Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Why Do We Need Neuro-symbolic AI to Model Pragmatic Analogies?

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 2308.01936 v2 pith:HVMV2WPA submitted 2023-08-02 cs.AI cs.CL

Why Do We Need Neuro-symbolic AI to Model Pragmatic Analogies?

classification cs.AI cs.CL
keywords analogiesllmsabilitycomplexcontentdiscussdomainfamiliar
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

A hallmark of intelligence is the ability to use a familiar domain to make inferences about a less familiar domain, known as analogical reasoning. In this article, we delve into the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in dealing with progressively complex analogies expressed in unstructured text. We discuss analogies at four distinct levels of complexity: lexical analogies, syntactic analogies, semantic analogies, and pragmatic analogies. As the analogies become more complex, they require increasingly extensive, diverse knowledge beyond the textual content, unlikely to be found in the lexical co-occurrence statistics that power LLMs. To address this, we discuss the necessity of employing Neuro-symbolic AI techniques that combine statistical and symbolic AI, informing the representation of unstructured text to highlight and augment relevant content, provide abstraction and guide the mapping process. Our knowledge-informed approach maintains the efficiency of LLMs while preserving the ability to explain analogies for pedagogical applications.

discussion (0)

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