Continual Reasoning: Non-Monotonic Reasoning in Neurosymbolic AI using Continual Learning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite the extensive investment and impressive recent progress at reasoning by similarity, deep learning continues to struggle with more complex forms of reasoning such as non-monotonic and commonsense reasoning. Non-monotonicity is a property of non-classical reasoning typically seen in commonsense reasoning, whereby a reasoning system is allowed (differently from classical logic) to jump to conclusions which may be retracted later, when new information becomes available. Neural-symbolic systems such as Logic Tensor Networks (LTN) have been shown to be effective at enabling deep neural networks to achieve reasoning capabilities. In this paper, we show that by combining a neural-symbolic system with methods from continual learning, LTN can obtain a higher level of accuracy when addressing non-monotonic reasoning tasks. Continual learning is added to LTNs by adopting a curriculum of learning from knowledge and data with recall. We call this process Continual Reasoning, a new methodology for the application of neural-symbolic systems to reasoning tasks. Continual Reasoning is applied to a prototypical non-monotonic reasoning problem as well as other reasoning examples. Experimentation is conducted to compare and analyze the effects that different curriculum choices may have on overall learning and reasoning results. Results indicate significant improvement on the prototypical non-monotonic reasoning problem and a promising outlook for the proposed approach on statistical relational learning examples.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 14 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 May 2023.
Builds on
14 of 25 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 13
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,445
- 2019Neural Probabilistic Logic Programming in DeepProbLogcited by 389
- 2019The Neuro-Symbolic Concept Learner: Interpreting Scenes, Words, and Sentences From Natural Supervisioncited by 369
- 2015Towards AI-Complete Question Answering: A Set of Prerequisite Toy Taskscited by 309
- 2020Transformers as Soft Reasoners over Languagecited by 265
- 2017Learning Explanatory Rules from Noisy Datacited by 210
- 2017Neural-Symbolic Learning and Reasoning: A Survey and Interpretationcited by 195
- 2017Logic Tensor Networks for Semantic Image Interpretationcited by 92
- 2020A Wholistic View of Continual Learning with Deep Neural Networks: Forgotten Lessons and the Bridge to Active and Open World Learningcited by 86
- 2021Improving Coherence and Consistency in Neural Sequence Models with Dual-System, Neuro-Symbolic Reasoningcited by 85
- 2020Exploring Neural Models for Parsing Natural Language into First-Order Logiccited by 16
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025LTLZinc: a Benchmarking Framework for Continual Learning and Neuro-Symbolic Temporal Reasoning
- 2026Learning without Overwriting: A Theory of Self-Distillation and Supervised Fine-Tuning in Continual Reasoning
- 2025A Comparative Study of Neurosymbolic AI Approaches to Interpretable Logical Reasoning
- 2026The RAIL Principles for Neurosymbolic AI: Reasoning, Assurances, Interfacing and Learning
- 2024Neuro-symbolic Learning Yielding Logical Constraints
- 2026Logical Phase Transitions: Understanding Collapse in LLM Logical Reasoning
- 2025Reasoning in Neurosymbolic AI
- 2025Neuro-Symbolic Artificial Intelligence: Towards Improving the Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models