CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.LOcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-02

ADVENT: LLM-Driven Automatic Predicate Invention for ILP

Tingting Yu, Pei-Cing Huang, Chan Hsu, Chan-Tung Ku, Yihuang Kang

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.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.AIcs.CLcs.LO2026-07-11

Interventional Grounding Audits: Black-Box Premise-Dependency Tests for LLM Chain-of-Thought via Predicate Substitution

Hironao Nakamura

Large language models produce chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning that appears logically sound yet may not genuinely depend on its stated premises. We introduce interventional grounding audits, a black-box, step-level test of premise dependency: we intervene on a single premise by s…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.CLcs.LGcs.LOcs.SE2026-07-01

Theoria: Rewrite-Acceptability Verification over Informal Reasoning States

Michael Saldivar, Ben Slivinski

When should an AI system's answer be trusted? Formal proof assistants offer certainty but cannot reach most of the problem distribution; scalar LLM judges offer coverage but produce opaque scores that cannot be audited after the fact and are subject to the same coherence issues a…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.CLcs.LO2026-06-30

Beyond Compilation: Evaluating Faithful Natural-Language-to-Lean Statement Formalization

Ke Zhang, Patricio Gallardo Candela, Sudhir Murthy, Yi Xie, Zhi Wang, Maziar Raissi

Theorem-proving benchmarks evaluate proof search against fixed formal statements, but natural-language-to-Lean formalization must generate the formal statement itself. In this setting, compilation is only a validity check: a Lean declaration may type-check while omitting hypothes…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.FLcs.AIcs.CLcs.LO2026-06-29

Destination-Labeled Self-Looping Systems with Dwell: Intrinsic Characterization, Realization Cost, and Recognition

Reda Belaiche

We study a finite-state symbolic controller for systems in which the admissible visible transitions are fixed in advance and each visible state carries a minimum dwell requirement. The resulting model, which we call a destination-labeled self-looping system with dwell (DLSL syste…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.LOcs.AIcs.CCcs.CL2026-06-26

The Unverifiability of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Alignment, Static and Dynamic: From Trakhtenbrot's Wall to the Safety-Generality Tension

Jose Pascual Gumbau Mezquita

We establish the mathematical limits of AGI safety in two forms: verifying a fixed system, and verifying that a certified safety property persists once the system self-modifies. In the static case, no algorithm can certify a highly expressive AGI's safe behaviour infallibly, comp…

View free PDFSource page