Natural language explanations represent a proxy for evaluating explanation-based and multi-step Natural Language Inference (NLI) models. However, assessing the validity of explanations for NLI is challenging as it typically involves the crowd-sourcing of apposite datasets, a process that is time-consuming and prone to logical errors. To address existing limitations, this paper investigates the verification and refinement of natural language explanations through the integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Theorem Provers (TPs). Specifically, we present a neuro-symbolic framework, named Explanation-Refiner, that integrates TPs with LLMs to generate and formalise explanatory sentences and suggest potential inference strategies for NLI. In turn, the TP is employed to provide formal guarantees on the logical validity of the explanations and to generate feedback for subsequent improvements. We demonstrate how Explanation-Refiner can be jointly used to evaluate explanatory reasoning, autoformalisation, and error correction mechanisms of state-of-the-art LLMs as well as to automatically enhance the quality of explanations of variable complexity in different domains.

Explanation constitutes an archetypal feature of human rationality, underpinning learning and generalisation, and representing one of the media supporting scientific discovery and communication. Due to the importance of explanations in human reasoning, an increasing amount of research in Natural Language Inference (NLI) has started reconsidering the role that explanations play in learning and inference, attempting to build explanation-based NLI models that can effectively encode and use natural language explanations on downstream tasks. Research in explanation-based NLI, however, presents specific challenges and opportunities, as explanatory reasoning reflects aspects of both material and formal inference, making it a particularly rich setting to model and deliver complex reasoning. In this tutorial, we provide a comprehensive introduction to the field of explanation-based NLI, grounding this discussion on the epistemological-linguistic foundations of explanations, systematically describing the main architectural trends and evaluation methodologies that can be used to build systems capable of explanatory reasoning.

Achieving precise semantic control over the latent spaces of Variational AutoEncoders (VAEs) holds significant value for downstream tasks in NLP as the underlying generative mechanisms could be better localised, explained and improved upon. Recent research, however, has struggled to achieve consistent results, primarily due to the inevitable loss of semantic information in the variational bottleneck and limited control over the decoding mechanism. To overcome these challenges, we investigate discrete latent spaces in Vector Quantized Variational AutoEncoder (VQVAE) to improve semantic control and generation in Transformer-based VAEs. In particular, We propose T5VQVAE, a novel model that leverages the controllability of VQVAE to guide the self-attention mechanism in T5, exploiting its full generalization capabilities. Experimental results indicate that T5VQVAE outperforms existing state-of-the-art VAE models, including Optimus, in terms of control and preservation of semantic information across different tasks such as auto-encoding of sentences and mathematical expressions, text transfer, and inference. Moreover, T5VQVAE exhibits improved reasoning capabilities, suggesting potential applications for downstream natural language and symbolic inference tasks.

The injection of syntactic information in Variational AutoEncoders (VAEs) can result in an overall improvement of performances and generalisation. An effective strategy to achieve such a goal is to separate the encoding of distributional semantic features and syntactic structures into heterogeneous latent spaces via multi-task learning or dual encoder architectures. However, existing works employing such techniques are limited to LSTM-based VAEs. This work investigates latent space separation methods for structural syntactic injection in Transformer-based VAE architectures (i.e., Optimus) through the integration of graph-based models. Our empirical evaluation reveals that the proposed end-to-end VAE architecture can improve theoverall organisation of the latent space, alleviating the information loss occurring in standard VAE setups, and resulting in enhanced performances on language modelling and downstream generation tasks.

This paper investigates the possibility of approximating multiple mathematical operations in latent space for expression derivation. To this end, we introduce different multi-operational representation paradigms, modelling mathematical operations as explicit geometric transformations. By leveraging a symbolic engine, we construct a large-scale dataset comprising 1.7M derivation steps stemming from 61K premises and 6 operators, analysing the properties of each paradigm when instantiated with state-of-the-art neural encoders.Specifically, we investigate how different encoding mechanisms can approximate expression manipulation in latent space, exploring the trade-off between learning different operators and specialising within single operations, as well as the ability to support multi-step derivations and out-of-distribution generalisation. Our empirical analysis reveals that the multi-operational paradigm is crucial for disentangling different operators, while discriminating the conclusions for a single operation is achievable in the original expression encoder. Moreover, we show that architectural choices can heavily affect the training dynamics, structural organisation, and generalisation of the latent space, resulting in significant variations across paradigms and classes of encoders.

This paper proposes a methodology for generating and perturbing detailed derivations of equations at scale, aided by a symbolic engine, to evaluate the generalisability of Transformers to out-of-distribution mathematical reasoning problems. Instantiating the framework in the context of sequence classification tasks, we compare the capabilities of GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and a canon of fine-tuned BERT models, exploring the relationship between specific operators and generalisation failure via the perturbation of reasoning aspects such as symmetry and variable surface forms. Surprisingly, our empirical evaluation reveals that the average in-distribution performance of fine-tuned models surpasses GPT-3.5, and rivals GPT-4. However, perturbations to input reasoning can reduce their performance by up to 80 F1 points. Overall, the results suggest that the in-distribution performance of smaller open-source models may potentially rival GPT by incorporating appropriately structured derivation dependencies during training, and highlight a shared weakness between BERT and GPT involving a relative inability to decode indirect references to mathematical entities. We release the full codebase, constructed datasets, and fine-tuned models to encourage future progress in the field.

An increasing amount of research in Natural Language Inference (NLI) focuses on the application and evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their reasoning capabilities. Despite their success, however, LLMs are still prone to factual errors and inconsistencies in their explanations, offering limited control and interpretability for inference in complex domains. In this paper, we focus on ethical NLI, investigating how hybrid neuro-symbolic techniques can enhance the logical validity and alignment of ethical explanations produced by LLMs. Specifically, we present an abductive-deductive framework named Logic-Explainer, which integrates LLMs with an external backward-chaining solver to refine step-wise natural language explanations and jointly verify their correctness, reduce incompleteness and minimise redundancy. An extensive empirical analysis demonstrates that Logic-Explainer can improve explanations generated via in-context learning methods and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) on challenging ethical NLI tasks, while, at the same time, producing formal proofs describing and supporting models’ reasoning. As ethical NLI requires commonsense reasoning to identify underlying moral violations, our results suggest the effectiveness of neuro-symbolic methods for multi-step NLI more broadly, opening new opportunities to enhance the logical consistency, reliability, and alignment of LLMs.

Natural language definitions possess a recursive, self-explanatory semantic structure that can support representation learning methods able to preserve explicit conceptual relations and constraints in the latent space. This paper presents a multi-relational model that explicitly leverages such a structure to derive word embeddings from definitions. By automatically extracting the relations linking defined and defining terms from dictionaries, we demonstrate how the problem of learning word embeddings can be formalised via a translational framework in Hyperbolic space and used as a proxy to capture the global semantic structure of definitions. An extensive empirical analysis demonstrates that the framework can help imposing the desired structural constraints while preserving the semantic mapping required for controllable and interpretable traversal. Moreover, the experiments reveal the superiority of the Hyperbolic word embeddings over the Euclidean counterparts and demonstrate that the multi-relational approach can obtain competitive results when compared to state-of-the-art neural models, with the advantage of being intrinsically more efficient and interpretable

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have found success in real-world applications, their underlying explanatory process is still poorly understood. This paper proposes IBE-Eval, a framework inspired by philosophical accounts on Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) to advance the interpretation and evaluation of LLMs’ explanations. IBE-Eval estimates the plausibility of natural language explanations through a combination of explicit logical and linguistic features including: consistency, parsimony, coherence, and uncertainty. Extensive experiments are conducted on Causal Question Answering (CQA), where IBE-Eval is tasked to select the most plausible causal explanation amongst competing ones generated by LLMs (i.e., GPT 3.5 and Llama 2). The experiments reveal that IBE-Eval can successfully identify the best explanation with up to 77% accuracy (≈ 27% above random), improving upon a GPT 3.5-as-a-Judge baseline (≈+17%) while being intrinsically more efficient and interpretable. Additional analyses suggest that, despite model-specific variances, LLM-generated explanations tend to conform to IBE criteria and that IBE-Eval is significantly correlated with human judgment, opening up opportunities for future development of automated explanation verification tools.

Integer Linear Programming (ILP) has been proposed as a formalism for encoding precise structural and semantic constraints for Natural Language Inference (NLI). However, traditional ILP frameworks are non-differentiable, posing critical challenges for the integration of continuous language representations based on deep learning. In this paper, we introduce a novel approach, named Diff-Comb Explainer, a neuro-symbolic architecture for explanation-based NLI based on Differentiable BlackBox Combinatorial Solvers (DBCS). Differently from existing neuro-symbolic solvers, Diff-Comb Explainer does not necessitate a continuous relaxation of the semantic constraints, enabling a direct, more precise, and efficient incorporation of neural representations into the ILP formulation. Our experiments demonstrate that Diff-Comb Explainer achieves superior performance when compared to conventional ILP solvers, neuro-symbolic black-box solvers, and Transformer-based encoders. Moreover, a deeper analysis reveals that Diff-Comb Explainer can significantly improve the precision, consistency, and faithfulness of the constructed explanations, opening new opportunities for research on neuro-symbolic architectures for explainable and transparent NLI in complex domains.

Rigorous evaluation of the causal effects of semantic features on language model predictions can be hard to achieve for natural language reasoning problems. However, this is such a desirable form of analysis from both an interpretability and model evaluation perspective, that it is valuable to investigate specific patterns of reasoning with enough structure and regularity to identify and quantify systematic reasoning failures in widely-used models. In this vein, we pick a portion of the NLI task for which an explicit causal diagram can be systematically constructed: the case where across two sentences (the premise and hypothesis), two related words/terms occur in a shared context. In this work, we apply causal effect estimation strategies to measure the effect of context interventions (whose effect on the entailment label is mediated by the semantic monotonicity characteristic) and interventions on the inserted word-pair (whose effect on the entailment label is mediated by the relation between these words). Extending related work on causal analysis of NLP models in different settings, we perform an extensive interventional study on the NLI task to investigate robustness to irrelevant changes and sensitivity to impactful changes of Transformers. The results strongly bolster the fact that similar benchmark accuracy scores may be observed for models that exhibit very different behaviour. Moreover, our methodology reinforces previously suspected biases from a causal perspective, including biases in favour of upward-monotone contexts and ignoring the effects of negation markers.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are at the forefront of NLP achievements but fall short in dealing with shortcut learning, factual inconsistency, and vulnerability to adversarial inputs. These shortcomings are especially critical in medical contexts, where they can misrepresent actual model capabilities. Addressing this, we present SemEval-2024 Task 2: Safe Biomedical Natural Language Inference for Clinical Trials. Our contributions include the refined NLI4CT-P dataset (i.e. Natural Language Inference for Clinical Trials - Perturbed), designed to challenge LLMs with interventional and causal reasoning tasks, along with a comprehensive evaluation of methods and results for participant submissions. A total of 106 participants registered for the task contributing to over 1200 individual submissions and 25 system overview papers. This initiative aims to advance the robustness and applicability of NLI models in healthcare, ensuring safer and more dependable AI assistance in clinical decision-making. We anticipate that the dataset, models, and outcomes of this task can support future research in the field of biomedical NLI. The dataset, competition leaderboard, and website are publicly available.

This paper describes the results of SemEval 2023 task 7 – Multi-Evidence Natural Language Inference for Clinical Trial Data (NLI4CT) – consisting of 2 tasks, a Natural Language Inference (NLI) task, and an evidence selection task on clinical trial data. The proposed challenges require multi-hop biomedical and numerical reasoning, which are of significant importance to the development of systems capable of large-scale interpretation and retrieval of medical evidence, to provide personalized evidence-based care. Task 1, the entailment task, received 643 submissions from 40 participants, and Task 2, the evidence selection task, received 364 submissions from 23 participants. The tasks are challenging, with the majority of submitted systems failing to significantly outperform the majority class baseline on the entailment task, and we observe significantly better performance on the evidence selection task than on the entailment task. Increasing the number of model parameters leads to a direct increase in performance, far more significant than the effect of biomedical pre-training. Future works could explore the limitations of large models for generalization and numerical inference, and investigate methods to augment clinical datasets to allow for more rigorous testing and to facilitate fine-tuning. We envisage that the dataset, models, and results of this task will be useful to the biomedical NLI and evidence retrieval communities. The dataset, competition leaderboard, and website are publicly available.

Probing strategies have been shown to detectthe presence of various linguistic features inlarge language models; in particular, seman-tic features intermediate to the “natural logic”fragment of the Natural Language Inferencetask (NLI). In the case of natural logic, the rela-tion between the intermediate features and theentailment label is explicitly known: as such,this provides a ripe setting for interventionalstudies on the NLI models’ representations, al-lowing for stronger causal conjectures and adeeper critical analysis of interventional prob-ing methods. In this work, we carry out newand existing representation-level interventionsto investigate the effect of these semantic fea-tures on NLI classification: we perform am-nesic probing (which removes features as di-rected by learned linear probes) and introducethe mnestic probing variation (which forgetsall dimensions except the probe-selected ones).Furthermore, we delve into the limitations ofthese methods and outline some pitfalls havebeen obscuring the effectivity of interventionalprobing studies.

How can we interpret and retrieve medical evidence to support clinical decisions? Clinical trial reports (CTR) amassed over the years contain indispensable information for the development of personalized medicine. However, it is practically infeasible to manually inspect over 400,000+ clinical trial reports in order to find the best evidence for experimental treatments. Natural Language Inference (NLI) offers a potential solution to this problem, by allowing the scalable computation of textual entailment. However, existing NLI models perform poorly on biomedical corpora, and previously published datasets fail to capture the full complexity of inference over CTRs. In this work, we present a novel resource to advance research on NLI for reasoning on CTRs. The resource includes two main tasks. Firstly, to determine the inference relation between a natural language statement, and a CTR. Secondly, to retrieve supporting facts to justify the predicted relation. We provide NLI4CT, a corpus of 2400 statements and CTRs, annotated for these tasks. Baselines on this corpus expose the limitations of existing NLI approaches, with 6 state-of-the-art NLI models achieving a maximum F1 score of 0.627. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to design a task that covers the interpretation of full CTRs. To encourage further work on this challenging dataset, we make the corpus, competition leaderboard, and website, available on CodaLab, and code to replicate the baseline experiments on GitHub.

In the interest of interpreting neural NLI models and their reasoning strategies, we carry out a systematic probing study which investigates whether these modelscapture the crucial semantic features central to natural logic: monotonicity and concept inclusion. Correctly identifying valid inferences in downward-monotone contexts is a known stumbling block for NLI performance,subsuming linguistic phenomena such as negation scope and generalized quantifiers. To understand this difficulty, we emphasize monotonicity as a property of a context and examine the extent to which models capture relevant monotonicity information in the vector representations which are intermediate to their decision making process. Drawing on the recent advancement of the probing paradigm,we compare the presence of monotonicity features across various models. We find that monotonicity information is notably weak in the representations of popularNLI models which achieve high scores on benchmarks, and observe that previous improvements to these models based on fine-tuning strategies have introduced stronger monotonicity features together with their improved performance on challenge sets.

The application of Natural Language Inference (NLI) methods over large textual corpora can facilitate scientific discovery, reducing the gap between current research and the available large-scale scientific knowledge. However, contemporary NLI models are still limited in interpreting mathematical knowledge written in Natural Language, even though mathematics is an integral part of scientific argumentation for many disciplines. One of the fundamental requirements towards mathematical language understanding, is the creation of models able to meaningfully represent variables. This problem is particularly challenging since the meaning of a variable should be assigned exclusively from its defining type, i.e., the representation of a variable should come from its context. Recent research has formalised the variable typing task, a benchmark for the understanding of abstract mathematical types and variables in a sentence. In this work, we propose VarSlot, a Variable Slot-based approach, which not only delivers state-of-the-art results in the task of variable typing, but is also able to create context-based representations for variables.

The Shared Task on Natural Language Premise Selection (NLPS) asks participants to retrieve the set of premises that are most likely to be useful for proving a given mathematical statement from a supporting knowledge base. While previous editions of the TextGraphs shared tasks series targeted multi-hop inference for explanation regeneration in the context of science questions (Thayaparan et al., 2021; Jansen and Ustalov, 2020, 2019), NLPS aims to assess the ability of state-of-the-art approaches to operate on a mixture of natural and mathematical language and model complex multi-hop reasoning dependencies between statements. To this end, this edition of the shared task makes use of a large set of approximately 21k mathematical statements extracted from the PS-ProofWiki dataset (Ferreira and Freitas, 2020a). In this summary paper, we present the results of the 1st edition of the NLPS task, providing a description of the evaluation data, and the participating systems. Additionally, we perform a detailed analysis of the results, evaluating various aspects involved in mathematical language processing and multi-hop inference. The best-performing system achieved a MAP of 15.39, improving the performance of a TF-IDF baseline by approximately 3.0 MAP.

This paper presents Diff-Explainer, the first hybrid framework for explainable multi-hop inference that integrates explicit constraints with neural architectures through differentiable convex optimization. Specifically, Diff- Explainer allows for the fine-tuning of neural representations within a constrained optimization framework to answer and explain multi-hop questions in natural language. To demonstrate the efficacy of the hybrid framework, we combine existing ILP-based solvers for multi-hop Question Answering (QA) with Transformer-based representations. An extensive empirical evaluation on scientific and commonsense QA tasks demonstrates that the integration of explicit constraints in a end-to-end differentiable framework can significantly improve the performance of non- differentiable ILP solvers (8.91%–13.3%). Moreover, additional analysis reveals that Diff-Explainer is able to achieve strong performance when compared to standalone Transformers and previous multi-hop approaches while still providing structured explanations in support of its predictions.

Most of the contemporary approaches for multi-hop Natural Language Inference (NLI) construct explanations considering each test case in isolation. However, this paradigm is known to suffer from semantic drift, a phenomenon that causes the construction of spurious explanations leading to wrong conclusions. In contrast, this paper proposes an abductive framework for multi-hop NLI exploring the retrieve-reuse-refine paradigm in Case-Based Reasoning (CBR). Specifically, we present Case-Based Abductive Natural Language Inference (CB-ANLI), a model that addresses unseen inference problems by analogical transfer of prior explanations from similar examples. We empirically evaluate the abductive framework on commonsense and scientific question answering tasks, demonstrating that CB-ANLI can be effectively integrated with sparse and dense pre-trained encoders to improve multi-hop inference, or adopted as an evidence retriever for Transformers. Moreover, an empirical analysis of semantic drift reveals that the CBR paradigm boosts the quality of the most challenging explanations, a feature that has a direct impact on robustness and accuracy in downstream inference tasks.

Probing (or diagnostic classification) has become a popular strategy for investigating whether a given set of intermediate features is present in the representations of neural models. Naive probing studies may have misleading results, but various recent works have suggested more reliable methodologies that compensate for the possible pitfalls of probing. However, these best practices are numerous and fast-evolving. To simplify the process of running a set of probing experiments in line with suggested methodologies, we introduce Probe-Ably: an extendable probing framework which supports and automates the application of probing methods to the user’s inputs.

The Shared Task on Multi-Hop Inference for Explanation Regeneration asks participants to compose large multi-hop explanations to questions by assembling large chains of facts from a supporting knowledge base. While previous editions of this shared task aimed to evaluate explanatory completeness – finding a set of facts that form a complete inference chain, without gaps, to arrive from question to correct answer, this 2021 instantiation concentrates on the subtask of determining relevance in large multi-hop explanations. To this end, this edition of the shared task makes use of a large set of approximately 250k manual explanatory relevancy ratings that augment the 2020 shared task data. In this summary paper, we describe the details of the explanation regeneration task, the evaluation data, and the participating systems. Additionally, we perform a detailed analysis of participating systems, evaluating various aspects involved in the multi-hop inference process. The best performing system achieved an NDCG of 0.82 on this challenging task, substantially increasing performance over baseline methods by 32%, while also leaving significant room for future improvement.

This paper presents a novel framework for reconstructing multi-hop explanations in science Question Answering (QA). While existing approaches for multi-hop reasoning build explanations considering each question in isolation, we propose a method to leverage explanatory patterns emerging in a corpus of scientific explanations. Specifically, the framework ranks a set of atomic facts by integrating lexical relevance with the notion of unification power, estimated analysing explanations for similar questions in the corpus. An extensive evaluation is performed on the Worldtree corpus, integrating k-NN clustering and Information Retrieval (IR) techniques. We present the following conclusions: (1) The proposed method achieves results competitive with Transformers, yet being orders of magnitude faster, a feature that makes it scalable to large explanatory corpora (2) The unification-based mechanism has a key role in reducing semantic drift, contributing to the reconstruction of many hops explanations (6 or more facts) and the ranking of complex inference facts (+12.0 Mean Average Precision) (3) Crucially, the constructed explanations can support downstream QA models, improving the accuracy of BERT by up to 10% overall.

Natural language contexts display logical regularities with respect to substitutions of related concepts: these are captured in a functional order-theoretic property called monotonicity. For a certain class of NLI problems where the resulting entailment label depends only on the context monotonicity and the relation between the substituted concepts, we build on previous techniques that aim to improve the performance of NLI models for these problems, as consistent performance across both upward and downward monotone contexts still seems difficult to attain even for state of the art models. To this end, we reframe the problem of context monotonicity classification to make it compatible with transformer-based pre-trained NLI models and add this task to the training pipeline. Furthermore, we introduce a sound and complete simplified monotonicity logic formalism which describes our treatment of contexts as abstract units. Using the notions in our formalism, we adapt targeted challenge sets to investigate whether an intermediate context monotonicity classification task can aid NLI models’ performance on examples exhibiting monotonicity reasoning.

This paper describes N-XKT (Neural encoding based on eXplanatory Knowledge Transfer), a novel method for the automatic transfer of explanatory knowledge through neural encoding mechanisms. We demonstrate that N-XKT is able to improve accuracy and generalization on science Question Answering (QA). Specifically, by leveraging facts from background explanatory knowledge corpora, the N-XKT model shows a clear improvement on zero-shot QA. Furthermore, we show that N-XKT can be fine-tuned on a target QA dataset, enabling faster convergence and more accurate results. A systematic analysis is conducted to quantitatively analyze the performance of the N-XKT model and the impact of different categories of knowledge on the zero-shot generalization task.

An emerging line of research in Explainable NLP is the creation of datasets enriched with human-annotated explanations and rationales, used to build and evaluate models with step-wise inference and explanation generation capabilities. While human-annotated explanations are used as ground-truth for the inference, there is a lack of systematic assessment of their consistency and rigour. In an attempt to provide a critical quality assessment of Explanation Gold Standards (XGSs) for NLI, we propose a systematic annotation methodology, named Explanation Entailment Verification (EEV), to quantify the logical validity of human-annotated explanations. The application of EEV on three mainstream datasets reveals the surprising conclusion that a majority of the explanations, while appearing coherent on the surface, represent logically invalid arguments, ranging from being incomplete to containing clearly identifiable logical errors. This conclusion confirms that the inferential properties of explanations are still poorly formalised and understood, and that additional work on this line of research is necessary to improve the way Explanation Gold Standards are constructed.

Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) is the task of answering a question over a paragraph of text. While neural MRC systems gain popularity and achieve noticeable performance, issues are being raised with the methodology used to establish their performance, particularly concerning the data design of gold standards that are used to evaluate them. There is but a limited understanding of the challenges present in this data, which makes it hard to draw comparisons and formulate reliable hypotheses. As a first step towards alleviating the problem, this paper proposes a unifying framework to systematically investigate the present linguistic features, required reasoning and background knowledge and factual correctness on one hand, and the presence of lexical cues as a lower bound for the requirement of understanding on the other hand. We propose a qualitative annotation schema for the first and a set of approximative metrics for the latter. In a first application of the framework, we analyse modern MRC gold standards and present our findings: the absence of features that contribute towards lexical ambiguity, the varying factual correctness of the expected answers and the presence of lexical cues, all of which potentially lower the reading comprehension complexity and quality of the evaluation data.

Recent advances in reading comprehension have resulted in models that surpass human performance when the answer is contained in a single, continuous passage of text. However, complex Question Answering (QA) typically requires multi-hop reasoning - i.e. the integration of supporting facts from different sources, to infer the correct answer. This paper proposes Document Graph Network (DGN), a message passing architecture for the identification of supporting facts over a graph-structured representation of text. The evaluation on HotpotQA shows that DGN obtains competitive results when compared to a reading comprehension baseline operating on raw text, confirming the relevance of structured representations for supporting multi-hop reasoning.