Impara Hybrid Reasoning: Symbolic and Embedding Approaches

Hybrid reasoning in knowledge graphs brings together the strengths of symbolic logic and embedding-based inference to solve complex problems that neither approach can address alone. Symbolic reasoning excels in enforcing logical constraints, handling explicit rules, and providing interpretable results. Embedding-based methods, on the other hand, capture nuanced patterns and similarities within the data, allowing for flexible generalization and efficient computation at scale. By combining these approaches, you can build systems that leverage both precise logical reasoning and the power of learned representations.

Consider a scenario where you want to recommend new research collaborators in a scientific knowledge graph. Symbolic rules can filter candidates based on explicit criteria, such as matching research domains or co-authorship history. However, these rules may miss potential collaborators who, while not directly connected, share hidden similarities—such as overlapping research interests captured by embeddings. Hybrid reasoning allows you to first apply symbolic filters to ensure basic requirements, then use embedding-based ranking to surface promising but less obvious suggestions.

Another practical example is fraud detection in financial transaction graphs. Symbolic rules can flag transactions that violate known constraints, such as exceeding a transfer limit or involving blacklisted entities. Yet, sophisticated fraudsters often evade such rules. Embedding-based reasoning can detect anomalous patterns that are not explicitly encoded, identifying suspicious activity based on relational similarities. Hybrid reasoning can thus enhance both precision and recall in complex tasks.

Study More

Purely symbolic methods may struggle with scalability and discovering implicit relationships, while embedding-based approaches can lack interpretability and may violate hard constraints. Understanding these limitations helps you choose the right mix for your application.


              1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344
            
import numpy as np

# Sample triples: (head, relation, tail)
triples = [
    ("Alice", "collaborates_with", "Bob"),
    ("Bob", "collaborates_with", "Carol"),
    ("Alice", "works_in", "AI"),
    ("Carol", "works_in", "AI"),
    ("Bob", "works_in", "AI"),   
    ("Dave", "works_in", "Biology"),
]


# Symbolic filter: Only pairs who work in the same field
def filter_same_field(triples, field):
    # Find all people who work in the specified field
    people_in_field = {h for (h, r, t) in triples if r == "works_in" and t == field}
    # Find all collaboration pairs where both are in the field
    candidates = []
    for (h, r, t) in triples:
        if r == "collaborates_with" and h in people_in_field and t in people_in_field:
            candidates.append((h, t))
    return candidates

# Simple embedding-based ranking: Dummy embeddings and cosine similarity
entity_embeddings = {
    "Alice": np.array([1.0, 0.2]),
    "Bob": np.array([0.9, 0.1]),
    "Carol": np.array([0.8, 0.25]),
    "Dave": np.array([0.1, 0.9]),
}

def embedding_score(h, t):
    # Cosine similarity
    a, b = entity_embeddings[h], entity_embeddings[t]
    return np.dot(a, b) / (np.linalg.norm(a) * np.linalg.norm(b))

# Hybrid reasoning: Filter, then rank
candidates = filter_same_field(triples, "AI")
ranked = sorted(candidates, key=lambda pair: embedding_score(pair[0], pair[1]), reverse=True)

print("Ranked collaboration candidates in AI:")
for h, t in ranked:
    print(f"{h} - {t} (score: {embedding_score(h, t):.2f})")

1. What is a benefit of hybrid reasoning in knowledge graphs?

2. When might symbolic reasoning outperform embeddings?

Tutto è chiaro?

Grazie per i tuoi commenti!

Sezione 3. Capitolo 4

Chieda ad AI

Chieda pure quello che desidera o provi una delle domande suggerite per iniziare la nostra conversazione

Suggested prompts:

Can you explain how the symbolic and embedding-based parts work together in this example?

What would happen if you changed the field from "AI" to "Biology" in the filter?

Can you suggest ways to improve the hybrid reasoning approach shown here?