Prior work infers the causation between events mainly based on the knowledge induced from the annotated causal event pairs. However, additional evidence information intermediate to the cause and effect remains unexploited. By incorporating such information, the logical law behind the causality can be unveiled, and the interpretability and stability of the causal reasoning system can be improved. To facilitate this, we present an Event graph knowledge enhanced explainable CAusal Reasoning framework (ExCAR). ExCAR first acquires additional evidence information from a large-scale causal event graph as logical rules for causal reasoning. To learn the conditional probabilistic of logical rules, we propose the Conditional Markov Neural Logic Network (CMNLN) that combines the representation learning and structure learning of logical rules in an end-to-end differentiable manner. Experimental results demonstrate that ExCAR outperforms previous state-of-the-art methods. Adversarial evaluation shows the improved stability of ExCAR over baseline systems. Human evaluation shows that ExCAR can achieve a promising explainable performance.

Abductive reasoning aims at inferring the most plausible explanation for observed events, which would play critical roles in various NLP applications, such as reading comprehension and question answering. To facilitate this task, a narrative text based abductive reasoning task 𝛼NLI is proposed, together with explorations about building reasoning framework using pretrained language models. However, abundant event commonsense knowledge is not well exploited for this task. To fill this gap, we propose a variational autoencoder based model ege-RoBERTa, which employs a latent variable to capture the necessary commonsense knowledge from event graph for guiding the abductive reasoning task. Experimental results show that through learning the external event graph knowledge, our approach outperforms the baseline methods on the 𝛼NLI task.

Many open-domain question answering problems can be cast as a textual entailment task, where a question and candidate answers are concatenated to form hypotheses. A QA system then determines if the supporting knowledge bases, regarded as potential premises, entail the hypotheses. In this paper, we investigate a neural-symbolic QA approach that integrates natural logic reasoning within deep learning architectures, towards developing effective and yet explainable question answering models. The proposed model gradually bridges a hypothesis and candidate premises following natural logic inference steps to build proof paths. Entailment scores between the acquired intermediate hypotheses and candidate premises are measured to determine if a premise entails the hypothesis. As the natural logic reasoning process forms a tree-like, hierarchical structure, we embed hypotheses and premises in a Hyperbolic space rather than Euclidean space to acquire more precise representations. Empirically, our method outperforms prior work on answering multiple-choice science questions, achieving the best results on two publicly available datasets. The natural logic inference process inherently provides evidence to help explain the prediction process.

Understanding event and event-centered commonsense reasoning are crucial for natural language processing (NLP). Given an observed event, it is trivial for human to infer its intents and effects, while this type of If-Then reasoning still remains challenging for NLP systems. To facilitate this, a If-Then commonsense reasoning dataset Atomic is proposed, together with an RNN-based Seq2Seq model to conduct such reasoning. However, two fundamental problems still need to be addressed: first, the intents of an event may be multiple, while the generations of RNN-based Seq2Seq models are always semantically close; second, external knowledge of the event background may be necessary for understanding events and conducting the If-Then reasoning. To address these issues, we propose a novel context-aware variational autoencoder effectively learning event background information to guide the If-Then reasoning. Experimental results show that our approach improves the accuracy and diversity of inferences compared with state-of-the-art baseline methods.