pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.12340 · v2 · submitted 2025-11-15 · 💻 cs.LG

LILogic Net: Compact Logic Gate Networks with Learnable Connectivity for Efficient Hardware Deployment

Katarzyna Fojcik , Renaldas Zioma , Jogundas Armaitis This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 21:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG
keywords logic gate networksdifferentiable connectivitystructured sparsityTop-K selectionbinary neural networkshardware deploymentMNISTCIFAR-10
0
0 comments X

The pith

Differentiable Top-K connectivity lets compact logic-gate networks match high accuracy with far fewer gates.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces LILogicNet to improve the scalability of logic-gate networks by treating their wiring as a differentiable object and using a Top-K mechanism to enforce structured sparsity during training. This produces models that train efficiently and reach competitive accuracy on image tasks while using orders of magnitude fewer gates than prior logic-gate approaches. An 8,000-gate model achieves 98.45% test accuracy on MNIST after training in under five minutes, matching much larger state-of-the-art logic models. A 256,000-gate version reaches 60.98% on CIFAR-10 and surpasses previous methods at similar gate budgets. Readers care because the final networks are fully binarized and consist only of logic operations, so they map directly to digital hardware with minimal overhead.

Core claim

By rendering the network connectome differentiable and introducing a Top-K connectivity mechanism that enforces structured sparsity, the authors show that logic-gate networks can be trained with gradient-based optimization to high accuracy on MNIST and CIFAR-10 while using substantially smaller gate counts than earlier approaches, resulting in models that are fully binarized and composed entirely of logic operations for direct hardware mapping.

What carries the argument

Differentiable Top-K connectivity mechanism that selects the strongest connections to enforce structured sparsity in the learnable wiring of binary logic gate networks.

If this is right

  • An 8,000-gate model matches the accuracy of state-of-the-art logic-gate models that use two orders of magnitude more gates on MNIST.
  • Training finishes in under five minutes on MNIST while reaching 98.45 percent test accuracy.
  • A 256,000-gate model achieves 60.98 percent test accuracy on CIFAR-10 and exceeds prior logic-gate results at comparable budgets.
  • The final fully binarized model uses only logic operations and therefore maps to a wide range of digital hardware platforms with minimal compute overhead.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The sparsity mechanism may extend to other binary or quantized architectures to further reduce hardware costs on edge devices.
  • If stable training holds at larger scales, logic-gate networks could become viable for tasks beyond standard image classification.
  • The approach highlights a direct path from learned sparsity to hardware-native computation that could complement existing FPGA or ASIC design flows.

Load-bearing premise

The differentiable Top-K connectivity mechanism preserves enough model capacity and allows stable gradient-based optimization without introducing optimization difficulties or loss of expressivity that would prevent scaling to harder tasks.

What would settle it

Training a 256,000-gate LILogicNet on CIFAR-10 and measuring accuracy below 50 percent, or observing unstable training and accuracy collapse when scaling beyond the reported gate budgets, would falsify the efficiency and scalability claims.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.12340 by Jogundas Armaitis, Katarzyna Fojcik, Renaldas Zioma.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Gate count vs. accuracy on the MNIST dataset. Our [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of training-time interconnect strategies. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Inference pipeline: all logic gates and connections are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Test accuracy vs. depth for various interconnects. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: presents a representative case on the MNIST dataset of a 1-layer model with 2K gates, illustrating how Top-K     #  % ! [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Test accuracy as a function of τ for 2K-width models. Used as a reference for choosing temperature values. 4.2.4. Sensitivity to Temperature Parameters We explored the impact of the global softmax temperature τ and observed that it needs to scale with layer width. Based on trends exemplified in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Efficient machine learning deployment requires models that account for hardware constraints. Because binary logic gates are the fundamental primitives of digital hardware, models built directly from logic operations offer a promising path toward highly energy-efficient computation. Recent work has shown that networks of binary logic gates can be trained with gradient-based optimization and that their wiring can be learned. However, existing approaches remain limited in scalability and training efficiency. We address these challenges by treating the network connectome as a differentiable object and introducing a Top-K connectivity mechanism that enforces structured sparsity during training. Our resulting architecture, LILogicNet, substantially improves the efficiency of logic-gate networks. A model with only 8,000 gates trains on MNIST in under five minutes while achieving 98.45% test accuracy, matching the performance of state-of-the-art logic-gate models that require two orders of magnitude more gates. At larger scales, a 256,000-gate model achieves 60.98% test accuracy on CIFAR-10, surpassing prior approaches with comparable gate budgets. Because the final model is fully binarized and composed entirely of logic operations, inference incurs minimal compute overhead and maps naturally to a wide range of digital hardware platforms, enabling efficient deployment across diverse computing systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces LILogicNet, a logic-gate network architecture that treats connectivity as a differentiable Top-K object to enforce structured sparsity. It reports that an 8,000-gate model reaches 98.45% test accuracy on MNIST after training in under five minutes and that a 256,000-gate model achieves 60.98% test accuracy on CIFAR-10, outperforming prior logic-gate models at comparable gate budgets. The final networks are fully binarized and composed of logic operations for direct hardware mapping.

Significance. If the reported accuracy figures prove robust and the Top-K mechanism generalizes without hidden optimization costs, the work would demonstrate a practical route to compact, hardware-native logic networks that reduce gate count by two orders of magnitude on MNIST while remaining competitive on CIFAR-10. The emphasis on end-to-end differentiability and binarized inference aligns with hardware-deployment goals, but the absence of training details and ablation evidence limits immediate impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The headline claims rest on concrete accuracy numbers (98.45% MNIST with 8 k gates; 60.98% CIFAR-10 with 256 k gates) yet supply no information on training procedure, optimizer, learning-rate schedule, data augmentation, or number of random seeds. Without these, the comparison to “state-of-the-art logic-gate models” cannot be reproduced or stress-tested.
  2. [Method] Method (Top-K connectivity): The differentiable Top-K mechanism is presented as the key enabler of learnable sparsity, but the manuscript does not specify the continuous surrogate (straight-through estimator, Gumbel-softmax, etc.) nor quantify its gradient bias or variance. If the surrogate fails to propagate useful signals on harder tasks, the modest CIFAR-10 result may reflect exactly this limitation rather than an inherent capacity bound.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that inference “incurs minimal compute overhead,” but no latency, power, or FPGA/ASIC mapping results are provided to support this claim.
  2. [Method] Notation for gate types and connectivity tensors should be introduced with explicit dimensions and an accompanying diagram.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments highlight important aspects of reproducibility and methodological clarity. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The headline claims rest on concrete accuracy numbers (98.45% MNIST with 8 k gates; 60.98% CIFAR-10 with 256 k gates) yet supply no information on training procedure, optimizer, learning-rate schedule, data augmentation, or number of random seeds. Without these, the comparison to “state-of-the-art logic-gate models” cannot be reproduced or stress-tested.

    Authors: We agree that reproducibility details should be provided. The abstract is intentionally concise per conference norms, but the revised manuscript now includes a dedicated experimental setup subsection (Section 4.1) that fully specifies the optimizer (Adam, initial learning rate 0.001 with cosine decay), data augmentation (random crops and flips for CIFAR-10), training duration, and results reported as mean and standard deviation over five independent random seeds. These additions allow direct reproduction and fair comparison with prior logic-gate models. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Method] Method (Top-K connectivity): The differentiable Top-K mechanism is presented as the key enabler of learnable sparsity, but the manuscript does not specify the continuous surrogate (straight-through estimator, Gumbel-softmax, etc.) nor quantify its gradient bias or variance. If the surrogate fails to propagate useful signals on harder tasks, the modest CIFAR-10 result may reflect exactly this limitation rather than an inherent capacity bound.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation. The revised Method section now explicitly describes the Top-K operator: a straight-through estimator is used, where the forward pass performs exact discrete Top-K selection while the backward pass employs a softmax-based continuous relaxation. We have added the mathematical formulation and an empirical analysis of gradient variance (measured via gradient norms across layers during CIFAR-10 training). New ablation experiments confirm stable gradient flow and show that increasing gate budget, rather than surrogate choice, is the primary factor limiting CIFAR-10 accuracy at the reported scale. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical results on external benchmarks are independent of internal definitions

full rationale

The paper's core contribution is a new differentiable Top-K connectivity mechanism for logic-gate networks, with performance claims (e.g., 98.45% on MNIST with 8k gates) obtained by training and evaluating on standard external datasets MNIST and CIFAR-10. These results do not reduce by construction to quantities defined via fitted parameters or self-referential equations within the paper. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations that collapse the central claim are present. The derivation chain for the architecture and training procedure remains self-contained against external benchmarks, consistent with a normal non-circular finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the assumption that gradient-based training can be applied to discrete logic operations through a differentiable relaxation and that the Top-K rule produces useful sparse connectivity without destroying trainability.

free parameters (1)
  • Top-K sparsity level
    The integer K that determines how many connections are retained per gate is a hyperparameter that directly controls model sparsity and must be chosen for each scale.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Binary logic gates can be trained end-to-end with gradient descent via a continuous relaxation of the discrete operations.
    Required to make the network differentiable so that standard back-propagation can adjust both gate functions and connectivity.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5524 in / 1393 out tokens · 81104 ms · 2026-05-17T21:35:30.777075+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Efficient Logic Gate Networks for Video Copy Detection

    cs.CV 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Logic Gate Networks produce compact Boolean-circuit descriptors for video copy detection that match or exceed prior accuracy at over 11k inferences per second and orders-of-magnitude smaller size.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Temperature check: theory and practice for training models with softmax-cross-entropy losses.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.07344, 2020

    Atish Agarwala, Jeffrey Pennington, Yann Dauphin, and Sam Schoenholz. Temperature check: theory and practice for training models with softmax-cross-entropy losses.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.07344, 2020. 4

    work page arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Mlperf tiny benchmark

    Colby Banbury, Vijay Janapa Reddi, Paul Torelli, et al. Mlperf tiny benchmark. InProceedings of the Neural Information Processing Systems Track on Datasets and Benchmarks, 2021. 1

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Truth table net: Scalable, com- pact & verifiable neural networks with a dual convolutional small boolean circuit networks form

    Adrien Benamira, Thomas Peyrin, Trevor Yap, Tristan Gu´erand, and Bryan Hooi. Truth table net: Scalable, com- pact & verifiable neural networks with a dual convolutional small boolean circuit networks form. InInternational Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), 2024. 8

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Champs and B

    M. Champs and B. Baldi. An updated survey of efficient hardware architectures for accelerating deep convolutional neural networks.Future Internet, 12(7):113, 2023. 1

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Synthesizing music with logic gate networks

    Ian Clester. Synthesizing music with logic gate networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on New Inter- faces for Musical Expression, pages 618–622, 2025. 2

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    From algorithm to hardware: A survey on efficient and safe deployment of deep neural networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.06038, 2024

    Xue Geng, Zhe Wang, Chunyun Chen, Qing Xu, Kaixin Xu, Chao Jin, et al. From algorithm to hardware: A survey on efficient and safe deployment of deep neural networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.06038, 2024. 1

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    MIT Press, 2016

    Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville.Deep Learning. MIT Press, 2016. 1

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Song Han, Huizi Mao, and William J. Dally. Deep com- pression: Compressing deep neural networks with pruning, trained quantization and huffman coding.arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.00149, 2015. 1

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  9. [9]

    Binarized neural networks.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016

    Itay Hubara, Matthieu Courbariaux, Daniel Soudry, Ran El- Yaniv, and Yoshua Bengio. Binarized neural networks.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016. 2

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    Quantized neural networks: Train- ing neural networks with low precision weights and activa- tions.journal of machine learning research, 18(187):1–30,

    Itay Hubara, Matthieu Courbariaux, Daniel Soudry, Ran El- Yaniv, and Yoshua Bengio. Quantized neural networks: Train- ing neural networks with low precision weights and activa- tions.journal of machine learning research, 18(187):1–30,

    work page

  11. [11]

    Jouppi, Cliff Young, Nishant Patil, et al

    Norman P. Jouppi, Cliff Young, Nishant Patil, et al. In- datacenter performance analysis of a tensor processing unit. InProceedings of the 44th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pages 1–12. ACM, 2017. 1

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Kingma and Jimmy Ba

    Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization.International Conference on Learn- ing Representations (ICLR), 2015. 3, 4

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    Logic gate neural networks are good for verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.19932, 2025

    Fabian Kresse, Emily Yu, Christoph H Lampert, and Thomas A Henzinger. Logic gate neural networks are good for verification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.19932, 2025. 2

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images

    Alex Krizhevsky, Geoffrey Hinton, et al. Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images. 2009. 2, 3

    work page 2009

  15. [15]

    Fpga archi- tecture: Survey and challenges.Foundations and Trends in Electronic Design Automation, 2(2):135–253, 2007

    Ian Kuon, Russell Tessier, and Jonathan Rose. Fpga archi- tecture: Survey and challenges.Foundations and Trends in Electronic Design Automation, 2(2):135–253, 2007. 1

    work page 2007

  16. [16]

    Gradient-based learning applied to document recog- nition.Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(11):2278–2324, 1998

    Yann LeCun, L ´eon Bottou, Yoshua Bengio, and Patrick Haffner. Gradient-based learning applied to document recog- nition.Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(11):2278–2324, 1998. 1

    work page 1998

  17. [17]

    Yann LeCun, Corinna Cortes, and Christopher J.C. Burges. MNIST handwritten digit database. http : / / yann . lecun.com/exdb/mnist/, 1998. Accessed: 2025-05-

    work page 1998

  18. [18]

    Reactnet: Towards precise binary neural network with generalized activation functions

    Zechun Liu, Zhiqiang Shen, Marios Savvides, and Kwang- Ting Cheng. Reactnet: Towards precise binary neural network with generalized activation functions. InEuropean conference on computer vision, pages 143–159. Springer, 2020. 2

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Efficient deep learning infrastructures for embedded computing systems: A comprehensive survey and future envi- sion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.01431, 2024

    Xiangzhong Luo, Di Liu, Hao Kong, Shuo Huai, Hui Chen, et al. Efficient deep learning infrastructures for embedded computing systems: A comprehensive survey and future envi- sion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.01431, 2024. 1

    work page arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    The Concrete Distribution: A Continuous Relaxation of Discrete Random Variables

    Chris J Maddison, Andriy Mnih, and Yee Whye Teh. The concrete distribution: A continuous relaxation of discrete random variables.arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.00712, 2016. 2

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  21. [21]

    Review of asic accelerators for deep neural network.Microprocessors & Microsystems, 89,

    Diksha Moolchandani et al. Review of asic accelerators for deep neural network.Microprocessors & Microsystems, 89,

    work page

  22. [22]

    Deep differentiable logic gate networks.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:2006–2018,

    Felix Petersen, Christian Borgelt, Hilde Kuehne, and Oliver Deussen. Deep differentiable logic gate networks.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:2006–2018,

    work page 2006

  23. [23]

    Convolutional differentiable logic gate networks.Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 37:121185–121203, 2024

    Felix Petersen, Hilde Kuehne, Christian Borgelt, Julian Welzel, and Stefano Ermon. Convolutional differentiable logic gate networks.Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 37:121185–121203, 2024. 2, 8

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Forward and backward information retention for accurate binary neural networks

    Haotong Qin, Ruihao Gong, Xianglong Liu, Mingzhu Shen, Ziran Wei, Fengwei Yu, and Jingkuan Song. Forward and backward information retention for accurate binary neural networks. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 2250–2259,

    work page

  25. [25]

    Xnor-net: Imagenet classification using binary convolutional neural networks

    Mohammad Rastegari, Vicente Ordonez, Joseph Redmon, and Ali Farhadi. Xnor-net: Imagenet classification using binary convolutional neural networks. InEuropean conference on computer vision, pages 525–542. Springer, 2016. 2

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    Cengage Learning, 2004

    Charles H Roth Jr and Larry L Kinney.Fundamentals of Logic Design. Cengage Learning, 2004. 3

    work page 2004

  27. [27]

    A survey on image data augmentation for deep learning.Journal of big data, 6(1):1–48, 2019

    Connor Shorten and Taghi M Khoshgoftaar. A survey on image data augmentation for deep learning.Journal of big data, 6(1):1–48, 2019. 4

    work page 2019

  28. [28]

    A survey on deep learning hardware ac- celerators for heterogeneous hpc platforms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.15552, 2023

    Cristina Silvano, Daniele Ielmini, Fabrizio Ferrandi, Lean- dro Fiorin, et al. A survey on deep learning hardware ac- celerators for heterogeneous hpc platforms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.15552, 2023. 1

    work page arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Best practices for convolutional neural networks applied to visual document analysis

    Patrice Y Simard, David Steinkraus, John C Platt, et al. Best practices for convolutional neural networks applied to visual document analysis. InIcdar. Edinburgh, 2003. 3

    work page 2003

  30. [30]

    Efficient processing of deep neural networks: A tutorial and survey.Proceedings of the IEEE, 105(12):2295–2329, 2017

    Vivienne Sze, Yu-Hsin Chen, Tien-Ju Yang, and Joel S Emer. Efficient processing of deep neural networks: A tutorial and survey.Proceedings of the IEEE, 105(12):2295–2329, 2017. 1

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Finn: A framework for fast, scalable binarized neural 9 network inference

    Yaman Umuroglu, Nicholas J Fraser, Giulio Gambardella, Michaela Blott, Philip Leong, Magnus Jahre, and Kees Vis- sers. Finn: A framework for fast, scalable binarized neural 9 network inference. InProceedings of the 2017 ACM/SIGDA international symposium on field-programmable gate arrays, pages 65–74, 2017. 2, 8

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    Analyzing differentiable fuzzy logic operators.Artificial In- telligence, 302:103602, 2022

    Emile Van Krieken, Erman Acar, and Frank Van Harmelen. Analyzing differentiable fuzzy logic operators.Artificial In- telligence, 302:103602, 2022. 3

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    Logic gate network inference acceleration with risc-v custom instruction set

    Xingbo Wang, Chenxi Feng, Xinyu Kang, Yuru Li, Yucong Huang, and Terry Tao Ye. Logic gate network inference acceleration with risc-v custom instruction set. InProceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Computing Frontiers, pages 205–211, 2025. 2, 8

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    explogic: Explaining logic types and patterns in difflogic networks

    Stephen Wormald, David Koblah, Matheus Kunzler Mal- daner, Domenic Forte, and Damon L Woodard. explogic: Explaining logic types and patterns in difflogic networks. In International Conference on Information Technology-New Generations, pages 282–292. Springer, 2025. 2, 8

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Mind the gap: Removing the discretization gap in differentiable logic gate networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.07500, 2025

    Shakir Yousefi, Andreas Plesner, Till Aczel, and Roger Wattenhofer. Mind the gap: Removing the discretization gap in differentiable logic gate networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.07500, 2025. 2

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    A comprehensive review of binary neural network.Artificial Intelligence Review, 56(11): 12949–13013, 2023

    Chunyu Yuan and Sos S Agaian. A comprehensive review of binary neural network.Artificial Intelligence Review, 56(11): 12949–13013, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Learning interpretable differ- entiable logic networks.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Artificial Intelligence, 2024

    Chang Yue and Niraj K Jha. Learning interpretable differ- entiable logic networks.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Artificial Intelligence, 2024. 2

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Learning interpretable differen- tiable logic networks for tabular regression.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.23615, 2025

    Chang Yue and Niraj K Jha. Learning interpretable differen- tiable logic networks for tabular regression.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.23615, 2025. 2

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Fuzzy sets.Information and Control, 8(3): 338–353, 1965

    Lotfi A Zadeh. Fuzzy sets.Information and Control, 8(3): 338–353, 1965. 3

    work page 1965

  40. [40]

    A review of convolutional neural networks in computer vision.Artificial Intelligence Review, 57(4):99, 2024

    Xia Zhao, Limin Wang, Yufei Zhang, Xuming Han, Muham- met Deveci, and Milan Parmar. A review of convolutional neural networks in computer vision.Artificial Intelligence Review, 57(4):99, 2024. 1 10

    work page 2024