Inductive Logic Programming

Declarative logic programs offer a powerful and interpretable abstraction for encoding relational structure and neurosymbolic reasoning, by expressing dependencies as weighted compositional rules. However, inducing them from data remains fundamentally hard, bottlenecked by the combinatorial explosion of symbolic search spaces. LLMs have recently emerged as powerful hypothesis generators, but when used in isolation, they lack the capacity to do systematic inductive reasoning needed to reliably synthesize valid programs that fit complex relational distributions. We introduce grasp (Gradient-boosted Synthesis of Probabilistic logic programs), a neurosymbolic framework that casts relational structure learning as functional gradient boosting in which the weak learner is a first-order rule and the intractable inner search is delegated to an LLM proposal oracle. We evaluate grasp on four relational benchmarks spanning molecular toxicity prediction (Tox21), mutagenesis, and citation matching (Cora), and show that it improves over purely symbolic, neural, and LLM-based baselines, while producing interpretable weighted rule ensembles. By replacing combinatorial search with gradient-guided LLM hypothesis generation, grasp retains boosting guarantees without sacrificing the transparency of symbolic outputs.

Humans can often acquire and synthesize complex, recursive concepts from minimal experience. Leveraging cognitive insights, we propose the Minimalist Machine, a framework for inductive program synthesis designed to model such conceptual learning. The system uses a compact relational subset of Prolog: Programs are searched within a fixed schema of body-free facts and two-body conjunctive Horn clauses. Recursion is not defined by a dedicated metarule. Instead, it emerges when a target predicate is reused inside the body of a learned clause. Inspired by a primary school curriculum, the model is taught through a human-curated, sequential introduction of new concepts in arithmetic. Starting from initially empty knowledge base, it first acquires simple structural predicates, then successor-based state transformations, and finally recursive programs for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Ultimately, this approach yields the fully transparent, inductive reasoning trace necessary for human-like conceptual learning.

This paper introduces QXymb, a general framework for constructing observational declarative twins of quantum circuits, and develops QILP-0, its first complete order-0 specialization. QILP-0 constructs a finite multi-valued propositional logic program from observed circuit behaviour within a declared observational scope. The pipeline traverses a declared family of quantum observables incrementally according to a reproducible structural grading and a declared observational reference horizon. Progress is quantified through reference-relative coverage against a fixed target-independent reference. Observable responses are organized through target-independent geometry, while retained latent structure is mapped deterministically back to original observable columns before symbolic processing, preserving observational semantics and provenance. Selected observable profiles are converted into a finite relation through admissible target-independent discretization. The target is used only afterwards to audit twin-admissibility and induce the declarative theory. A theory is certified as an exact observational declarative twin when it completely and correctly reconstructs the resulting finite task-conditioned discrete relation. Logical exactness is therefore separated from numerical, backend, provider, and discretization uncertainty, which is retained as audit metadata. Validation uses two complementary QML settings. Exhaustive Bars & Stripes experiments compare product and grid-CZ embeddings from 16 to 100 qubits and exercise the native-discrete branch. Low-Depth MNIST analyses all 14,708 digit-0/1 instances before and after a trained variational quantum transformation and exercises continuous discretization. In every reported relation, the induced QILP-0 theory achieves complete, conflict-free reconstruction with strict accuracy equal to one.

First-order concept synthesis asks a system to infer one formula that classifies labeled objects consistently across several finite relational structures. Every candidate can be evaluated exactly, but quantified first-order formulas form a vast search space, and LLM outputs are often semantically promising without being fully correct. We introduce Hypothesis Frontier, a verifier-guided neurosymbolic framework that evaluates each LLM formula on every training object, retains the strongest verified hypothesis across rounds, and uses its remaining errors to guide subsequent generation. Symbolic processing repairs invalid formulas while remaining anchored to the LLM-generated hypothesis, and simplifies train-valid formulas without changing any training prediction. Under matched models, problem sets, and LLM-round budgets, Hypothesis Frontier solves substantially more problems than repeated original-prompt generation. After the final formulas are selected, exact simplification shortens many train-valid formulas while preserving every training prediction. Exact symbolic reasoning therefore helps both to solve more induction problems and to compress many of the resulting formulas.

We revisit higher-arity atomic concept learning through the geometry of hypercubes and hyperplanes of ground instances. Our starting point is the observation that the ambient r-dimensional hypercube of ground atoms is not structurally uniform. Its logical complexity is organized by hyperplanes: every hyperplane other than the full diagonal collapses into finitely many elementary-equivalence classes, with a bound independent of the term depth, while the full diagonal is exceptional and its class count grows without bound. This asymmetry is not merely geometric. It reflects the reduction-theoretic structure of the concepts themselves. Building on a higher-dimensional framework developed in the author's earlier work, we reinterpret these results through canonical simple concepts, minimal orderings, and representative reductions. This yields a taxonomy of hyperplane behavior in higher dimensions and shows that complexity is localized rather than spread uniformly through the instance space. The paper includes a fully worked binary case, an explicit treatment of the ternary hypercube, and an unpacked account of the reduction machinery that drives the collapse. The three-dimensional case already exhibits the essential phenomenon of orthogonal families, partial diagonals, and the exceptional full diagonal. This geometric-logical perspective clarifies where complexity is concentrated in atomic concept learning and suggests a modern interpretation in terms of constrained hypothesis spaces and structured classification.

Logical rule induction seeks interpretable rules that transfer across propositional schemas. This requires respecting symmetries: atom naming, example order, polarity flips, and label swap. Enforcing exact symmetry by construction lets one trained inducer scale beyond its training schemas. Our central contribution is a canonical export that decodes a discrete rule from literal scores. It needs no retraining and is exactly equivariant whenever those scores respect the symmetries. We instantiate it on the Neural Rule Inducer, a disjunctive-normal-form (DNF) foundation model that natively respects only example order. We restore the remaining symmetries through architecture, inference, and training. On synthetic stress tests, accuracy on the support labels stays stable at much larger schemas, and rule fidelity on fresh inputs remains above the unmodified model. On real data, accuracy improves most on larger schemas. The exported rule is exact on synthetic full-group tests and on schema-valid real-data tests. This is a mathematical property of the export rather than of a specific model, and we validate it empirically only on the NRI. Enforcing symmetry by construction turns this small-data pretrained model into a reusable, interpretable inducer that transfers to larger schemas.

FastLAS is a scalable system for Inductive Logic Programming (ILP): you give it some background knowledge, a language bias, and a set of examples, and it searches for a set of logic program rules (a hypothesis) that explains the examples. These notes are a hands-on introduction to writing FastLAS programs. They are organised as a programmer's guide: syntax first, then a ladder of worked, numbered examples of increasing difficulty. Every self-contained example here has been run against FastLAS 2.2.0 and shows the tool's actual output. We keep theory to the minimum needed to write correct programs; throughout, set-off notes flag where FastLAS differs from its sibling system ILASP, and where the two learning algorithms (--opl and --nopl) behave differently. The document is intended as an unofficial tutorial to FastLAS 2.2.0, not as an official language specification.

Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting enables large language models (LLMs) to tackle multi-step reasoning tasks, yet the generated intermediate steps are not guaranteed to be logically sound. We present Reason Popper-ly, a neurosymbolic framework that uses inductive logic programming (ILP) to learn relation composition rules from reasoning traces and deploys them as an online verifier for step-level correction. Given an LLM-generated trace, the method checks each inferred step against the learned rule table, diagnoses the violation type, rewrites incorrect steps with symbolically derived repairs, and regenerates the remaining suffix so that the model can produce its final answer conditioned on a verified trace. We evaluate on CLUTRR, a multi-hop kinship reasoning benchmark, using five language models over reasoning chains of 2 to 10 hops. Across all models, Reason Popper-ly consistently improves terminal accuracy over standard CoT, with gains of up to 48 percentage points for small models and 15 points for frontier models on the longest chains. Compared with a fully exogenous symbolic pipeline, our method performs better on harder instances by preserving the model's successful grounding while correcting only verifiable reasoning failures. In addition, step-level ILP verification yields a fine-grained error taxonomy that provides diagnostic insight beyond final-answer accuracy.

Predicate invention (PI), the creation of new predicates to extend the hypothesis space, remains a critical bottleneck in Inductive Logic Programming (ILP). Existing methods rely on domain expertise and produce semantically opaque predicates, hindering adaptation to unfamiliar domains and cross-task reuse. We present ADVENT, an LLM-driven PI mechanism for ILP. ADVENT pairs LLM abductive generation with Prolog deductive verification, forming an iterative loop in which concrete execution results guide the LLM to refine candidate predicates. The mechanism leverages Large Language Models to identify implicit patterns in structured relational data and invent auxiliary predicates with meaningful names and definitions. Invented predicates and learned rules accumulate in a knowledge pool for cross-task reuse. Experiments on nine poker-hand concepts across seven LLMs show that LLM-driven PI achieves 58% success rate where ILP alone fails entirely, formal verification raises this to 80%, and the knowledge pool yields gains up to +31 percentage points, while producing human-interpretable rules. These results suggest that ADVENT offers a promising direction for automating predicate invention and enabling cross-task knowledge reuse in ILP.

Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly automate complex tasks by integrating language models with external tools and environments. However, their autonomy poses significant safety risks: agents may execute destructive commands, leak sensitive data, or violate domain constraints. Existing safety approaches face a fundamental tradeoff: hand-crafted rules are interpretable but brittle, with overly conservative rules blocking safe operations (high false positives) while permissive rules miss unsafe behaviors (high false negatives). Neural classifiers lack the interpretability required for safety-critical deployments. We present AutoSpec, a framework that automatically evolves deployed expert-designed safety rules from user safe/unsafe annotations through counterexample-guided inductive synthesis (CEGIS) guided by inductive logic programming (ILP). Starting from the expert rules and a stream of annotated traces, AutoSpec iteratively evaluates rules, mines false-positive and false-negative counterexamples, uses ILP to learn which predicates discriminate them, generates candidate rule edits, and verifies candidates to select the best revision. The key insight is that ILP efficiently identifies predicates that appear frequently in false negatives but rarely in false positives (or vice versa), dramatically pruning the exponential search space of rule edits. This continues until convergence, producing interpretable rules that balance precision and recall. We evaluate AutoSpec on 291 execution traces spanning code execution and embodied agent domains. AutoSpec raises rule F1 to 0.98 and 0.93 across the two domains, achieving up to 94% false positive reduction while maintaining high recall, and converges within 4-5 iterations. The ILP-guided approach achieves up to 4.8x higher F1 than heuristic CEGIS. The learned rules are human-readable, auditable, and generalize to unseen scenarios.

Learning from Demonstration~(LfD) should capture not only how a task is executed, but also its high-level task structure that explains the demonstrated behavior. As robots become more autonomous, such task representations must be inspectable, reusable, and human-interpretable. To address this, we study how to represent and learn robotic tasks with inductive logic programming~(ILP) by decomposing a complex task into a series of simpler learning objectives at different abstraction (ontological) levels. The system infers symbolic rules from demonstrations and prior (domain) knowledge, and reuses learned rules when learning higher-level task structure. We evaluate the approach in a synthetic block-assembly scenario and show that the learned abstractions are interpretable and support strong generalization to harder, held-out tasks with unseen objects. These results provide preliminary evidence that decomposed ILP is a feasible approach to task-level LfD.

Mechanistic interpretability produces circuit-level causal analyses of neural network behaviour, but discovered circuits often remain isolated experimental artefacts: there is no shared formal representation for what circuits compute, how they relate, or when two findings provide evidence for the same mechanism. This work provides a formal infrastructure for cumulative mechanistic science by treating circuit interpretation as inductive theory construction. Each circuit is characterised at two levels: a Causal Functional Signature (CFS), which grounds component behaviour in causal attribution evidence and token role profiles, and an architectural signature $τ_{\mathrm{arch}}$, learned by inductive logic programming (ILP) from scale-invariant structural predicates. Together, these constitute a formal coherence layer that makes mechanistic claims explicit, comparable via $θ$-subsumption, and portable across model scales. CFS reveals qualitatively distinct computational strategies across task types, including attention-mediated copying versus MLP-mediated binding. ILP signatures achieve substantially better structural separation than graph kernel and feature-vector baselines, and support principled transfer across model scales and architecture families.

Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) learns interpretable logical rules from data. Existing methods are transductive: their learned parameters are bound to specific predicates and require retraining for each new task. We introduce Neural Rule Inducer (NRI), a pretrained model for zero-shot rule induction. Rather than encoding literal identities, NRI represents literals using domain-agnostic statistical properties such as class-conditional rates, entropy, and co-occurrence, which generalize across variable identities and counts without retraining. The model consists of a statistical encoder and a parallel slot-based decoder. Parallel decoding preserves the permutation invariance of logical disjunction; an autoregressive decoder would instead impose an arbitrary clause order. Product T-norm relaxation makes rule execution differentiable, allowing end-to-end training on prediction accuracy alone. We evaluate NRI on rule recovery, robustness to label noise and spurious correlations, and zero-shot transfer to real-world benchmarks, and we believe this work opens up the possibility of foundation models for symbolic reasoning. Code and the reference checkpoint are available at https://github.com/phuayj/neural-rule-inducer.

Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) aims to learn interpretable first-order rules from data, but existing symbolic and neuro-symbolic approaches struggle to scale to noisy and probabilistic settings. Classical ILP relies on discrete combinatorial rule search and is brittle under uncertainty, while differentiable ILP methods typically depend on predefined rule templates or inaccurate fuzzy operators that suffer from vanishing gradients or poor approximation of logical structure when reasoning over probabilistic predicate valuations. This paper proposes an Attention-based Neuro-symbolic Differentiable Rule Extractor (ANDRE), a novel ILP framework that learns first-order logic programs by optimizing over a continuous rule space with attention-based logical operators. ANDRE replaces both rule templates and logical operators with fully differentiable, attention-driven conjunction and disjunction operators that approximate logical min-max semantics, enabling accurate, stable, and interpretable reasoning over probabilistic data. By softly selecting, negating, or excluding predicates within each rule, ANDRE supports flexible rule induction while preserving symbolic structure. Extensive experiments on classical ILP benchmarks, large-scale knowledge bases, and synthetic datasets with probabilistic predicates and noisy supervision demonstrate that ANDRE achieves competitive or superior predictive performance while reliably recovering correct symbolic rules under uncertainty. In particular, ANDRE remains robust to moderate label noise, substantially outperforming existing differentiable ILP methods in both rule extraction quality and stability.

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents exhibit systemic failures in compositional generalization, limiting their robustness in interactive environments. This work introduces AGEL-Comp, a neuro-symbolic AI agent architecture designed to address this challenge by grounding actions of the agent. AGEL-Comp integrates three core innovations: (1) a dynamic Causal Program Graph (CPG) as a world model, representing procedural and causal knowledge as a directed hypergraph; (2) an Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) engine that synthesizes new Horn clauses from experiential feedback, grounding symbolic knowledge through interaction; and (3) a hybrid reasoning core where an LLM proposes a set of candidate sub-goals that are verified for logical consistency by a Neural Theorem Prover (NTP). Together, these components operationalize a deduction--abduction learning cycle: enabling the agent to deduce plans and abductively expand its symbolic world model, while a neural adaptation phase keeps its reasoning engine aligned with new knowledge. We propose an evaluation protocol within the \texttt{Retro Quest} simulation environment to probe for compositional generalization scenarios to evaluate our AGEL agent. Our findings clearly indicate the better performance of our AGEL model over pure LLM-based models. Our framework presents a principled path toward agents that build an explicit, interpretable, and compositionally structured understanding of their world.

Active learning is a general learning mechanism shared by artificial and human learners. Whether AI can teach humans such a strategy that transfers across domains is an open question. Ultra Strong Machine Learning (USML), a system whose explanations quantifiably improve human out-of-sample performance compared to self-learning, is uniquely positioned to answer this question. Prior USML work relied on hand-crafted explanation templates that require expert effort for each new domain and do not scale. We developed an explanation pipeline combining Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) with large language models (LLMs) to automate explanation generation and scoring. We tested whether these explanations achieve USML in a human trial teaching active learning strategies across three related domains. Our exploratory results show that concise, expert-written explanations benefit learners with higher initial performance, while pipeline-generated explanations provide no advantage over self-learning despite being rated as higher quality from an LLM-as-judge evaluation. This case study reveals a systematic gap that LLM quality metrics do not predict human learning outcomes. Our findings point to explanation complexity relative to task difficulty as a key factor, and call for explanation methods and evaluation criteria grounded in human cognitive constraints rather than LLM preference.

Weak supervision enables machine learning models to learn from limited or noisy labels, but it introduces challenges in reliability and semantic clarity, particularly in multi-instance partial label learning (MI-PLL), where models must resolve both ambiguous supervision signals and uncertain instance-label mappings. This paper proposes a semantics for a neuro-symbolic framework that integrates inductive logic programming (ILP) to structure MI-PLL through relational constraints. In this formulation, ILP defines a hypothesis space over label transitions, formalizes the semantics of per-instance classifiers and provides a relational scaffold for reasoning about weak supervision. Two inductive tasks are studied in this framework: inferring the transition predicate from the observed and classifier predicates, and inferring instance-level classifier assignments from the observed and transition predicates. This formal semantics facilitates constraint specification, consistency checking and the diagnosis of semantic failure modes that bag-level accuracy alone may conceal.