; d’Avila Garcez et al., 2019; Jiang & Ahn, 2020; d’Avila Garcez & Lamb, 2020), which integrates low-level perception with high-level reasoning by combining data-driven neural modules with logic-based symbolic modules, has gained traction. This combination of sub-symbolic and symbolic systems has been shown to have several advantages for various tasks such as visual question answering and reasoning (Yi et al., 2018), concept learning (Mao et al., 2019) and improved properties for explainable and revisable models (Ciravegna et al., 2020; Stammer et al., 2021). ",
"bbox": [
174,
535,
825,
632
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Rather than designing specifically tailored Neuro-Symbolic architectures, where often the neural and symbolic modules are disjoint and trained independently (Yi et al., 2018; Mao et al., 2019; Stammer et al., 2021), deep probabilistic programming languages (DPPLs) provide an exciting alternative (Bingham et al., 2019; Tran et al., 2017; Manhaeve et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2020). Specifically, DPPLs integrate neural and symbolic modules via a unifying programming framework with probability estimates acting as the “glue” between separate modules allowing for reasoning over noisy, uncertain data and, importantly, joint training of the modules. Additionally, prior knowledge and biases in the form of logical rules can easily be added with DPPLs, rather than creating implicit architectural biases, thereby integrating neural networks into downstream logical reasoning tasks. ",
"bbox": [
174,
638,
825,
763
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Object-centric deep learning has recently brought forth several exciting avenues of research by introducing inductive biases to neural networks to extract objects from visual scenes in an unsupervised manner (Zhang et al., 2019; Burgess et al., 2019; Engelcke et al., 2020; Greff et al., 2019; Lin et al., 2020; Locatello et al., 2020; Jiang & Ahn, 2020). We refer to Greff et al. (2020) for a detailed overview. A motivation for this specific line of investigation, which notably has been around for a longer period of time (Fodor & Pylyshyn, 1988; Marcus, 2019), is that objects occur as natural building blocks in human perception and possess advantageous properties for many cognitive tasks, such as scene understanding and reasoning. With a DPPL, these advancements can be improved by integrating the previously mentioned components into the DPPL’s programming framework and further adding constraints about objects and their properties in form of logical statements e.g. about color singularity, rather than implicitly enforcing this via one hot encodings. ",
"bbox": [
174,
771,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 0
},
{
"type": "image",
"img_path": "images/fbc474f94d8a2574e5362c4b2e3c3d61cc7e2bb6baf0aac66d0dc2840ab2de17.jpg",
"image_caption": [
"Figure 1: SLASH Attention illustrated for a visual reasoning task. SLASH with Neural-Probabilistic Predicates consisting of a slot attention encoder and Probabilistic Circuits (PCs) realised via EiNets. The slot encoder is shared over all NPPs. Each triangle in the figure represents a single EiNet that gives us a joint distribution at the root node. Thus, each PC learns the joint distribution over slot encodings, $z ^ { i }$ , and object attributes, $C$ , of a specific category, e.g. color attributes. Via targeted queries to the NPPs, one can obtain task-related probabilities, e.g. conditional probabilities for the task of set prediction. Given the probability estimates from the NPP(s) and a SLASH program, containing a set of facts and logical statements about the world, the probability of the truth value of a task-related query are computed via answer set programming. The entire system, including the neural and probabilistic modules, are finally trained end-to-end via a single loss function. "
],
"image_footnote": [],
"bbox": [
184,
104,
810,
310
],
"page_idx": 1
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We propose SLASH – a novel DPPL that, similar to the punctuation symbol, can be used to efficiently combine several paradigms into one. Specifically, SLASH represents a scalable programming language that seamlessly integrates probabilistic logical programming with neural representations and tractable probabilistic estimations. Fig. 1 shows an example instantiation of SLASH, termed SLASH Attention, for object-centric set prediction. SLASH consists of several key building blocks. Firstly, it makes use of Neural-Probabilistic Predicates (NPPs) for probability estimation. NPPs consist of neural and/or probabilistic circuit (PC) modules and act as a unifying term, encompassing the neural predicates of DeepProbLog and NeurASP, as well as purely probabilistic predicates. In this work, we introduce a much more powerful “flavor” of NPPs that consist jointly of neural and PC modules, taking advantage of the power of neural computations together with true density estimation of PCs. Depending on the underlying task one can thus ask a range of queries to the NPP, e.g. sample an unknown, desired variable, but also query for conditional class probabilities. Example NPPs consisting of a slot attention encoder and several PCs are depicted in Fig. 1 for the task of set prediction. The slot encoder is shared across all NPPs, whereas the PC of each NPP models a separate category of attributes. In this way, each NPP models the joint distribution over slot encodings and object attribute values, such as the color of an object. By querying the NPP, one can obtain task-related probability estimations, such as the conditional attribute probability. ",
"bbox": [
174,
479,
825,
715
],
"page_idx": 1
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The second component of SLASH is the logical program, which consists of a set of facts and logical statements defining the state of the world of the underlying task. For example, one can define the rules for when an object possesses a specific set of attributes (cf. Fig. 1). Thirdly, an ASP module is used to combine the first two components. Given a logical query about the input data, the logical program and the probability estimates obtained from the NPP(s), the ASP module produces a probability estimate about the truth value of the query, stating, e.g., how likely it is for a specific object in an image to be a large, dark red triangle. In contrast to query evaluation in Prolog (Colmerauer & Roussel, 1993; Clocksin & Mellish, 1981) which may lead to an infinite loop, many modern answer set solvers use Conflict-Driven-Clause-Learning (CDPL) which, in principle, always terminates. ",
"bbox": [
174,
722,
825,
848
],
"page_idx": 1
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Training in SLASH is performed efficiently in a batch-wise and end-to-end fashion, by integrating the parameters of all modules, neural and probabilistic, into a single loss term. SLASH thus allows a simple, fast and effective integration of sub-symbolic and symbolic computations. In our experiments, we investigate the advantages of SLASH in comparison to SOTA DPPLs on the benchmark task of MNIST-Addition (Manhaeve et al., 2018). We hereby show SLASH’s increased scalability regarding computation time, as well as SLASH’s ability to handle incomplete data via true probabilistic density modelling. Next, we show that SLASH Attention provides superior results for set prediction in terms of accuracy and generalization abilities compared to a baseline slot attention encoder. With our experiments, we thus show that SLASH is a realization of “one system – two approaches” (Bengio, 2019), that can successfully be used for performing various tasks and on a variety of data types. ",
"bbox": [
174,
854,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 1
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "",
"bbox": [
174,
103,
825,
174
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We make the following contributions: (1) We introduce neural-probabilistic predicates, efficiently integrating answer set programming with probabilistic inference via our novel DPPL, SLASH. (2) We successfully train neural, probabilistic and logic modules within SLASH for complex data structures end-to-end via a simple, single loss term. (3) We show that SLASH provides various advantages across a variety of tasks and data sets compared to state-of-the-art DPPLs and neural models. ",
"bbox": [
174,
180,
825,
250
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "2 NEURO-SYMBOLIC LOGIC PROGRAMMING ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
174,
270,
562,
286
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Neuro-Symbolic AI can be divided into two lines of research, depending on the starting point. Both, however, have the same final goal: to combine low-level perception with logical constraints and reasoning. ",
"bbox": [
174,
301,
826,
344
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "A key motivation of Neuro-Symbolic AI (d’Avila Garcez et al., 2009; Mao et al., 2019; Hudson & Manning, 2019; d’Avila Garcez et al., 2019; Jiang & Ahn, 2020; d’Avila Garcez & Lamb, 2020) is to combine the advantages of symbolic and neural representations into a joint system. This is often done in a hybrid approach where a neural network acts as a perception module that interfaces with a symbolic reasoning system, e.g. (Mao et al., 2019; Yi et al., 2018). The goal of such an approach is to mitigate the issues of one type of representation by the other, e.g. using the power of symbolic reasoning systems to handle the generalizability issues of neural networks and on the other hand handle the difficulty of noisy data for symbolic systems via neural networks. Recent work has also shown the advantage of Neuro-Symbolic approaches for explaining and revising incorrect decisions (Ciravegna et al., 2020; Stammer et al., 2021). Many of these previous works, however, train the sub-symbolic and symbolic modules separately. ",
"bbox": [
174,
349,
825,
503
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Deep Probabilistic Programming Languages (DPPLs) are programming languages that combine deep neural networks with probabilistic models and allow a user to express a probabilistic model via a logical program. Similar to Neuro-Symbolic architectures, DPPLs thereby unite the advantages of different paradigms. DPPLs are related to earlier works such as Markov Logic Networks (MLNs) (Richardson & Domingos, 2006). Thereby, the binding link is the Weighted Model Counting (WMC) introduced in $\\mathrm { L P ^ { M L N } }$ (Lee & Wang, 2016). Several DPPLs have been proposed by now, among which are Pyro (Bingham et al., 2019), Edward (Tran et al., 2017), DeepProbLog (Manhaeve et al., 2018), and NeurASP (Yang et al., 2020). ",
"bbox": [
174,
511,
825,
622
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "To resolve the scalability issues of DeepProbLog, which use Sentential Decision Diagrams (SDDs) (Darwiche, 2011) as the underlying data structure to evaluate queries, NeurASP (Yang et al., 2020), offers a solution by utilizing Answer Set Programming (ASP) (Dimopoulos et al., 1997; Soininen & Niemelä, 1999; Marek & Truszczynski, 1999; Calimeri et al., 2020). In this way, NeurASP changes the paradigm from query evaluation to model generation, i.e. instead of constructing an SDD or similar knowledge representation system, NeurASP generates a set of all possible solutions (one model per solution) and estimates the probability for the truth value of each of these solutions. Of those DPPLs that handle learning in a relational, probabilistic setting and in an end-to-end fashion, all of these are limited to estimating only conditional class probabilities. ",
"bbox": [
174,
628,
826,
753
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "3 THE SLASH FRAMEWORK ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
773,
429,
790
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In this section, we introduce our novel DPPL, SLASH. Before we dive into the details of this, it is necessary to first introduce Neural-Probabilistic Predicates, for which we require an understanding of Probabilistic Circuits. Finally, we will present the learning paradigm of SLASH. ",
"bbox": [
176,
804,
823,
847
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The term probabilistic circuit (PC) (Choi et al., 2020) represents a unifying framework that encompasses all computational graphs which encode probability distributions and guarantee tractable probabilistic modelling. These include Sum-Product Networks (SPNs) (Poon & Domingos, 2011) which are deep mixture models represented via a rooted directed acyclic graphs with a recursively defined structure. ",
"bbox": [
174,
853,
823,
922
],
"page_idx": 2
},
{
"type": "image",
"img_path": "images/fe12c632ab68913a19fb5c0639cac79765cabf16e331224edc0cd2c84bb8eebe.jpg",
"image_caption": [],
"image_footnote": [],
"bbox": [
225,
103,
488,
239
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "(a) NPPs come in various flavors depending on the data and underlying task. ",
"bbox": [
209,
246,
504,
271
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "image",
"img_path": "images/deaa2f06b12c44d64f5ac8f226a3fdb61c0d8bba50b15128cddc5ccafbad3205.jpg",
"image_caption": [
"(b) Minimal SLASH program and query for set prediction. ",
"Figure 2: (a) Depending on the data set and underlying task, SLASH requires a suitable NeuralProbabilistic Predicate (NPP) that computes query-dependent probability estimates. An NPP can be composed of neural and probabilistic modules, or (depicted via slash symbol) only one of these two. (b) A minimal SLASH program and query for the set prediction task, here only showing the NPP that models the color category per object. For the full program, we refer to the Appendix. "
],
"image_footnote": [],
"bbox": [
537,
101,
774,
238
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "3.1 NEURAL-PROBABILISTIC PREDICATES ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
381,
480,
395
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Previous DPPLs, DeepProbLog (Manhaeve et al., 2018) and NeurASP (Yang et al., 2020), introduced the Neural Predicate as an annotated-disjunction or as a propositional atom, respectively, to acquire conditional class probabilities, $P ( C | X )$ , via the softmax function at the output of an arbitrary DNN. As mentioned in the introduction, this approach has certain limitations concerning inference capabilities. To resolve this issue, we introduce Neural-Probabilisitic Predicates (NPPs). ",
"bbox": [
173,
406,
825,
477
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Formally, we denote with ",
"bbox": [
174,
484,
343,
498
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/187dcc297a855ad44e5c575f0d91e7583f0c038c9c3016485793aabe684f440a.jpg",
"text": "$$\nn p p \\left( h ( x ) , [ v _ { 1 } , . . . , v _ { n } ] \\right)\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
418,
498,
578,
515
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "a Neural-Probabilistic Predicate $h$ . Thereby, (i) npp is a reserved word to label an NPP, (ii) $h$ a symbolic name of either a PC, NN or a joint of a PC and NN (cf. Fig. 2a), e.g., color_attr is the name of an NPP of Fig. 2b. Additionally, (iii) $x$ denotes a “term” and (iv) $v _ { 1 } , \\ldots , v _ { n }$ are placeholders for each of the $n$ possible outcomes of $h$ . For example, the placeholders for color_attr are the color attributes of an object (Red, Blue, Green, etc.). ",
"bbox": [
174,
518,
825,
588
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "An NPP abbreviates an arithmetic literal of the form $c = v$ with $c \\in \\{ h ( x ) \\}$ and $v \\in \\{ v _ { 1 } , \\ldots , v _ { n } \\}$ . Furthermore, we denote with $\\Pi ^ { n p p }$ a set of NPPs of the form stated in (Eq. 1) and $r ^ { n p p }$ the set of all rules $c = v$ of one NPP, which denotes the possible outcomes, obtained from an NPP in $\\Pi ^ { n p p }$ , e.g. $r ^ { c o l o r \\_ a t t r } = \\{ c = R e d , c = B l u e , c = G r \\bar { e } e n , . . . \\}$ for the example depicted in Fig. 2b. ",
"bbox": [
174,
589,
825,
645
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Rules of the form $n p p ( h ( x ) , [ v _ { 1 } , \\ldots , v _ { n } ] ) B o d y$ are used as an abbreviation for application to multiple entities, e.g. multiple slots for the task of set prediction (cf. Fig. 2b). Hereby, Body of the rule is identified by $\\top$ (tautology, true) or $\\perp$ (contradiction, false) during grounding. Rules of the form $H e a d \\gets B o d y$ with $r ^ { n p p }$ appearing in Head are prohibited for $\\Pi ^ { n p p }$ . ",
"bbox": [
173,
650,
825,
708
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In this work, we largely make use of NPPs that contain probabilistic circuits (specifically SPNs) which allow for tractable density estimation and modelling of joint probabilities. In this way, it is possible to answer a much richer set of probabilistic queries, i.e. $P ( X , C )$ , $P ( X | C )$ and $P ( \\bar { C } | X )$ . ",
"bbox": [
176,
713,
823,
757
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In addition to this, we introduce the arguably more interesting type of NPP that combines a neural module with a PC. Hereby, the neural module learns to map the raw input data into an optimal latent representation, e.g. object-based slot representations. The PC, in turn, learns to model the joint distribution of these latent variables and produces the final probability estimates. This type of NPP nicely combines the representational power of neural networks with the advantages of PCs in probability estimation and query flexibility. ",
"bbox": [
174,
762,
825,
847
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For making the different probabilistic queries distinguishable in a SLASH program, we introduce the following notation. We denote a given variable with $^ +$ and the query variable with −. E.g., within the running example of set prediction $\\cdot e f .$ Fig. 1 and 2b), with the query color_attr $\\cdot ( + X , - C )$ one is asking for $P ( C | X )$ . Similarly, with color_attr $( - X , + C )$ one is asking for $P ( X | C )$ and, finally, with color_attr $( - X , - C )$ for $P ( X , C )$ . ",
"bbox": [
174,
853,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 3
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "To summarize, an NPP can consist of neural and/or probabilistic modules and produces querydependent probability estimates. Due to the flexibility of its definition, the term NPP contains the predicates of previous works (Manhaeve et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2020), but also more interesting predicates discussed above. The specific “flavor” of an NPP should be chosen depending on what type of probability estimation is required (cf. Fig 2a). Lastly, NPPs have the unified loss function of the negative log-likelihood: ",
"bbox": [
173,
102,
825,
188
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/2df2b15aa55bfa392ca1eea024da8df01763335460315fe384a335f6d03243b3.jpg",
"text": "$$\nL _ { N P P } : = - \\log L H ( x , \\hat { x } ) = \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } L H ( x _ { i } , \\hat { x } _ { i } ) = - \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } x _ { i } \\cdot \\log ( P _ { \\xi } ^ { ( X , C ) } ( x _ { i } ) ) = - \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\log ( P _ { \\xi } ^ { ( X , C ) } )\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
181,
194,
823,
236
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "whereby we are assuming the data to be i.i.d., ground truth $x _ { i }$ to be the all-ones vector, $\\xi$ to be the parameters of the NPP and $P _ { \\xi } ^ { ( X , C ) }$ are the predictions ${ \\hat { x } } _ { i }$ obtained from the PC encoded in the NPP. ",
"bbox": [
174,
246,
826,
280
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "3.2 THE SLASH LANGUAGE AND SEMANTICS ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
174,
296,
511,
311
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Fig. 1 presents an illustration of SLASH, exemplified for the task of set prediction, with all of its key components. Having introduced the NPPs previously, which produce probability estimates, we now continue in the pipeline on how to use these probability estimates for answering logical queries. We begin by formally defining a SLASH program. ",
"bbox": [
173,
321,
825,
380
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Definition 1. A SLASH program Π is the union of $\\Pi ^ { a s p }$ , $\\Pi ^ { n p p }$ . Therewith, $\\Pi ^ { a s p }$ is the set of propositional rules (standard rules from ASP-Core-2 (Calimeri et al., 2020)), and $\\Pi ^ { n p p }$ is a set of Neural-Probabilistic Predicates of the form stated in Eq. 1. ",
"bbox": [
173,
383,
825,
426
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Fig. 2b depicts a minimal SLASH program for the task of set prediction, exemplifying a set of propositional rules and neural predicates. Similar to NeurASP, SLASH requires ASP and as such adopts its syntax to most part. We therefore now address integrating our NPPs into an ASP compatible form to obtain the success probability for the logical query given all possible solutions. Thus, we define SLASH’s semantics. For SLASH to translate the program $\\Pi$ to the ASP-solver’s compatible form, the rules (Eq. 1) will be rewritten to the set of rules: ",
"bbox": [
173,
436,
825,
522
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/e4c76dbbc6e4f0607f36cfe65c5c74b6f382d229457f6b2b9ff4996044984268.jpg",
"text": "$$\n1 \\{ h ( x ) = v _ { 1 } ; \\ldots ; h ( x ) = v _ { n } \\} 1\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
393,
529,
604,
546
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The ASP-solver should understand this as “Pick exactly one rule from the set”. After the translation is done, we can ask an ASP-solver for the solutions for $\\Pi$ . We denote a set of ASP constraints in the $\\mathrm { f o r m } \\gets B o d y$ , as queries $Q$ (annotation). and each of the solutions with respect to $Q$ as a potential solution, $I$ , (referred to as stable model in ASP). With $I | _ { r ^ { n _ { P } p } }$ we denote the projection of the $I$ onto $r ^ { n p p }$ , $N u m ( I | _ { r ^ { n p p } } , \\Pi ) \\ -$ – the number of the possible solutions of the program $\\Pi$ agreeing with $I | _ { r ^ { n p p } }$ on $r ^ { n p p }$ . Because we aim to calculate the success probability of the query $Q$ , we formalize the probability of a potential solution $I$ beforehand. ",
"bbox": [
173,
553,
825,
651
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Definition 2. We specify the probability of the potential solution, $I$ , for the program $\\Pi$ as the product of the probabilities of all atoms $c = v$ in $I | _ { r ^ { n p p } }$ divided by the number of potential solutions of $\\Pi$ agreeing with I|rnpp on rnpp: ",
"bbox": [
173,
655,
823,
696
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/8412f1d11746ec4046c38cac73f234346a59ec206ee4309a3774af105b0f2f9a.jpg",
"text": "$$\nP _ { \\Pi } ( I ) = \\left\\{ \\begin{array} { l l } { \\frac { \\prod _ { c = v \\in { I \\vert _ { r } n p p } } P _ { \\Pi } ( c = v ) } { N u m ( I \\vert _ { r ^ { n p p } } , \\Pi ) } , } & { i f I i s a p o t e n t i a l s o l u t i o n o f \\Pi , } \\\\ { 0 , } & { o t h e r w i s e . } \\end{array} \\right.\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
279,
704,
717,
747
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Therefore, the probability of a query can be defined as follows. ",
"bbox": [
173,
771,
589,
787
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Definition 3. The probability of the query $Q$ given the set of possible solutions $I$ is defined as ",
"bbox": [
171,
791,
790,
806
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/85f8048e7bb05e818b56885781d4a00f2c446c1eab1ad62d131afc2c89182051.jpg",
"text": "$$\nP _ { \\Pi } ( Q ) : = \\sum _ { I \\ v { = } Q } P _ { \\Pi } ( I ) .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
421,
813,
575,
849
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Thereby, $I \\models Q$ reads as $^ { * } I$ satisfies $Q$ ”. The probability of the set of queries $\\mathbf { Q } = \\{ Q _ { 1 } , \\ldots , Q _ { l } \\}$ is defined as the product of the probability of each. I.e. ",
"bbox": [
173,
856,
826,
886
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/8fbd6787ba9865c4142b45115e9ee1a16382065a884dc2a918eaf718c77fae02.jpg",
"text": "$$\nP _ { \\Pi } \\left( \\mathbf { Q } \\right) : = \\prod _ { Q _ { i } \\in \\mathbf { Q } } P _ { \\Pi } ( Q _ { i } ) = \\prod _ { Q _ { i } \\in \\mathbf { Q } } \\sum _ { I \\ v { | } = Q } P _ { \\Pi } ( I ) .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
344,
891,
653,
928
],
"page_idx": 4
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "3.3 PARAMETER LEARNING IN SLASH ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
103,
460,
118
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We denote with $\\Pi ( \\pmb \\theta )$ the SLASH program under consideration, thereby $\\pmb \\theta$ is the set of the parameters associated with Π. Further, making the i.i.d. assumption of the query set $\\mathbf { Q }$ , we follow Manhaeve et al. (2018) and Skryagin et al. (2020), and use the learning from entailment setting. That is, the training examples are logical queries that are known to be true in the SLASH program $\\Pi ( \\theta )$ . The goal is now to learn the parameters $\\pmb \\theta$ of the SLASH program $\\Pi ( \\pmb \\theta )$ so that the observed queries are most likely. ",
"bbox": [
173,
128,
825,
214
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "To this end, we employ the negative log-likelihood and the cross-entropy of the observed queries $P _ { \\mathrm { { I I } } ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } )$ and their predicted probability value $P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } )$ , assuming the NPPs are fixed: $L _ { E N T } : =$ ",
"bbox": [
174,
219,
825,
265
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/73189bdbb324a7a5de4d157ea631cf184596aa216a9062f2a7d12c533ba1b87c.jpg",
"text": "$$\n- \\log L H \\left( \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( \\mathbf { Q } ) ) , P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { \\mathbf { Q } } ) \\right) = - \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i j } ) ) \\cdot \\log \\left( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) \\right) .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
178,
270,
800,
313
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "This loss function aims at maximizing the estimated success probability. We remark that the defined loss function is true regardless of the NPP’s form (NN with Softmax, PC or PC jointly with NN). The only difference will be the second term, i.e. $P ^ { ( C | X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } ) } ( x _ { \\mathbf { Q } } )$ or $P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } | C ) } ( x _ { \\mathbf { Q } } ) )$ depending on the NPP and task. Furthermore, we assume that for the set of queries $\\mathbf { Q }$ holds ",
"bbox": [
173,
319,
826,
377
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/38f649600323f2cd8117cf3828720d0ed67716c406e417f4cd2dd9149045732f.jpg",
"text": "$$\nP _ { \\Pi ( \\pmb \\theta ) } ( Q ) > 0 \\quad \\forall Q \\in { \\bf Q } .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
410,
383,
588,
402
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In accordance with the semantics, we seek to reward the right solutions $v = c$ and penalize wrong ones $v \\neq c$ . Referring to the probabilities in $r ^ { n p p }$ (the set of logical rules denoting NPPs, see Def. 2) as $\\mathbf { p }$ , one can compute their gradients w.r.t. $\\pmb { \\theta }$ via backpropagation as ",
"bbox": [
174,
407,
825,
450
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/c71b1b57c842f235633b5397660cc117df3a103d2b93a4c5089f527d193524eb.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\sum _ { Q \\in { \\bf Q } } \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\Pi ( \\pmb \\theta ) } ( Q ) \\right) } { \\partial \\pmb \\theta } = \\sum _ { Q \\in { \\bf Q } } \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\Pi ( \\pmb \\theta ) } ( Q ) \\right) } { \\partial { \\bf p } } \\times \\frac { \\partial { \\bf p } } { \\partial \\pmb \\theta } .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
308,
457,
692,
501
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The term $\\textstyle { \\frac { \\partial \\mathbf { p } } { \\partial \\theta } }$ can now be computed as usual via backward propagation through the NPPs (see Eq. 13 in the appendix for details). By letting $p$ to be the label of the probability of an atom $c = v$ in $r ^ { n p p }$ and denoting $P _ { \\Pi ( \\pmb { \\theta } ) } ( c = v )$ , the term $\\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\mathrm { I I } ( \\pmb { \\theta } ) } ( Q ) \\right) } { \\partial \\mathbf { p } }$ follows from NeurASP (Yang et al., 2020) as ",
"bbox": [
176,
508,
823,
561
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/16ead2545e3a3b0901ab36b2cc5263e0781b7c70ac9da887d966ab918f15d447.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q ) \\right) } { \\partial \\mathbf { p } } = \\frac { I \\underset { I : I \\mid = Q } { \\sum } \\frac { P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( I ) } { P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( c = v ) } - \\underset { I : I , v ^ { \\prime } \\mid = Q } { \\sum } \\frac { P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( I ) } { P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( c = v ^ { \\prime } ) } } { \\underset { I : I \\mid = Q } { \\sum } P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( I ) } .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
279,
568,
718,
642
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "This is sensible. For instance, if a query to be true is not likely to be entailed, the gradient is positive. Putting everything together, the final loss function is ",
"bbox": [
171,
656,
825,
684
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/f145bb6a4a4cfb00ec9261d4033d6ebfe1f151e47554c538aff178796d7c3820.jpg",
"text": "$$\n{ \\cal L } _ { S L A S H } = { \\cal L } _ { N P P } + { \\cal L } _ { E N T }\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
401,
693,
594,
708
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "and we perform training using coordinate descent, i.e., we train the NPPs, the train the program with fixed NPPs, train the NPPs with the program fixed, and so on. ",
"bbox": [
171,
717,
825,
744
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In hindsight, rather than requiring a novel loss function for each individual task and data set, with SLASH, it is possible to simply incorporate the specific requirements into the logic program. The training loss, however, remains the same. We refer to the Appendix A for further details, including the derivation of the total loss gradient. ",
"bbox": [
173,
751,
825,
808
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "4 EMPIRICAL RESULTS ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
828,
382,
844
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The advantage of SLASH lies in the efficient integration of neural, probabilistic and symbolic computations. To emphasize this, we conduct a variety of experimental evaluations. ",
"bbox": [
173,
859,
821,
888
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Experimental Details. We use two benchmark data sets, namely MNIST (LeCun et al., 1998b) for the task of MNIST-Addition and a variant of the ShapeWorld data set (Kuhnle & Copestake, 2017) for ",
"bbox": [
173,
895,
821,
924
],
"page_idx": 5
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Table 1: MNIST Addition Results. Test accuracy corresponds to the percentage of correctly classified test images. (a) Test accuracies in percent for the MNIST Addition task with various DPPLs, including SLASH with an NPP that models the joint probabilities (SLASH (PC)) and one that models only conditional probabilities (SLASH (DNN)). (b) Test accuracies in percent for the MNIST Addition task with missing data, comparing DeepProbLog with SLASH (PC). The amount of missing data was varied between $50 \\%$ and $9 7 \\%$ of the pixels per image. ",
"bbox": [
173,
101,
825,
185
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/3788e55de7e7cfea5762aea98d8f13b0b9a4135918a954edc0d22b46010214d8.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"(a) Baseline MNIST Addition. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1></td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>Test Acc. (%)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>DeepProbLog</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>98.49±0.18</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>NeurASP</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>98.21 ± 0.30</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>SLASH (PC)</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>95.39 ± 0.29</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>SLASH (DNN)</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>98.74±0.21</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
194,
215,
447,
292
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/3c1f935051a7d747c53cdcf34ea4560b6fea51387ad5d49e7ef95ee58f377bb2.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"(b) Missing data MNIST Addition. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=2>DeepProbLog</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>SLASH (PC)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>50%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>97.73 ± 0.12</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>97.67±0.12</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>80%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>76.07 ± 18.38</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>96.72士0.05</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>90%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>69.15 ± 29.15</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>94.85士0.38</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>97%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>32.46 ± 22.48</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>82.57士4.66</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
504,
215,
802,
292
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "object-centric set prediction. For all experiments we present the average and the standard deviation over five runs with different random seeds for parameter initialization. ",
"bbox": [
176,
324,
823,
352
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For ShapeWorld experiments, we generate a data set we refer to as ShapeWorld4. Images of ShapeWorld4 contain between one and four objects, with each object consisting of four attributes: a color (red, blue, green, gray, brown, magenta, cyan or yellow), a shade (bright, or dark), a shape (circle, triangle or square) and a size (small or big). Thus, each object can be created from 84 different combinations of attributes. Fig. 1 depicts an example image. ",
"bbox": [
174,
359,
825,
430
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We measure performance via classification accuracies in the MNIST-Addition task. In our ShapeWorld4 experiments, we present the average precision. We refer to appendix B for the SLASH programs and queries of each experiment, and appendix C for a detailed description of hyperparameters and further details. ",
"bbox": [
174,
435,
825,
492
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Evaluation 1: SLASH outperforms SOTA DPPLs in MNIST-Addition. The task of MNISTAddition (Manhaeve et al., 2018) is to predict the sum of two MNIST digits, presented only as raw images. During test time, however, a model should classify the images directly. Thus, although a model does not receive explicit information about the depicted digits, it must learn to identify digits via indirect feedback on the sum prediction. ",
"bbox": [
173,
498,
825,
569
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We compare the test accuracy after convergence between the three DPPLs: DeepProbLog (Manhaeve et al., 2018), NeurASP (Yang et al., 2020) and SLASH, using a probabilistic circuit (PC) or a deep neural network (DNN) as NPP. Notably, the DNN used in SLASH (DNN) is the LeNet5 model (LeCun et al., 1998a) of DeepProbLog and NeurASP. We note that when using the PC as NPP, we have also extracted conditional class probabilities $P ( C | X )$ , by marginalizing the class variables $C$ to acquire the normalization constant $P ( X )$ from the joint $P ( X , C )$ , and calculating $P ( X | C )$ . ",
"bbox": [
173,
575,
825,
660
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The results can be seen in Tab. 1a. We observe that training SLASH with a DNN NPP produces SOTA accuracies compared to DeepProbLog and NeurASP, confirming that SLASH’s batch-wise loss computation leads to improved performances. We further observe that the test accuracy of SLASH with a PC NPP is slightly below the other DPPLs, however we argue that this may be since a PC, in comparison to a DNN, is learning a true mixture density rather than just conditional probabilities. The advantages of doing so will be investigated in the next experiments. Note that, optimal architecture search for PCs, e.g. for computer vision, is an open research question.These evaluations show SLASH’s advantages on the benchmark MNIST-Addition task. Additional benefits will be made clear in the following experiments. ",
"bbox": [
173,
666,
825,
792
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Evaluation 2: Handling Missing Data with SLASH. SLASH offers the advantage of its flexibility to use various kinds of NPPs. Thus, in comparison to previous DPPLs, one can easily integrate NPPs into SLASH that perform joint probability estimation. For this evaluation, we consider the task of MNIST-Addition with missing data. We trained SLASH (PC) and DeepProbLog with the MNIST-Addition task with images in which a percentage of pixels per image has been removed. It is important to mention here that whereas DeepProbLog handles the missing data simply as background pixels, SLASH (PC) specifically models the missing data as uncertain data by marginalizing the denoted pixels at inference time. We use DeepProbLog here representative of DPPLs without true density estimation. ",
"bbox": [
173,
797,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 6
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/0b06c8954d45055a4eff3ce528d6a37b02d5a2f22cb9bd72bf07133146fdad99.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"(a) ShapeWorld4 and ShapeWorld4 CoGenT Test Avg.Precision ",
"Figure 3: ShapeWorld4 Experiments. (a) Converged test average precision scores for the set prediction task with ShapeWorld4 (top) and ShapeWorld4 CoGenT (bottom). (b) Test average precision scores for set prediction with ShapeWorld4 over the training epochs. In these experiments we compared a baseline slot encoder versus SLASH Attention with slot attention and PC-based NPPs. For the CoGenT experiments, a model is trained on one training set and tested on two separate test conditions. The Condition A test set contains attribute compositions which were also seen during training. The Condition B test set contains attribute compositions which were not seen during training, e.g. yellow circles were not present in the training set, but present in Condition B test set. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td></td><td>Slot Att.</td><td>SLASH Att.</td></tr><tr><td>Test Set</td><td>ShapeWorld4 90.24 ± 0.93</td><td>95.58 ± 0.61</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>CoGenT</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Test Cond. A</td><td>90.37 ± 2.19</td><td>96.85 ± 0.43</td></tr><tr><td>Test Cond.B</td><td>27.15 ± 2.36</td><td>40.58 ± 1.99</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
194,
133,
517,
231
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "image",
"img_path": "images/0eaf19403876aa7fbb58219357ca9c041a53e7685ffb819aff2c0d5f28605742.jpg",
"image_caption": [
"(b) Test Avg.Precision over Training Epochs "
],
"image_footnote": [],
"bbox": [
527,
106,
805,
215
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The results can be seen in Tab. 1b for $5 0 \\%$ , $8 0 \\%$ , $9 0 \\%$ and $9 7 \\%$ missing pixels per image. We observe that at $5 0 \\%$ , DeepProbLog and SLASH produce almost equal accuracies. With $8 0 \\%$ percent missing pixels, there is a substantial difference in the ability of the two DPPLs to correctly classify images, with SLASH being very stable. By further increasing the percentage of missing pixels, this difference becomes even more substantial with SLASH still reaching a $8 2 \\%$ test accuracy even when $9 7 \\%$ of the pixels per image are missing, whereas DeepProbLog degrades to an average of $3 2 \\%$ test accuracy. We further note that SLASH, in comparison to DeepProbLog, produces largely reduced standard deviations over runs. ",
"bbox": [
174,
372,
825,
484
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Thus, by utilizing the power of true density estimation SLASH, with an appropriate NPP, can produce more robust results in comparison to other DPPLs. Further, we refer to Appendix D, which contains results of additional experiments where training is performed with the full MNIST data set whereas only the test set entails different rates of missing pixels. ",
"bbox": [
174,
491,
825,
547
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Evaluation 3: Improved Concept Learning via SLASH. We show that SLASH can be very effective for the complex task of set prediction, which previous DPPLs have not tackled. We revert to the ShapeWorld4 data set for this setting. For set prediction, a model is trained to predict the discrete attributes of a set of objects in an image (cf. Fig. 1 for an example ShapeWorld4 image). The difficulty for the model lies therein that it must match an unordered set of corresponding attributes (with varying number of entities over samples) with its internal representations of the image. ",
"bbox": [
174,
554,
825,
638
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The slot attention module introduced by Locatello et al. (2020) allows for an attractive object-centric approach to this task. Specifically, this module represents a pluggable, differentiable module that can be easily added to any architecture and, through a competitive softmax-based attention mechanism, can enforce the binding of specific parts of a latent representation into permutation-invariant, taskspecific vectors, called slots. ",
"bbox": [
174,
645,
825,
714
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In our experiments, we wish to show that by adding logical constraints to the training setting, one can improve the overall performances and generalization properties of such a model. For this, we train SLASH with NPPs as depicted in Fig. 1 consisting of a shared slot encoder and separate PCs, each modelling the mixture of latent slot variables and the attributes of one category, e.g. color. For ShapeWorld4, we thereby have altogether four NPPs. SLASH is trained via queries of the kind exemplified in Fig. 7 in the Appendix. We refer to this configuration as SLASH Attention. ",
"bbox": [
174,
722,
825,
805
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We compare SLASH Attention to a baseline slot attention encoder using an MLP and Hungarian loss for predicting the object properties from the slot encodings as in Locatello et al. (2020). The results of these experiments can be found in Fig. 3a (top). We observe that the average precision after convergence on the held-out test set with SLASH Attention is greatly improved to that of the baseline model. Additionally, in Fig. 3b we observe that SLASH Attention reaches the average precision value of the baseline model in much fewer number of epochs. Thus, we can summarize that adding logical knowledge in the training procedure via SLASH can greatly improve the capabilities of a neural module for set prediction. ",
"bbox": [
174,
811,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 7
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Evaluation 4: Improved Compositional Generalization with SLASH. To test the hypothesis that SLASH Attention possesses improved generalization properties in comparison to the baseline model, we ran experiments on a variant of ShapeWorld4 similar to the CLEVR Compositional Generalization Test (CoGenT) (Johnson et al., 2017). The goal of CoGenT is to investigate a model’s ability to handle novel combinations of attributes that were not seen during training. ",
"bbox": [
174,
103,
825,
172
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For this purpose, we established two conditions within a ShapeWorld4 CoGenT data set: Condition (A) – the training and test data set contains squares with the colors gray, blue, brown, or yellow, triangles with the colors red, green, magenta, or cyan and circles of all colors. Condition (B) – the training set is as in Condition (A). However, the test set contains squares with the colors red, green, magenta, or cyan, triangles with the colors gray, blue, brown, or yellow and circles of all colors. The goal is to investigate how well a model can generalize that, e.g., also squares can have the color red, although never having seen evidence for this during training. ",
"bbox": [
173,
180,
825,
279
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The resulting average precision test scores are presented in Fig. 3a (bottom). We observe that, even though the SLASH Program used for this experiment was not explicitly written to handle composition generalization, SLASH Attention shows greatly improved generalization capabilities. This can be seen in the approx. $1 3 \\%$ higher average precision scores on the Condition (B) test set in comparison to the baseline model. Importantly, this trend still holds even when subtracting the higher precision scores observed in Condition (A). ",
"bbox": [
174,
285,
825,
368
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "To summarize our findings from the experiments on set prediction: we observe that adding prior knowledge in the form of logical constraints via SLASH can greatly improve a neural module in terms of performance and generalizability. On a side note: training neural networks for novel tasks, often involves defining explicit loss functions, e.g. Hungarian loss for set prediction. In contrast with SLASH, no matter the choice of NPP and underlying task, the training loss remains the same. Task-related requirements simply need to be added as lines of code to the SLASH program. This additionally highlights SLASH’s versatility and flexibility. ",
"bbox": [
174,
376,
825,
473
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Summary of all Empirical Results. All empirical results together demonstrate that the flexibility of SLASH is highly beneficial and can easily outperform state-of-the-art: one can freely combine what is required to solve the underlying task — (deep) neural networks, PCs, and logic. Particularly, the results indicate the potential of integrating PCs via SLASH into DPPLs. ",
"bbox": [
174,
479,
825,
536
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "5 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
174,
587,
493,
604
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We introduce SLASH, a novel DPPL that integrates neural computations with tractable probability estimates and logical statements. The key ingredient of SLASH to achieve this are Neural-Probabilistic Predicates (NPPs) that can be flexibly constructed out of neural and/or probabilistic circuit modules based on the data and underlying task. With these NPPs, one can produce task-specific probability estimates. The details and additional prior knowledge of a task are neatly encompassed within a SLASH program with only few lines of code. Finally, via Answer Set Programming and Weighted Model Counting, the logical SLASH program and probability estimates from the NPPs are combined to estimate the truth value of a task-specific query. Our experiments show the power and efficiency of SLASH, improving upon previous DPPLs in the benchmark MNIST-Addition task in terms of performance, efficiency and robustness. Importantly, by integrating a SOTA slot attention encoder into NPPs and adding few logical constraints, SLASH demonstrates improved performances and generalizability in comparison to the pure slot encoder for the task of object-centric set prediction; a setting no DPPL has tackled yet. This shows the great potential of DPPLs to elegantly combine logical reasoning with neural computations and uncertainty estimates. ",
"bbox": [
174,
638,
825,
833
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Interesting avenues for future work include benchmarking SLASH on additional data types and tasks. One should explore unsupervised and weakly supervised learning using logic with SLASH and investigate how far logical constraints can help unsupervised object discovery. In direct alignment with our work, one should also investigate image generation via the beneficial feature of PCs to generate random samples. Actually, it should be possible to generate images that encapsulate logical knowledge bases. This is important to move from data-rich to knowledge-rich AI. ",
"bbox": [
174,
840,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 8
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "ETHICS STATEMENT ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
102,
344,
118
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "With our work, we have shown that one can add prior knowledge and logical constraints to the training of learning systems. We postulate that SLASH can therefore additionally be used to identify and remove biases or undesirable behavior, by adding constraints within the SLASH program. We observe that this feature, however, also has the potential danger to be used in the opposite way, e.g. explicitly adding bias and discriminatory factors to a system. To the best of our knowledge, our study does not raise any ethical, privacy or conflict of interest concerns. ",
"bbox": [
174,
132,
825,
217
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "REPRODUCIBILITY STATEMENT ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
237,
436,
252
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "An official, curated GitHub repository will be made public with the final version, containing the code of SLASH, as well as scripts to reproduce the experiments and generate data sets. In addition to this, architectural details and hyperparameters are included in the appendix. Preliminary code will be uploaded upon submission. Lastly, details on the evaluation metrics and relevant data sets are given in the main text as well as appendix. ",
"bbox": [
174,
268,
825,
338
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "REFERENCES ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
359,
285,
375
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Yoshua Bengio. From System 1 Deep Learning to System 2 Deep Learning. Invited talk NeurIPS, 2019. URL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v $=$ T3sxeTgT4qc. ",
"bbox": [
174,
382,
823,
411
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Eli Bingham, Jonathan P. Chen, Martin Jankowiak, Fritz Obermeyer, Neeraj Pradhan, Theofanis Karaletsos, Rohit Singh, Paul A. Szerlip, Paul Horsfall, and Noah D. Goodman. Pyro: Deep universal probabilistic programming. Journal of Machine Learning Research, pp. 28:1–28:6, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
174,
419,
826,
462
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Christopher P. Burgess, Loïc Matthey, Nicholas Watters, Rishabh Kabra, Irina Higgins, Matthew Botvinick, and Alexander Lerchner. Monet: Unsupervised scene decomposition and representation. CoRR, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
174,
469,
826,
512
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Francesco Calimeri, Wolfgang Faber, Martin Gebser, Giovambattista Ianni, Roland Kaminski, Thomas Krennwallner, Nicola Leone, Marco Maratea, Francesco Ricca, and Torsten Schaub. Asp-core-2 input language format. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, pp. 294–309, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
173,
521,
826,
577
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "YooJung Choi, Antonio Vergari, and Guy Van den Broeck. Probabilistic circuits: A unifying framework for tractable probabilistic models. Technical report, Technical report, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
176,
587,
823,
616
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Gabriele Ciravegna, Francesco Giannini, Marco Gori, Marco Maggini, and Stefano Melacci. Humandriven FOL explanations of deep learning. In IJCAI, pp. 2234–2240, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
173,
625,
825,
652
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "W. F. Clocksin and Chris Mellish. Programming in Prolog. 1981. ",
"bbox": [
173,
661,
604,
676
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Alain Colmerauer and Philippe Roussel. The birth of prolog. In HOPL-II, pp. 37–52, 1993. ",
"bbox": [
178,
685,
776,
700
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Adnan Darwiche. SDD: A new canonical representation of propositional knowledge bases. In IJCAI, pp. 819–826, 2011. ",
"bbox": [
176,
708,
826,
737
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Artur d’Avila Garcez and Luís C. Lamb. Neurosymbolic AI: the 3rd wave. CoRR, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
173,
746,
754,
761
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Artur S. d’Avila Garcez, Luís C. Lamb, and Dov M. Gabbay. Neural-Symbolic Cognitive Reasoning. Cognitive Technologies. 2009. ",
"bbox": [
176,
768,
823,
797
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Artur S. d’Avila Garcez, Marco Gori, Luís C. Lamb, Luciano Serafini, Michael Spranger, and Son N. Tran. Neural-symbolic computing: An effective methodology for principled integration of machine learning and reasoning. FLAP, pp. 611–632, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
174,
806,
825,
849
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Yannis Dimopoulos, Bernhard Nebel, and Jana Koehler. Encoding planning problems in nonmonotonic logic programs. In ECP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 169–181, 1997. ",
"bbox": [
176,
858,
823,
887
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Martin Engelcke, Adam R. Kosiorek, Oiwi Parker Jones, and Ingmar Posner. GENESIS: generative scene inference and sampling with object-centric latent representations. In ICLR, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
176,
895,
821,
924
],
"page_idx": 9
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Jerry A Fodor and Zenon W Pylyshyn. Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition, pp. 3–71, 1988. ",
"bbox": [
171,
103,
825,
132
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Klaus Greff, Raphaël Lopez Kaufman, Rishabh Kabra, Nick Watters, Christopher Burgess, Daniel Zoran, Loic Matthey, Matthew Botvinick, and Alexander Lerchner. Multi-object representation learning with iterative variational inference. In ICML, pp. 2424–2433, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
176,
141,
821,
184
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Klaus Greff, Sjoerd van Steenkiste, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. On the binding problem in artificial neural networks. CoRR, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
169,
193,
823,
222
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Drew A. Hudson and Christopher D. Manning. Learning by abstraction: The neural state machine. In NeurIPS, pp. 5901–5914, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
171,
231,
825,
261
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Jindong Jiang and Sungjin Ahn. Generative neurosymbolic machines. In NeurIPS, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
169,
268,
758,
285
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Justin Johnson, Bharath Hariharan, Laurens van der Maaten, Li Fei-Fei, C. Lawrence Zitnick, and Ross B. Girshick. CLEVR: A diagnostic dataset for compositional language and elementary visual reasoning. In CVPR, pp. 1988–1997, 2017. ",
"bbox": [
176,
292,
825,
337
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In ICLR 2015, 2015. ",
"bbox": [
171,
344,
825,
375
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Alexander Kuhnle and Ann A. Copestake. Shapeworld - A new test methodology for multimodal language understanding. CoRR, 2017. ",
"bbox": [
173,
383,
823,
412
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Yann LeCun, Léon Bottou, Yoshua Bengio, and Patrick Haffner. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. pp. 2278–2324, 1998a. ",
"bbox": [
173,
421,
823,
450
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Yann LeCun, Corinna Cortes, and Christopher J.C. Burges. THE MNIST DATABASE of handwritten digits, 1998b. URL http://yann.lecun.com/exdb/mnist/. ",
"bbox": [
174,
459,
823,
489
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Joohyung Lee and Yi Wang. Weighted rules under the stable model semantics. In KR, pp. 145–154, 2016. ",
"bbox": [
173,
497,
823,
526
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Zhixuan Lin, Yi-Fu Wu, Skand Vishwanath Peri, Weihao Sun, Gautam Singh, Fei Deng, Jindong Jiang, and Sungjin Ahn. SPACE: unsupervised object-oriented scene representation via spatial attention and decomposition. In ICLR, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
173,
535,
825,
578
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Francesco Locatello, Dirk Weissenborn, Thomas Unterthiner, Aravindh Mahendran, Georg Heigold, Jakob Uszkoreit, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Thomas Kipf. Object-centric learning with slot attention. In NeurIPS, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
173,
587,
825,
630
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Robin Manhaeve, Sebastijan Dumancic, Angelika Kimmig, Thomas Demeester, and Luc De Raedt. Deepproblog: Neural probabilistic logic programming. pp. 3753–3763, 2018. ",
"bbox": [
171,
638,
825,
670
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Jiayuan Mao, Chuang Gan, Pushmeet Kohli, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, and Jiajun Wu. The neurosymbolic concept learner: Interpreting scenes, words, and sentences from natural supervision. In ICLR, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
173,
676,
825,
719
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Gary F Marcus. The algebraic mind: Integrating connectionism and cognitive science. 2019. ",
"bbox": [
171,
728,
787,
746
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Victor W. Marek and Miroslaw Truszczynski. Stable models and an alternative logic programming paradigm. In The Logic Programming Paradigm - A 25-Year Perspective, Artificial Intelligence, pp. 375–398. 1999. ",
"bbox": [
174,
752,
825,
796
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Robert Peharz, Steven Lang, Antonio Vergari, Karl Stelzner, Alejandro Molina, Martin Trapp, Guy Van den Broeck, Kristian Kersting, and Zoubin Ghahramani. Einsum networks: Fast and scalable learning of tractable probabilistic circuits. In ICML, pp. 7563–7574, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
174,
805,
825,
848
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Hoifung Poon and Pedro M. Domingos. Sum-product networks: A new deep architecture. In UAI, pp. 337–346, 2011. ",
"bbox": [
171,
857,
825,
886
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Matthew Richardson and Pedro M. Domingos. Markov logic networks. Machine Learning, pp. 107–136, 2006. ",
"bbox": [
173,
895,
823,
924
],
"page_idx": 10
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Arseny Skryagin, Karl Stelzner, Alejandro Molina, Fabrizio Ventola, and Kristian Kersting. Splog: Sum-product logic. In ProbProg, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
169,
103,
825,
132
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Timo Soininen and Ilkka Niemelä. Developing a declarative rule language for applications in product configuration. In PADL, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 305–319, 1999. ",
"bbox": [
173,
141,
823,
170
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Wolfgang Stammer, Patrick Schramowski, and Kristian Kersting. Right for the right concept: Revising neuro-symbolic concepts by interacting with their explanations. In CVPR, pp. 3619–3629, 2021. ",
"bbox": [
173,
179,
823,
208
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Dustin Tran, Matthew D. Hoffman, Rif A. Saurous, Eugene Brevdo, Kevin Murphy, and David M. Blei. Deep probabilistic programming. In ICLR, 2017. ",
"bbox": [
173,
217,
825,
246
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Zhun Yang, Adam Ishay, and Joohyung Lee. NeurASP: Embracing neural networks into answer set programming. In IJCAI, pp. 1755–1762, 2020. ",
"bbox": [
169,
253,
825,
284
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Kexin Yi, Jiajun Wu, Chuang Gan, Antonio Torralba, Pushmeet Kohli, and Josh Tenenbaum. Neuralsymbolic VQA: disentangling reasoning from vision and language understanding. In NeurIPS, pp. 1039–1050, 2018. ",
"bbox": [
173,
291,
825,
334
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Yan Zhang, Jonathon S. Hare, and Adam Prügel-Bennett. Deep set prediction networks. In NeurIPS, pp. 3207–3217, 2019. ",
"bbox": [
173,
343,
823,
372
],
"page_idx": 11
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "A APPENDIX A – DETAILS ON PARAMETER LEARNING ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
174,
102,
647,
118
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In the Appendix, we want to discuss details on parameter learning in SLASH. Since we use coordinate descent for training SLASH we present the derivative of each component of the loss function defined in equation 10 since while optimization, one component has to be kept fixed. ",
"bbox": [
173,
132,
826,
175
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We start with the gradient of the NPP loss function $L _ { N P P }$ i.e. the negative log-likelihood, defined in equation 2 ",
"bbox": [
173,
181,
825,
210
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/585d7e4126426f14bee1247b8486a079b7133b5af781821d1e81c73d2b32d03d.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\begin{array} { c } { { \\displaystyle { \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial \\xi } } L _ { N P P } = { \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial x _ { Q _ { i } } } \\cdot \\frac { \\partial x _ { Q _ { i } } } { \\partial \\xi } } L _ { N P P } = { \\frac { \\partial x _ { Q _ { i } } } { \\partial \\xi } } \\left( - { \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } } { \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial x _ { Q _ { i } } } \\log \\left( P _ { \\xi } ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\right) } \\right) } } \\\\ { { \\displaystyle { = \\frac { \\partial x _ { Q _ { i } } } { \\partial \\xi } } \\left( - { \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } } { \\frac { 1 } { \\left( P _ { \\xi } ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\right) } } \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial x _ { Q _ { i } } } \\left( P _ { \\xi } ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\right) \\right) } } \\end{array}\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
230,
213,
767,
309
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Here, we remark tha t ∂xQi∂ξ will be carried out by back-propagation and the expression after it is the initial gradient. ",
"bbox": [
176,
310,
821,
344
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Next, we derive the gradient of the logical entailment loss function $\\mathit { L } _ { \\mathit { E N T } }$ , as defined in equation 7. One estimates the gradient as follows ",
"bbox": [
174,
352,
825,
380
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/25d52485cccf285e31823cec21b9741e5713aae7acecaaba5018b450f79cbcf7.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\frac { 1 } { n } \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial p } L _ { E N T } \\ge - \\frac { 1 } { n } \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\frac { \\partial \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) ) } { \\partial p } \\cdot \\log \\bigl ( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\bigr ) ,\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
285,
383,
710,
424
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "whereby ",
"bbox": [
173,
426,
232,
441
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "• $X _ { \\mathbf { Q } }$ is the set of random variables associated with the set of the queries $\\mathbf { Q }$ , \n• $x _ { Q _ { i } }$ is a training sample, a realization of the set of random variables $X _ { \\mathbf { Q } }$ associated with the particular query $Q _ { i }$ , \n• $P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } )$ is the probability of the realization $x _ { Q _ { i } }$ estimated by the NPP modelling the joint over the set $X _ { \\mathbf { Q } }$ and $C$ – the set of classes (the domain of the NPP), \n• $\\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) )$ – the probability of the query $Q _ { i }$ under the program $\\Pi ( \\theta )$ calculated by SLASH (for the reference see the equation (5)), \n• and ∂ log(PΠ(θ)(Qi)) is the gradient as defined in Eq.9. ",
"bbox": [
217,
450,
825,
590
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We begin with the definition of the cross-entropy for two vectors $y _ { i }$ and $\\hat { y } _ { i }$ : ",
"bbox": [
174,
599,
671,
614
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/14efd2278c7a27ae3caf3aa86dbfe8b6cd10cb590327c2af094e018d78f8a58a.jpg",
"text": "$$\nH ( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } ) : = \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } y _ { i j } \\cdot \\log \\left( \\frac { 1 } { \\hat { y } _ { i j } } \\right) = \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } \\left( y _ { i j } \\cdot \\underbrace { \\log ( 1 ) } _ { = 0 } - y _ { i j } \\cdot \\log ( \\hat { y } _ { i j } ) \\right) = - \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } y _ { i j } \\cdot \\log ( \\hat { y } _ { i j } ) .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
187,
617,
808,
667
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Hereafter we substitute ",
"bbox": [
173,
670,
328,
684
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/8d2dc436876b6a02f8a97fb08e101dcf909c86ec9964c1fd88d9161441971688.jpg",
"text": "$$\ny _ { i } = \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) ) \\qquad \\mathrm { ~ a n d ~ } \\qquad \\hat { y } _ { i } = P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } )\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
313,
685,
684,
705
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "and obtain ",
"bbox": [
173,
707,
246,
722
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/2b9e3b0da6436f352dbb7d2b7302116d37bd724246a285e83381b2e506b7e554.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\bar { \\cal I } ( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } ) = \\cal H \\left( \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) ) , P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , { \\cal C } ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\right) = - \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i j } ) ) \\cdot \\log \\Big ( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , { \\cal C } ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) \\Big ) .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
181,
722,
833,
765
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We remark that $m$ represent the number of classes defined in the domain of an NPP. Now, we differentiate the equation (11) with the respect to $p$ depicted as in Eq. 9 to be the label of the probability of an atom $c = v$ in $r ^ { n p p }$ , denoting $P _ { \\Pi ( \\pmb { \\theta } ) } ( c = v )$ . Since differentiation is linear, the product rule is applicable directly: ",
"bbox": [
174,
775,
825,
833
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/3c0bbe5adcca47ae64eee1a8772ec5065bb21a604d9ef8d82b7d7725f3268047.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\begin{array} { c } { \\displaystyle \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial p } H \\left( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } \\right) = - \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } \\left[ \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i j } ) \\right) } { \\partial p } \\cdot \\log \\left( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) \\right) \\right. } \\\\ { \\displaystyle \\left. + \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i j } ) ) \\cdot \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) \\right) } { \\partial p } \\right] . } \\end{array}\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
261,
834,
738,
922
],
"page_idx": 12
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "We do not wish to consider the latter term of $\\begin{array} { r } { \\log ( P _ { \\mathrm { { I I } } ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) ) \\cdot \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\right) } { \\partial p } } \\end{array}$ because it represents the rescaling and to keep the first since SLASH procure $\\frac { \\partial \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) ) } { \\partial p }$ following Eq. 9. To achieve this, we estimate equation from above downwards as ",
"bbox": [
173,
101,
826,
160
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/b2e3c45fb5858cfba6c3db1fb458509db228f8ac82adf03458a47e91d2270af1.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\frac { \\partial } { \\partial p } H \\left( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } \\right) \\geq - \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } \\frac { \\partial \\log ( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i j } ) ) } { \\partial p } \\cdot \\log \\left( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) \\right) .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
279,
165,
720,
209
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Furthermore, let us recall that under i.i.d assumption we obtain from the definition of likelihood ",
"bbox": [
171,
214,
803,
231
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/b1cef1055651c022e4fabcdf7453f8c1f11569815c366ea8cad9ac5be1bcf777.jpg",
"text": "$$\nL H ( y , \\hat { y } ) = \\prod _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } L H ( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } ) ,\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
403,
236,
593,
277
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "and following the negative likelihood coupled with the knowledge that the log-likelihood of $y _ { i }$ is the log of a particular entry of $\\hat { y } _ { i }$ ",
"bbox": [
173,
282,
825,
313
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/d0e566d68e2f20b4e54fc7c2b09a43dd98b00de71bda7849e2d912e6c8af305d.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\begin{array} { c } { { { \\cal L } _ { E N T } = - \\displaystyle \\log { \\cal L } H ( y , \\hat { y } ) = - \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\log { \\cal L } H ( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } ) = - \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } y _ { i j } \\cdot \\log ( \\hat { y } _ { i j } ) = } } \\\\ { { \\displaystyle \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\left[ - \\sum _ { j = 1 } ^ { m } y _ { i j } \\cdot \\log ( \\hat { y } _ { i j } ) \\right] = \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } H ( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } ) . } } \\end{array}\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
236,
318,
761,
412
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Finally, we obtain the following estimate applying inequality (12) ",
"bbox": [
171,
417,
606,
434
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/e89568be2c91580ddf980db40d0e2dcf668767f5e62acf9ad3ab41e0da02c656.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\frac { 1 } { n } \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial p } L _ { E N T } = \\frac { 1 } { n } \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\frac { \\partial } { \\partial p } H ( y _ { i } , \\hat { y } _ { i } ) \\geq - \\frac { 1 } { n } \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\mathrm { { I I } } ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) \\right) } { \\partial p } \\cdot \\log \\left( P ^ { ( X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } , C ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i } } ) \\right)\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
210,
439,
785,
481
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Also, we note that the mathematical transformations listed above hold for any type of NPP and the task dependent queries (NN with Softmax, PC or PC jointly with NN). The only difference will be the second term, i.e., $\\log ( P ^ { ( C | X _ { \\mathbf { Q } } ) } ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) )$ or $\\log ( P ^ { ( \\bar { X } _ { \\mathbf { Q } } | C ) } \\bar { ( x _ { Q _ { i j } } ) } )$ depending on the NPP and task. The NPP in a form of a single PC modeling the joint over $X _ { \\mathbf { Q } }$ and $C$ was depicted to be the example. With that, the derivation of gradients for both loss functions 2 and 7 is complete, and the training is carried out by coordinated descent. ",
"bbox": [
173,
486,
826,
571
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Backpropagation for joint NN and PC NPPs: If within the SLASH program, $\\Pi ( \\pmb \\theta )$ , the NPP forwards the data tensor through a NN first, i.e., the NPP models a joint over the NN’s output variables by a PC, then we rewrite (8) to ",
"bbox": [
174,
592,
825,
636
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "equation",
"img_path": "images/44e2cbe01c8e9cc1b050627c51a956c1b81d85f83dda7a0471ea236f4081c019.jpg",
"text": "$$\n\\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } { \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) \\right) } { \\partial \\theta } } = \\sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } { \\frac { \\partial \\log \\left( P _ { \\Pi ( \\theta ) } ( Q _ { i } ) \\right) } { \\partial \\mathbf { p } } } \\times { \\frac { \\partial \\mathbf { p } } { \\partial \\theta } } \\times { \\frac { \\partial \\theta } { \\partial \\gamma } } .\n$$",
"text_format": "latex",
"bbox": [
287,
641,
710,
683
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Thereby, $\\gamma$ is the set of the NN’s parameters and $\\frac { \\partial \\pmb { \\theta } } { \\partial \\gamma }$ is computed by the backward propagation through the NN. ",
"bbox": [
173,
689,
825,
722
],
"page_idx": 13
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "B APPENDIX B – SLASH PROGRAMS ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
174,
102,
504,
118
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Here, the interested reader will find the SLASH programs which we compiled for our experiments. Figure 4 presents the one for the MNIST Addition task, Figure 6 – for the set prediction task with slot attention encoder and the subsequent CoGenT test. Note the use of the $\" + \"$ and “-” notation for indicating whether a random variable is given or being queried for. ",
"bbox": [
173,
133,
826,
190
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "# Define images img(i1). img(i2). 3 # Define Neural-Probabilistic Predicate 4 npp(digit(X), [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]) :- img(X). 5 # Define the addition of digits given two images and the resulting sum 6 addition(A, B, N) :- digit $\\mathrm { \\Omega } + \\tt { A }$ , -N1), digit( $+ \\mathtt { B }$ , -N2), $\\mathrm { ~ N ~ } = \\mathrm { ~ N ~ 1 ~ } + \\mathrm { ~ N ~ 2 ~ }$ . ",
"bbox": [
161,
210,
816,
287
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "# Is 7 the sum of the digits in img1 and img2? 2 :- addition(image_id1, image_id2, 7) ",
"bbox": [
160,
364,
580,
390
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "image",
"img_path": "images/5d942cadea3c1d2f75797d835c60baf51150bd1a4748aee77f10460fe3c0d331.jpg",
"image_caption": [
"Figure 4: SLASH Program for MNIST addition. The same program was used for the training with missing data. ",
"Figure 5: Example SLASH Query for MNIST addition. The same type of query was used for the training with missing data ",
"Figure 6: SLASH Program for ShapeWorld4. The same program was used for the CoGenT experiments. "
],
"image_footnote": [],
"bbox": [
156,
467,
803,
760
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "# Does object o1 have the attributes red, circle, bright, small? :- has_attributes(o1, red, circle, bright, small) ",
"bbox": [
163,
834,
738,
861
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Figure 7: Example SLASH Query for ShapeWorld4 experiments. In other words, this query corresponds to asking SLASH: “Is object 1 a small, bright red circle?”. ",
"bbox": [
171,
878,
825,
909
],
"page_idx": 14
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "C APPENDIX C – EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
174,
102,
547,
118
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "C.1 SHAPEWORLD4 GENERATION ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
133,
424,
148
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The ShapeWorld4 and ShapeWorld4 CoGenT data sets were generated using the original scripts of (Kuhnle & Copestake, 2017) (https://github.com/AlexKuhnle/ShapeWorld). The exact scripts will be added together with the SLASH source code. ",
"bbox": [
174,
160,
825,
202
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "C.2 AVERAGE PRECISION COMPUTATION (SHAPEWORLD4) ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
220,
598,
234
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For the baseline slot encoder experiments on ShapeWorld4 we measured the average precision score as in Locatello et al. (2020). In comparison to the baseline slot encoder, when applying SLASH Attention, however, we handled the case of a slot not containing an object, e.g. only background variables, differently. Whereas Locatello et al. (2020) add an additional binary identifier to the multi-label ground truth vectors, we have added a background (bg) attribute to each category (cf. Fig. 6). A slot is thus considered to be empty (i.e. not containing an object) if each NPP returns the maximal conditional probability for the $b g$ attribute. ",
"bbox": [
174,
246,
825,
344
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "As the ShapeWorld4 prediction task only included discrete object properties both for Slot Attention as well as for SLASH Attention the distance threshold for the average precision computation was infinity (thus corresponding to no threshold). ",
"bbox": [
176,
344,
825,
386
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "C.3 MODEL DETAILS ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
176,
404,
336,
417
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For those experiments using NPPs with PC we have used Einsum Networks (EiNets) for implementing the probabilistic circuits. EiNets are a novel implementation design for SPNs introduced by Peharz et al. (2020) that minimize the issue of computational costs that initial SPNs had suffered. This is accomplished by combining several arithmetic operations via a single monolithic einsum-operation. ",
"bbox": [
174,
430,
825,
486
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For all experiments, the ADAM optimizer (Kingma & Ba, 2015) with $\\beta 1 = 0 . 9$ and $\\beta 2 = 0 . 9 9 9$ $\\epsilon = 1 e - 8$ and no weight decay was used. ",
"bbox": [
174,
492,
823,
521
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "MNIST-Addition Experiments For the MNIST-Addition experiments, we ran the DeepProbLog and NeurASP programs with their original configurations, as stated in (Manhaeve et al., 2018) and (Yang et al., 2020), respectively. For the SLASH MNIST-Addition experiments, we have used the same neural module as in DeepProbLog and NeurASP, when training SLASH with the neural NPP (SLASH (DNN)) represented in Tab. 2. When using a PC NPP (SLASH (PC)) we have used an EiNet with the Poon-Domingos (PD) structure (Poon & Domingos, 2011) and normal distribution for the leafs. The formal hyperparameters for the EiNet are depicted in Tab. 3. ",
"bbox": [
173,
529,
825,
626
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The learning rate and batch size for the DNN were 0.005 and 100, for DeepProbLog, NeurASP and SLASH (DNN). For the EiNet, these were 0.01 and 100. ",
"bbox": [
174,
632,
823,
661
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/f70c0188a3a6753bf5fd03b4241a0ce55a0b8fc7d6e5338c2bb42fd3d7818bc9.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"Table 2: Neural module – LeNet5 for MNIST-Addition experiments. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td>Type</td><td>Size/Channels</td><td>Activation</td><td>Comment</td></tr><tr><td>Encoder</td><td>-</td><td>二</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Conv 5 x 5</td><td>1x28x28</td><td>1</td><td>stride 1</td></tr><tr><td>MaxPool2d</td><td>6x24x24</td><td>ReLU</td><td>kernel size 2, stride 2</td></tr><tr><td>Conv 5 x 5</td><td>6x12x12</td><td>1</td><td>stride 1</td></tr><tr><td>MaxPool2d</td><td>16x8x8</td><td>ReLU</td><td>kernel size 2,stride 2</td></tr><tr><td>Classifier</td><td>1</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>MLP</td><td>16x4x4,120</td><td>ReLU</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>MLP</td><td>120,84</td><td>ReLU</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>MLP</td><td>84,10</td><td>1</td><td>Softmax</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
269,
700,
728,
853
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "ShapeWorld4 Experiments For the baseline slot attention experiments with the ShapeWorld4 data set we have used the architecture presented in Tab. 4. For further details on this, we refer to the original work of Locatello et al. (2020). The slot encoder had a number of 4 slots and 3 attention iterations over all experiments. ",
"bbox": [
174,
867,
825,
924
],
"page_idx": 15
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/055619a651ca94f260eb57626f398d17ef7693cb21b9b36feb10922133cfeb38.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"Table 3: Probabilistic Circuit module – EiNet for MNIST-Addition experiments. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td>Variables</td><td>Width</td><td>Height</td><td>Number of Pieces</td><td>Class count</td></tr><tr><td>784</td><td>28</td><td>28</td><td>[4,7,28]</td><td>10</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
279,
127,
718,
164
],
"page_idx": 16
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/7a6e8fe39959ba94229a5e2822d9f8343254e45215672d154eb62542dc807e0b.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"Table 4: Baseline slot encoder for ShapeWorld4 experiments. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td>Type</td><td>Size/Channels</td><td>Activation</td><td>Comment</td></tr><tr><td>Conv 5 x 5</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td>stride 1</td></tr><tr><td>Conv 5 x 5</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td>stride 1</td></tr><tr><td>Conv 5 x 5</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td>stride 1</td></tr><tr><td>Conv 5 x 5</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td>stride 1</td></tr><tr><td>Position Embedding</td><td>1</td><td>二</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Flatten</td><td>axis: [0, 1,2 x 3]</td><td>-</td><td>flatten x, y pos.</td></tr><tr><td>Layer Norm</td><td>二</td><td>-</td><td>二</td></tr><tr><td>MLP (per location)</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td>二</td></tr><tr><td>MLP (per location)</td><td>32</td><td>-</td><td>二</td></tr><tr><td>SlotAttentionModule</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td>二</td></tr><tr><td>MLP</td><td>32</td><td>ReLU</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>MLP</td><td>16</td><td>Sigmoid</td><td>二 1</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
245,
204,
753,
397
],
"page_idx": 16
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "For the SLASH Attention experiments with ShapeWorld4 we have used the same slot encoder as in Tab. 4, however, we replaced the final MLPs with 4 individual EiNets with Poon-Domingos structure (Poon & Domingos, 2011). Their hyperparameters are represented in Tab. 5. ",
"bbox": [
174,
422,
825,
465
],
"page_idx": 16
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/bf6ad54fdca37e6aada941896a644326dea1a55ea9b6a6022392ceabd19cbc57.jpg",
"table_caption": [
"Table 5: Probabilistic Circuit module – EiNet for ShapeWorld4 experiments. "
],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td>EiNet</td><td>Variables</td><td>Width</td><td>Height</td><td>Number ofPieces</td><td>Class count</td></tr><tr><td>Color</td><td>32</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>[4]</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Shape</td><td>32</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>[4]</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Shade</td><td>32</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>[4]</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Size</td><td>32</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>[4]</td><td>3</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
248,
505,
748,
584
],
"page_idx": 16
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The learning rate and batch size for SLASH Attention were 0.01 and 512, for ShapeWorld4 and ShapeWorld4 CoGenT. The learning rate for the baseline slot encoder were 0.0004 and 512. ",
"bbox": [
174,
598,
825,
627
],
"page_idx": 16
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "D APPENDIX D - ADDITIONAL RESULTS ON MNIST ADDITION ",
"text_level": 1,
"bbox": [
171,
101,
717,
118
],
"page_idx": 17
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Table 6: Additional MNIST Addition Results. Test accuracy corresponds to the percentage of correctly classified test images. Both models (DeepProbLog and SLASH (PC)) were trained on the full MNIST data, but tested on images with missing pixels. Test accuracies are presented in percent. The amount of missing data was varied between $50 \\%$ and $9 7 \\%$ of the pixels per image. ",
"bbox": [
173,
136,
825,
194
],
"page_idx": 17
},
{
"type": "table",
"img_path": "images/2187ddca008e51592b0fa5460a51944b779f5cb0f908f13fbbd1c2ac7dff9efa.jpg",
"table_caption": [],
"table_footnote": [],
"table_body": "<table><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1></td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>DeepProbLog</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>SLASH (PC)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>50%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>79.94 ± 7.2</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>72.2 ± 12.15</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>80%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>31.6± 6.08</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>44.2± 8.23</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>90%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>16.94 ± 1.76</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>29.6± 5.77</td></tr><tr><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>97%</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>12.33 ± 0.47</td><td rowspan=1 colspan=1>17.6 ± 2.97</td></tr></table>",
"bbox": [
370,
204,
660,
281
],
"page_idx": 17
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "In addition to the setting considered in Evaluation 2, we adjusted the settings for the MNIST Addition task with missing data into the following way. ",
"bbox": [
173,
292,
823,
321
],
"page_idx": 17
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Training was performed with the full MNIST data set, however the test data set contained different rates of missing pixels. Whereas using an NPP with a PC allows, among other things, to compute marginalization “out of the box” without requiring an update to the architecture or a retraining, this is not so trivial for purely neural-based predicates as in DeepProbLog. Thus, we allowed SLASH (PC) to marginalize over the missing pixels, where this was not directly possible for DeepProbLog. ",
"bbox": [
173,
328,
825,
400
],
"page_idx": 17
},
{
"type": "text",
"text": "The results can be seen in Tab. 6 for $5 0 \\%$ , $8 0 \\%$ , $9 0 \\%$ and $9 7 \\%$ of missing pixels per image in the test set. We observe that at $5 0 \\%$ , DeepProbLog outperforms SLASH by a small margin. For all other rates, we observe that SLASH (PC) reaches significantly higher test accuracies than DeepProbLog. However, we remark that in this setting, SLASH produces larger standard deviations in comparison to DeepProbLog. These results indicate that the conclusions, drawn in the main part of our work, remain true also in this setting of handling missing data. ",
"bbox": [
174,
404,
825,
489
],
"page_idx": 17
}
] |