Propositions

While Large Language Model (LLM)-based Natural Language Inference (NLI) systems achieve high accuracy, their decision-making processes lack auditable structures. This paper explores whether NLI can be performed using only interpretable, graph-based representations of evidence. We introduce a fully graph-based pipeline where the classifier never directly processes the input text. Instead, sentences are decomposed into atomic propositions, converted into ConceptNet triples via constrained decoding, and represented as three graphs per pair: premise, hypothesis, and a retrieved ConceptNet subgraph. These graphs are then fed into a fine-tuned 0.8-billion-parameter language model. On the SNLI dataset, our pipeline achieves 89.7% accuracy, just 1.9 points below an identically trained text-based model. On ANLI, it matches the published performance of RoBERTa-large on rounds R2 and R3 (48.0% vs. 48.9% and 44.9% vs. 44.4%) but trails by 16 points on R1, resulting in an overall gap of 9 to 14 points compared to its text counterpart. We term this gap the price of interpretability and demonstrate that it stems from representational limitations rather than data constraints. Ablation studies further reveal that graphs and text are complementary: combining both modalities achieves 92.1% accuracy on SNLI.

Sanskrit fuses case, number, person and tense into word endings and chains clauses into compounds, so it is information-dense per word. Whether that density survives subword tokenization is a separate question, to be asked per unit of meaning rather than per word. On identical FLORES-200 devtest content, Sanskrit costs 1.774-2.187 times the English tokens under deployed tokenizers with vocabularies of 200,019 ids or more, but only 1.325-1.353 times the Hindi tokens. Against a deployed English tokenizer, Sanskrit-trained BPE arms then look cheaper per proposition than English on contemporary prose (0.887). Against a matched English control, the same algorithm and vocabulary trained on the English side of the same corpus, that flip disappears: at 32,000 and 64,000 pieces all 8 matched pairs, each size-matched arm against both a pair-matched and a byte-matched control, sit above 1.0 on prose with 95% intervals excluding it. The gap closes as the vocabulary grows: at 128,000 pieces the BPE pair reads 0.983 in domain while staying above parity out of domain (1.025) and on FLORES (1.116). The ratio factorises into a character-length ratio and a tokens-per-character ratio, the second near 1 throughout: what survives matched tokenization is character-level length, which Sanskrit prose lacks over English in SLP1 (1.028) and Sanskrit verse has (0.596). The robust statement is about deployed practice: on contemporary prose and on FLORES, with the Sanskrit side in SLP1 against the deployed o200k English pivot, Sanskrit costs 1.831-2.899 English tokens per proposition under the tokenizers people actually ship. Code, the results snapshot and every table here are public.

For a finite set $O$ of Boolean functions, we consider the class of propositional formulas built using the functions in $O$ as connectives. We determine, for each possible choice of $O$, the complexity of various fitting and learning problems. These include: finding a formula that fits a given labeled sample, finding a small one (an Occam algorithm), minimizing the number of misclassified examples when the sample is not realizable (empirical risk minimization), and several forms of PAC learning. Our results apply both to formulas (represented as trees) and to circuits. We also briefly discuss the status of the same questions for other kinds of propositional fragments.

In various data models, the classical triple is a typical semantic data model. However, due to the design of the triple as a simple structure for representing positive assertions, it cannot sufficiently express different forms of negation present in the triple and its elements. This paper conceptually proposes that there are three distinct forms of negation within triples and their elements: contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation. Based on the the set SCOI and the logic LCOI+PLCOI with three kinds of negation, we propose an extension of triple that can distinguish and express these three different negations in the triple and its elements, called the TCOI triple with contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation. The TCOI triple is a semantic and structural extension of the classical triple. While retaining the ability to express positive assertions, it systematically introduces the three semantic dimensions of three negations, allowing these negations to independently act on the elements of the triple and on the whole triple. This significantly enhances the triple model capability to represent and reasoning about complex negative information. This paper also explores the expressive power and reasoning of the TCOI triple, as well as the application of TCOI triple implication reasoning in counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning. We propose a truth-value (continuous value) algorithm for TCOI triple implication reasoning and perform its calculation through an example of the counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning.

The OWL 2 EL profile is used in some of the largest production ontologies, including the Gene Ontology and SNOMED CT. Existing neuro-symbolic (NeSy) learning methods accept propositional theories or Datalog, and reasoning-shortcut (RS) awareness has not been investigated in ontology settings. We present Moose, a method that compiles an $\mathcal{EL}^{++}$ TBox and finite ABox to a Sentential Decision Diagram (SDD). The SDD acts as a differentiable weighted-model-counting layer, and we add closure clauses outside the $\mathcal{EL}^{++}$ profile on declared exhaustive families to overcome the limited expressivity of $\mathcal{EL}^{++}$ under partial supervision. We show termination, soundness, completeness, and polynomial intermediate sizes, and validate the proofs in Lean. We then define the first formal partial-supervision latent-concept-learning task over an OWL EL ontology, i.e., learning per-individual classifiers for latent concepts from observed ABox literals, and evaluate Moose on MNIST-with-ontology and Pizzaïolo. Moose improves over propositional-NeSy, fuzzy-logic, and ontology embedding baselines, and presents the first reasoning-shortcut analysis in an OWL EL setting.

Standard approaches to abductive reasoning can retain multiple candidate explanations, but they do not generally combine explicit compositional cross-hypothesis interaction with an internal, rival-sensitive commitment judgment. This paper argues that in risk-sensitive domains -- where premature commitment carries asymmetric downside costs -- the timing of commitment is itself a governed decision that the inferential apparatus should formally represent. We present a minimal $κ$--$τ$ logical framework built on two primitives: epistemic interaction among hypotheses ($κ$) and a normative commitment threshold ($τ$). Hypotheses may coexist, reinforce or inhibit one another, and form emergent composite explanations, while collapse into committed conclusions is regulated by governance constraints rather than forced by inference alone. The logic is developed in two complementary modes sharing the interaction relation and the governance apparatus: a synthetic mode, in which atomic hypotheses are composed upward into emergent explanations, and an analytic mode, in which complex observed states of affairs are decomposed into causal clusters of latent factors, with commitment governed at both the cluster and the factor level. The framework provides formal machinery for domains in which the distinction between highly likely and commit-worthy is operationally consequential. The $κ$--$τ$ logic is positioned as the symbolic governance layer of a neurosymbolic architecture: its epistemic parameters are naturally estimated by neural components -- semantic embeddings and generative models, as demonstrated in existing computational realizations -- while its normative parameters remain under explicit human governance, yielding transparent and auditable abductive reasoning for deployment in high-stakes settings.

Reasoning about necessity and possibility depends on assumptions about accessibility between worlds and about which objects exist at each one. The same inference may therefore hold under one modal system and fail under another. Evaluating language models on such problems requires testing whether their judgments follow the stated semantics rather than a familiar logic. We construct paired modal problems with identical premises and conjecture but different frame or domain conditions; automated reasoning verifies opposite labels. A balanced core prevents the semantic condition alone from revealing the answer. On this core, four of five recent models perform below the condition-only baseline under direct prompting. Yet enabling reasoning mode raises DeepSeek V4 Flash from 4.4% to 88.1% on unchanged prompts. Following stipulated modal semantics thus depends strongly on inference mode as well as model identity. When frame conditions are omitted, models often agree but fit different familiar logics best. We release the formulas, oracle artifacts, countermodels, and responses.

Prior work has shown that LLMs encode the truth of factual propositions along linear directions in activation space. It's unclear how these representations extend to contextual truth: propositions whose truth is determined by in-context evidence rather than world knowledge. We show that LLMs maintain a linear representation of contextual truth that persists across structurally different output policies, even when the output doesn't require the model to determine a proposition's truth, and show causal evidence via steering experiments. Using the transcripts from a collaborative vision-language task that requires two LLMs to maintain a shared common ground, we show that truth representations of a proposition are significantly swayed by partner assertions about that proposition, even when the LLM has enough evidence to determine its truth. We find evidence that propositions near the decision boundary are more susceptible to having their truth shifted through partner assertions. Separating representation from output distinguish two forms of sycophancy that output behavior alone cannot: the model may accommodate a false proposition while continuing to represent it as false, or shift its representation across the boundary. The latter is 2.59x more common when the model agrees by restating the false claim explicitly than when it agrees implicitly.

To test how correct logical judgments respond to learned context, we prepend a soft prefix to an exactly labeled syllogistic reasoning benchmark while keeping the model fixed. Soft prefixes are opaque continuous vectors, so we characterize them through the behavior they induce across controlled variations in logical form and interface. By studying which prefixes succeed and how their effects generalize, we characterize how learned contextual pressure can override correct judgments and expose limits in a model's logical stability. Across Qwen3.6-35B-A3B MoE, Qwen3-8B, and Gemma 4 31B, learned prefixes redirect many correct answers and remain effective across unseen forms and interface changes. In repeated tests with Qwen3.6 MoE and Gemma, they outperform paired random controls in all 16 model--direction--split comparisons by 37 to 99 percentage points. Qwen3.6 MoE flip rates remain between 72% and 90% across wording and prompt changes, while Gemma validity prefixes retain 54% to 56% flip compared with less than 1% for matched random prefixes. Diagnostic tests show that the dominant effect is a broad preference for one answer meaning rather than fixed-symbol forcing or a logical operation that transfers reliably between tasks. The form of this bias differs across models. In both Qwen models, simple score models often predict which judgments will flip but not how far their margins will move, whereas Gemma's overall response is more closely approximated by the same models. These results show that the dominant behavioral effect of successful soft prefixes is a broad answer preference, while the remaining response reveals substantial model-specific differences in logical stability.

We propose a language representation for multimodal data in which any observation, whether image, video, or text, is expressed as a bag of atomic propositions, simple statements about the entities, actions, and relations in a scene. A global semantic codebook unifies these into a shared vocabulary of canonical atomic propositions, placing every modality and observation into one interpretable space that spans fine grained facts to high level concepts and composes into richer ones. This brings interpretability with reasoning, cross-modal understanding and retrieval, and compositionality that enables complex multimodal understanding, rich data curation and complex structured retrieval. We demonstrate the framework on autonomous driving and open-world data.

In this paper, we investigate preprocessing techniques aimed at improving the efficiency of accessing models of propositional formulas represented in conjunctive normal form (CNF). We focus on three fundamental tasks: uniform sampling, direct model access, and model enumeration. Our analysis reveals that most state-of-the-art preprocessors, when they do not preserve formula equivalence, are generally unsuitable for these tasks. In contrast, we demonstrate that preprocessors which preserve model counts can be effectively leveraged, provided relevant preprocessing information is maintained. To validate our approach, we perform extensive experiments on a diverse suite of benchmarks from multiple domains. The experimental results show that our preprocessing methods are both efficient and robust, yielding significant performance improvements for model access queries when CNF formulas are compiled into d-DNNF representations.

Quantum logic is usually presented as a non-classical departure from ordinary reasoning forced on us by quantum mechanics, with classical logic kept as the secure starting point. We argue for the opposite order of explanation in a finite and fully computable setting. The free orthomodular lattice on two generators has ninety-six elements, the direct product of a six-element non-distributive factor and a sixteen-element Boolean factor. Reading the first factor as a register of contexts and the second as Boolean content, we obtain a calculus whose elements are context--bit-vector pairs and whose operations act component by component. With this calculus we establish three results. First, we classify the six layers by commutativity, identifying the central kernel of context-neutral propositions together with a dual central layer in which all complementary contexts are present. Second, we show that orthocomplementation rearranges the layers exactly as the complementation of the small factor rearranges its elements, which makes the duality among the layers rigid rather than accidental. Third, we prove that the operation forgetting the context is a surjective homomorphism of orthocomplemented lattices whose quotient is the classical Boolean algebra, so that classical logic is a six-to-one, information-losing image of the contextual calculus.

Frictive Policy Optimization (FPO; Pustejovsky et al., 2025) treats friction in collaborative dialogue -- misalignment, misunderstanding, repair -- as an epistemic signal essential to common-ground construction, rather than noise to be minimized. However, FPO and its implementations assume shared perceptual contexts, where friction arises from differently interpreted propositions over the same scene, which we define as propositional asymmetry. We extend FPO to perceptual asymmetry, where participants hold asymmetric partial information and the same referring expression yields different denotations depending on whose information state grounds the reference. We evaluate this through cross-corpora analysis and LLM probing on referentially asymmetric dialogue tasks, primarily the HCRC MapTask (Anderson et al., 1991). We find that FPO's friction functional is empirically valid only when evaluated from within each participant's information horizon: different landmark configurations produce qualitatively distinct grounding failure modes, with a small class of ambiguous configurations driving a disproportionate share of misunderstandings through trajectories that appear successful but silently diverge. The LLM probe confirms that having the "right perspective" matters more than having all perspectives: the informed single viewpoint outperforms omniscient access to both participants' contexts. We propose two annotation refinements: subtype decomposition of pending grounding states and accommodation-aware alignment classification.

Current anomaly detection methods primarily focus on structural anomalies, while paying insufficient attention to anomalies that violate logical constraints. Conversely, top-performing logical anomaly detection approaches address this by modeling global semantic consistency, but perform poorly on subtle structural anomalies due to inadequate detection granularity. In this paper, we propose LogiCo, a unified framework for Logical and structural anomaly detection via Component-level feature reconstruction. Unlike existing methods that rely on explicit global semantic modeling, LogiCo employs a novel component-level feature reconstruction technique to capture inter-component logical constraints. Specifically, LogiCo maps pre-trained image features into a discrete component-level feature space and performs collaborative feature reconstruction at both component and patch levels, enabling it to effectively detect both logical and structural anomalies. Furthermore, to address the specific challenge of count-related logical anomalies, we integrate a segmentation-map discriminator that extends the model's capability to identify quantitative inconsistencies. LogiCo achieves state-of-the-art performance on both logical and structural anomaly detection across four benchmarks, including MVTec-LOCO, MVTec-AD, VisA, and Real-IAD, demonstrating its superiority and practical feasibility. The code is available at https://github.com/cnulab/LogiCo.

In today's fast-paced information era, logical fallacies, defined as defective patterns of reasoning, inevitably contribute to the growth of information disorder. However, often fallacies appear in nuanced forms that complicate automated classification. In this study, we investigate whether merging abstract logical structures with context-level linguistic cues proves beneficial for fallacy classification, developing a framework that inductively extracts such patterns from fallacious examples and their explanations using Large Language Models (LLMs). We evaluate the impact of these patterns across different LLMs and experimental zero- and one-shot configurations, showing statistically significant improvements over zero-shot baselines and outperforming competing approaches. Cross-dataset experiments validate generalization, establishing data-driven pattern extraction as an effective method for generating logical representations.

Image restoration aims to reconstruct high-quality images from degraded low-quality inputs. As the computational demands of image restoration models continue to rise, there is growing interest in lightweight architectures optimized for fast and efficient inference. Logic gate networks (LGNs), which operate using fundamental logic operations such as NAND and XOR, have recently emerged as a promising direction for achieving highly efficient computation. However, their potential remains largely untapped in the domain of image restoration. In this work, we introduce LogicIR, the first LGN specifically designed for image restoration tasks. LogicIR incorporates a UNet-inspired architecture composed entirely of logic gates. In addition, we propose a differentiable bit decoding layer and an index shuffling mechanism that improves information propagation across logic gates. Experimental results across multiple image restoration benchmarks demonstrate that LogicIR achieves strong performance with significantly reduced computational cost, establishing LogicIR as a viable and efficient alternative for image restoration. The source code is available at https://github.com/jimmy9704/LogicIR

We develop a framework for interpreting AI systems as agents, drawing on the philosophical tradition of radical interpretation and the tools of mechanistic interpretability. The core question is: given the computational facts about a system, how do we solve for its beliefs, desires, and meanings? This matters increasingly for safety. We want to be able to trust the systems we deploy, whether by understanding their goals or, more modestly, by reliably detecting deception. Interpretability researchers are building tools to read beliefs and desires off a model's internals, but there is no settled account of when such a tool has succeeded. This book supplies one. We propose criteria on both representationalist and interpretationist approaches, and tie each to tests current interpretability methods can carry out. A central lesson is that these attributions cannot be made piecemeal. Beliefs, desires, and the propositional structure they presuppose are jointly constrained, and a method that fixes one while measuring the others inherits whatever distortions that introduces. This holism becomes pressing for AI systems, which may not share the interpreter's concepts. However, it also provides leverage: a system's attitudes constrain its propositional structure, that structure constrains which attitudes can be attributed, and mechanistic interpretability can help us measure both.

In many decision-making scenarios, acquiring information incurs different costs. We consider the problem of constructing a deterministic evaluation strategy that minimizes the expected cost of evaluating a propositional formula under variable costs and a probability distribution over truth assignments. We present a branch-and-bound algorithm with variable-selection heuristics, pruning, and caching. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first practical exact algorithm for this level of generality. Experiments on random instances demonstrate scalability and quantify the efficiency-quality trade-off of a greedy beam-search variant. We additionally evaluate a structured heart-disease diagnosis instance. Finally, we prove that the problem is $\#P$-hard and contained in $\mathrm{PSPACE}$.

In this paper, we integrate the defeasible logic of Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor (KLM) with the standpoint logic framework of Gómez Álvarez and Rudolph. This is done with the goal of formally expressing knowledge taking into account multiple (possibly contradicting) viewpoints, which in turn may hold defeasible beliefs. In doing so, we utilise Defeasible Restricted Standpoint Logics (DRSL), introduced by Leisegang et al. Our work expands on previous work by providing a foundational representation result for DRSL semantics and systematically lifting several well-known entailment relations from the propositional case to the standpoint-enhanced setting. In particular, we characterise the semantics for DRSL through a set of KLM-style postulates adapted for the standpoints case. We furthermore provide a means to lift preferential entailment, and the class of entailment relations based on single ranking functions from the purely propositional to the standpoint-enhanced context, including rational and lexicographic closure. We show this can be done equivalently through semantic and algorithmic means. Furthermore, we show that, for each considered form of entailment, the complexity class of entailment checking does not change when moving from propositional KLM to DRSL.

Factored tasks are a classical planning representation that extends SAS+ with limited forms of disjunctive preconditions, conditional effects, and angelic nondeterminism. This allows for a more compact representation of tasks than traditional formalisms such as STRIPS or SAS+, and supports a wide range of task transformations. However, existing planning approaches for factored tasks have been limited to heuristic search methods. In this work, we investigate how to encode factored tasks in SAT. We propose several ways to encode the tasks, focusing on different strategies for translating the factored transition relation into propositional logic. We also analyze how to exploit parallelism at various levels in this setting and study the impact of common task transformations on the performance of SAT-based planners.

This position statement looks back on two decades of work on shallow embeddings of non-classical logics in classical higher-order logic (HOL), a line of research that expanded into a range of logic embeddings in HOL and inspired the LogiKEy logic-pluralistic knowledge representation and reasoning methodology. This paper advances the case for logical pluralism at object-logic level within a unifying meta-logical framework such as LogiKEy, grounding the argument in computational metaphysics. More broadly, it advocates principled support for logical pluralism in modern proof assistants, and cautions against logical imperialism -- the rigid adoption of a single foundational logic for large-scale theory developments -- which impedes the interdisciplinary reuse that LogiKEy is designed to enable.

Judgment aggregation studies how to combine individual judgments on logically related propositions into a collective judgment. Classical impossibility results show that sufficiently strong logical interconnections force dictatorship under natural aggregation axioms. In this paper, we ask whether such impossibility can still arise when the objects of aggregation are required to be genuinely modal judgments rather than plain factual propositions. Since modal logic contains propositional logic, this question is meaningful only if one excludes fact-based aggregation in disguise. We show that Arrow-type impossibility already re-emerges in a strikingly sparse modal setting. We prove an impossibility theorem on a simple cyclic frame for an agenda generated from a single propositional variable by repeated applications of a single modal operator, and we further demonstrate this phenomenon for an alternative family of frames satisfying a natural symmetry condition. Thus, even under a modal-operator requirement, semantic structure alone can generate the logical interconnections needed for dictatorship. Technically, our analysis has two layers. First, we prove a semantic reduction theorem showing that certain iterated modal patterns can be collapsed by shifting the evaluation point. Second, building on this reduction, we identify a local-to-global frame mechanism by which frame geometry yields minimally inconsistent modal judgment sets and the strong path-connectivity required for impossibility. The same reduction also turns consistency checking into a small combinatorial covering problem, which yields efficient implementations of non-dictatorial aggregation procedures.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are predominantly governed by probabilistic frameworks in which the sum of outcome probabilities is constrained to unity. This architectural limitation, often imposed by Softmax layers, leads to a collapse of uncertainty that makes it difficult to differentiate between epistemic uncertainty, paradox, and vagueness. We present an empirical investigation of the application of Neutrosophic Logic, a framework that treats Truth (T), Indeterminacy (I), and Falsity (F) as three independent dimensions, to model epistemic states in LLMs. We conducted experiments on a family of four OpenAI GPT models across five linguistic phenomena: logical paradoxes, epistemic ignorance, vagueness, ethical contradictions, and future contingencies, under three prompting strategies: neutrosophic, probabilistic, and entropy-derived. Our findings reveal that the neutrosophic approach, by allowing T+I+F > 1, a state we term hyper-truth, provides a richer representation of a model's internal state. In 35% of evaluations, hyper-truth emerged spontaneously, predominantly under ethical contradiction and logical paradox. We demonstrate that this approach preserves truth values in fuzzy contexts and offers a robust method for identifying and quantifying internal model conflict. We conclude that the integration of neutrosophic evaluation layers is a critical step toward more transparent, reliable, and ethically aware AI systems.

This paper establishes and proves complexity results for entailment for cumulative propositional dependence logic and for cumulative propositional logic with team semantics. As recently shown, cumulative logics are famously characterised by System~C and exactly captured by the cumulative models of Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor. This gives rise to the entailment problem via relational models, which is specifically considered here.

Agentic retrieval improves multi-hop question answering by giving language models autonomy to iteratively gather evidence. Recent work augments these systems with knowledge graphs for structured traversal, but this combination introduces significant cost: expensive graph construction at index time and compounding token usage at inference time. We introduce Graph Agentic Search over Propositions (GRASP), an agentic system that simultaneously optimizes for high accuracy and minimal token usage in multi-hop question answering. Rather than executing a rigid, singular query, GRASP actively coordinates its retrieval strategy by decomposing multi-hop queries into dependency-aware plans. This enables GRASP to dynamically scale the number of sub-agents according to the complexity of the problem. Each sub-agent resolves its single-hop query by exploring a novel three-layer hierarchical graph of entities, propositions, and passages, using the entity layer for targeted traversal and the proposition layer for high-recall passage retrieval via reciprocal-rank voting. We evaluate GRASP on MuSiQue, 2WikiMultihopQA, and HotpotQA under two settings: open-corpus retrieval and extended context reasoning (LongBench). GRASP achieves the highest QA accuracy in the open retrieval setting on MuSiQue and 2Wiki while using 40-50 percent fewer tokens than IRCoT+HippoRAG2. Furthermore, GRASP leads on EM and F1 across all three datasets in the LongBench setting while using 30 percent fewer tokens than the next most accurate method. Finally, we introduce success economy - the amortized token cost per correct answer, weighted by difficulty - and advocate for efficiency-aware evaluation as a standard practice for agentic QA.

We present a new algorithm for deciding formula entailment in orthologic (a sound approximation of classical logic) that avoids the costly preprocessing phase of prior implementations while retaining the same $\mathcal{O}(n^2(1+|A|))$ worst-case complexity. We then introduce a family of synthetic SAT benchmarks based on the observation that, for any formula $φ$, the equivalence $φ\leftrightarrow \mathrm{NF}_{\mathrm{OL}}(φ)$ is a tautology whose Tseitin encoding yields unsatisfiable instances that are hard for state-of-the-art SAT solvers yet have short orthologic proofs. Applied to EPFL arithmetic circuits, our algorithm solves these instances efficiently while Kissat times out on a significant fraction. Finally, we show that using orthologic normalization as a preprocessing step can improve SAT solving time on some hard problems.

Discrete variables are common in many applications, such as probabilistic reasoning, planning and explainable AI. When symbolic reasoning techniques are brought in to bear on these applications, a standard technique for handling discrete variables is to binarize them into Boolean variables to allow the use of Boolean computational machinery such as SAT solvers. This technique can face both computational and semantical challenges though. In this work, we develop a native SAT solver for discrete logic, which is a direct extension of Boolean logic in which variables can take arbitrary values. Our proposed solver has a similar design to Boolean SAT solvers, with ingredients such as unit resolution and clause learning but ones that operate natively on discrete variables. We illustrate the merits of the developed SAT solver by comparing it empirically to CSP solvers applied to discrete CNFs, to Boolean SAT solver applied to binarized CNFs, and to some hybrid solvers.

Weighted first-order model counting (WFOMC) is a central task in lifted probabilistic inference: It asks for the weighted sum of all models of a first-order sentence over a finite domain. A long line of work has identified domain-liftable fragments of first-order logic, that is, syntactic classes for which WFOMC can be solved in time polynomial in the domain size. Among them, the two-variable fragment with counting quantifiers, $\mathbf{C}^2$, is one of the most expressive known liftable fragments. Existing algorithms for $\mathbf{C}^2$, however, establish tractability through multi-stage reductions that eliminate counting quantifiers via cardinality constraints, which introduces substantial practical overhead as the domain size grows. In this paper, we introduce IncrementalWFOMC3, a lifted algorithm for WFOMC on $\mathbf{C}^2$ and its modulo counting extension, $\mathbf{C}^2_{\text{mod}}$. Instead of relying on reduction techniques, IncrementalWFOMC3 operates directly on a Scott normal form that retains counting quantifiers throughout inference. This direct treatment yields two main results. First, we derive a tighter data-complexity bound for WFOMC in $\mathbf{C}^2$, reducing the degree of the polynomial from quadratic to linear in the counting parameters. Second, we prove that $\mathbf{C}^2_{\text{mod}}$ is domain-liftable, extending tractability from $\mathbf{C}^2$ to a richer fragment with native modulo counting support. Finally, our empirical evaluation shows that IncrementalWFOMC3 delivers orders-of-magnitude runtime improvements and better scalability than both existing WFOMC algorithms and state-of-the-art propositional model counters.

Graph neural networks (GNNs) are the standard for learning on graphs, yet they have limited expressive power, often expressed in terms of the Weisfeiler-Leman (WL) hierarchy or within the framework of first-order logic. In this context, topological neural networks (TNNs) have recently emerged as a promising alternative for graph representation learning. By incorporating higher-order relational structures into message-passing schemes, TNNs offer higher representational power than traditional GNNs. However, a fundamental question remains open: what is the logical expressiveness of TNNs? Answering this allows us to characterize precisely which binary classifiers TNNs can represent. In this paper, we address this question by analyzing isomorphism tests derived from the underlying mechanisms of general TNNs. We introduce and investigate the power of higher-order variants of WL-based tests for combinatorial complexes, called $k$-CCWL test. In addition, we introduce the topological counting logic (TC$_k$), an extension of standard counting logic featuring a novel pairwise counting quantifier $\exists^{N}(x_i,x_j)\, \varphi(x_i,x_j),$ which explicitly quantifies pairs $(x_i, x_j)$ satisfying property $\varphi$. We rigorously prove the exact equivalence: $\text{k-CCWL} \equiv \text{TC}_{k{+}2} \equiv \text{Topological }(k{+}2)\text{-pebble game}.$ These results establish a logical expressiveness theory for TNNs.

Memristive crossbars store numerical weights needing aggregation and decoding; a single junction means nothing alone. This paper presents a fundamentally different use: each junction stores a complete, domain-scoped logical assertion (holds/negated/undefined). Ternary resistance states encode these values directly. We establish a structure-preserving mapping from a domain algebra to crossbar topology: domains become isolated arrays, specialization becomes directed wiring, relation typing controls inheritance gates, and cross-domain links become explicit registers. The physical layout thus embodies the algebra; changing wiring changes reasoning semantics. We detail an ICD-11 respiratory disease classification chip (1,247 entities, ~136k 1T1R junctions) enabling domain scoping, three-valued logic, transitive cascade, typed inheritance, and cross-axis queries. Behavioral simulation (sigma_log=0.15, SNR=20dB) shows error-free operation across 100,000 trials per task with wide tolerance margins. Where prior work unified representation and computation in software, this work unifies them in hardware: reading one junction answers one question, without symbolic interpretation.

We present THEIA, a 2.75M-parameter modular neural architecture that learns the complete Kleene three-valued logic (K3) truth table from task data without external symbolic inference or hand-encoded K3 gate primitives. Across 5 seeds it passes all 39 K3 rules at >99% per-rule accuracy. K3 learnability is not the central finding: Transformer baselines also pass all 39 rules, and flat MLPs match THEIA on Phase-1 accuracy within 0.04pp. The contributions are two properties of the learned system. (1) Uncertainty-verdict asymmetric propagation. THEIA preserves Has-Unknown at every upstream boundary (80.0/91.1/90.8/99.7% across Arith/Order/Set/Logic vs. ~52% majority) while final-verdict decodability stays at or below a 73.4% U-vs-non-U oracle reference under linear and nonlinear probes. Activation patching on non-absorbent T->U cases flips 4,898/4,898 OR and 4,719/4,719 AND pairs across 5 seeds, ruling out residual shortcuts. (2) Reliability spectrum under discretized end-to-end training, on tasks decomposable along the engine boundaries. A mod-3 sequential composition task generalizes from 5- to 500-step evaluation at 99.96+-0.04% (5 seeds). Under identical Gumbel-softmax training, flat MLPs collapse to chance by 50 steps; a 2x2 ResMLP grid reaches >=99% on only 3/20 (config, seed) trials; a pre-LN Transformer reaches 99.24+-0.34%. Straight-through discretization prevents 0.999^500 compounding; the architectural separator is sustaining Phase-1 accuracy under Phase-3 training, where flat MLPs fail. Auxiliary: under per-architecture development defaults (not optimizer-controlled), THEIA reaches 12/12 Kleene coverage 6.5x faster than a parameter-comparable 8L Transformer; this narrows to ~3.6x with Transformer-standard tuning and 4.93x with the same recipe on both. Ratios are config-specific, not asymptotic.

Two deep ReLU networks can have entirely different architectures and parameters, yet realize the same function. We provide a complete characterization of this nonuniqueness. This is effected by building a symbolic calculus for deep ReLU networks, equivalence and simplification of networks becoming derivation of formulae, in close parallel to Shannon's analysis of switching circuits through Boolean logic. Inspired by Shannon, who turned circuit synthesis into the manipulation of Boolean formulae by the axioms of Boolean algebra, we turn ReLU network identification into the derivation of Łukasiewicz formulae by the axioms of many-valued (MV) logic. Two non-degenerate ReLU networks realize the same function on the unit cube if and only if one is obtained from the other by finitely many applications of the MV axioms for integer weights and biases, the divisible MV axioms for rational ones, and the Riesz MV axioms for real ones. The MV logic axioms characterize all symmetries of ReLU networks, the single-layer ones, which for tanh networks are the only kind, and the deep ones, spanning three or more layers. Our framework consists of three steps, an extraction algorithm turning a network into a substitution graph, whose represented formula has the network's input-output map as its truth function, a completeness theorem, by which functionally equivalent formulae are interderivable, and a construction algorithm returning from graphs to networks. The substitution graph is layered, carrying at each node a formula in the variables of the layer feeding it, encodes the network uniquely, and induces a new normal form for MV logic, compositional rather than flat as in the literature, hence retaining the algebraic structure of the network, with three local operations--node rewrite, layer collapse, layer expansion--realizing every derivation.

A proposition that connects randomness and compression is put forward via Gibbs entropy over set of measurement vectors associated with a compression process. In building this connection, we use a performance of a learning task as a probe of compression, over series of compression cycles within a cascade. The Gibbs entropy at each cycle measures the degree of randomness. Consequently a lossy compression process can be seen as an equivalent to {\it directed randomness} that preserves information content under certain bounds of Gibbs entropy and the performance of the learning task. The term directed means we guide the compression process with set of mathematical rules on how to reduce the model size. We formulate this connection with a theorem using a $δ$ and $ε$ bounds, and demonstrated a logical proof via comonotonic relationship within a very small decrease in compression ratio and the performance. We have showcase the validity of this proposition with a canonical vision task in deep learning with three different model compression processes as {\it a baseline model}. We use the following, simpler to more complex model compression approaches: (1) random pruning, (2) magnitude pruning, and (3) a more complex compression by using dual tomographic compression, which utilizes compressed sensing in dual fashion. We use remaining weights of deep learning network as a measurement vector where we measure the Gibbs entropy. The proposition is supported with the experimental evidence, resulting in very high correlation between learning performance and the Gibbs entropy over compression ratios for all different compression processes. We show case the idea that there is an inherent computable connection between compression probed by performance degradation and randomness from an entropy measure on the learned model.