Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces LLM+ASP, a framework that leverages LLMs to translate natural language into Answer Set Programming (ASP) for nonmonotonic reasoning. It employs a novel self-correction loop using feedback from the ASP solver to iteratively refine the generated ASP code. The results show that this approach outperforms SMT-based alternatives on nonmonotonic tasks, and that iterative self-correction is crucial, diminishing the need for handcrafted domain knowledge.
LLMs can achieve robust nonmonotonic reasoning across diverse tasks without task-specific engineering, simply by iteratively self-correcting based on feedback from an ASP solver.
Recent large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive reasoning milestones but continue to struggle with high computational costs, logical inconsistencies, and sharp performance degradation on high-complexity problems. While neuro-symbolic methods attempt to mitigate these issues by coupling LLMs with symbolic reasoners, existing approaches typically rely on monotonic logics (e.g., SMT) that cannot represent defeasible reasoning -- essential components of human cognition. We present"LLM+ASP,"a framework that translates natural language into Answer Set Programming (ASP), a nonmonotonic formalism based on stable model semantics. Unlike prior"LLM+ASP"approaches that require manually authored knowledge modules, domain-specific prompts, or evaluation restricted to single problem classes, our framework operates without any per-task engineering and applies uniformly across diverse reasoning tasks. Our system utilizes an automated self-correction loop where structured feedback from the ASP solver enables iterative refinement. Evaluating across six diverse benchmarks, we demonstrate that: (1) stable model semantics allow LLMs to naturally express default rules and exceptions, outperforming SMT-based alternatives by significant margins on nonmonotonic tasks; (2) iterative self-correction is the primary driver of performance, effectively replacing the need for handcrafted domain knowledge; (3) compact in-context reference guides substantially outperform verbose documentation, revealing a"context rot"phenomenon where excessive context hinders constraint adherence.
