Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Comparing differentiable logics for learning with logical constraints

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2407.03847 v2 pith:SYJ7NQUH submitted 2024-07-04 cs.LO

classification cs.LO
keywords learninglogicsdifferentiableconstraintsnetworktrainingavailablebackground
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Extensive research on formal verification of machine learning systems indicates that learning from data alone often fails to capture underlying background knowledge, such as specifications implicitly available in the data. Various neural network verifiers have been developed to ensure that a machine-learnt model satisfies correctness and safety properties; however, they typically assume a trained network with fixed weights. A promising approach for creating machine learning models that inherently satisfy constraints after training is to encode background knowledge as explicit logical constraints that guide the learning process via so-called differentiable logics. In this paper, we experimentally compare and evaluate various logics from the literature, present our findings, and highlight open problems for future work. We evaluate differentiable logics with respect to their suitability in training, and use a neural network verifier to check their ability to establish formal guarantees. The complete source code for our experiments is available as an easy-to-use framework for training with differentiable logics at https://github.com/tflinkow/comparing-differentiable-logics.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Formally Verified Neurosymbolic Trajectory Learning via Tensor-based Linear Temporal Logic on Finite Traces

    cs.AI 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A formally verified Isabelle/HOL specification of tensor-based LTLf semantics yields a verified differentiable loss and derivative, automatically extracted to OCaml and used to train trajectory-planning networks in PyTorch.

  2. Neural Network Verification is a Programming Language Challenge

    cs.PL 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Neural network verification's hardest open problems are reframed as programming language design challenges, with a unified dependently typed language proposed as the ideal solution.

  3. Creating a Formally Verified Neural Network for Autonomous Navigation: An Experience Report

    cs.LO 2024-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A case study shows that differentiable-logic training improves local robustness of a small path-centring network, but current verifiers fail on the regression architecture and the title's 'formally verified' claim is ...

Pith tools